Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Merge

avc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 184 posts

Re: The Merge

#81

Post by mpeg »

dale_glass wrote: post #69
kranke155 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure what you mean. NFTs allow for a market for digital art, in that there's an immutable ledger where artists can say "I am selling 10 'signed artworks' of this piece". Because the ledger is known to be immutable, and it allows for transactions between users, you have a market where there wasn't one before. The problem of authenticating art before this, for a digital artist, was that you HAD to have a gallery do…

> The problem of authenticating art before this, for a digital artist, was that you HAD to have a gallery do it with you in order for it to work. No one trusted anyone, not even the artist, to say that there would only be "10 copies" of that digital artwork, since they couldn't do any follow through if the artist decided to say there were ten copies but sold 10 000. This was an issue with digital art that was previou…

This is incorrect, as the parent explained the point of an NFT is the signature, this proves you bought from a certain collection that was created by a certain wallet

You can create your own BAYC, scammers do it all the time but they aren’t too successful because it’s trivial to see it came from an unknown wallet.

Sure, you could infringe on the copyright of a non-crypto artist and pretend to be the artist in an NFT marketplace, but then it becomes a normal copyright claim

NFTs don’t replace the legal system, they simply remove the need for the artist to be trusted by a third party (an art gallery, etc) before they can authenticate their own work to a buyer.

Re: The Merge

#82

Post by flotzam »

tromp wrote: post #76
flotzam wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 2b. If > 67% of the network refuses, transactions can be successfully censored. Similar with PoW. For both PoW and PoS, the proper response is to socially coordinate forking out the censoring block producer majority (like with the Bitcoin UASF that was threatened over much less egregious miner misbehavior). PoS improves on PoW here in two ways: 1. Non-censoring PoS block producers can have a tiny meatspace presence…

With PoW, even if a majority of hashpower refuses to include a particular transaction in their mempool (and hence in blocks they mine), that transaction can be mined by some minority miner. It's only when the majority is colluding to reorg the chain that the transaction can be censored.

> It's only when the majority is colluding to reorg the chain that the transaction can be censored.

I'm assuming (like in the last tweets of the linked thread) that pro-censorship forces who can arrange for the supermajority in PoS to censor transactions can also arrange for the majority in PoW to not build on any uncensored head of the chain, i.e. they can mandate "always reorg."

Re: The Merge

#83

Post by wmf »

silentsea90 wrote: post #41
foepys wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This already happened multiple times, e.g. Ethereum Classic and for Bitcoin with Bitcoin Cash a few years back. It created quite a bit of drama when exchanges refused to give customers the respective forked coins.

Exchanges refused to give customers forked coins? Why?!

It takes a certain amount of development work for an exchange to support a new coin so sometimes they don't do it.

Re: The Merge

#84

Post by pa7x1 »

tromp wrote: post #76
flotzam wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 2b. If > 67% of the network refuses, transactions can be successfully censored. Similar with PoW. For both PoW and PoS, the proper response is to socially coordinate forking out the censoring block producer majority (like with the Bitcoin UASF that was threatened over much less egregious miner misbehavior). PoS improves on PoW here in two ways: 1. Non-censoring PoS block producers can have a tiny meatspace presence…

With PoW, even if a majority of hashpower refuses to include a particular transaction in their mempool (and hence in blocks they mine), that transaction can be mined by some minority miner. It's only when the majority is colluding to reorg the chain that the transaction can be censored.

This is true also in PoS. If 90% of the validators censor a transaction, i.e. Do not include them in their blocks, the censored transactions would take 10x longer to be included but they would be included eventually.

Re: The Merge

#85

Post by wanderingbort »

jjulius wrote: post #71
kranke155 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NFTs work and they allow artists to - make money off digital art in a global permissionless market (didn’t exist before) - easily charge royalties in perpetuity for resale of their art Some aspects of DeFi - the ones that were properly audited and whose function is not a ponzi derivative - work absolutely fine. Compound, AAVE, Uniswap, Curve Finance.

>... easily charge royalties in perpetuity for resale of their art... Hi. Artist here. I have yet to actually see any example of this occurring with a piece of NFT art. Do you have an example of an NFT that is actively collecting royalties for the artist via resale?

Sure, look at the last sale for this piece https://opensea.io/assets/ethereum/0x495f947276749ce646f68ac...

The artist got 0.21 ETH in the transaction despite not actually having a direct role in the sale.

Here is that sale transaction https://etherscan.io/tx/0xcd157ff73439e20903a8573ef2a280571a...

Here is the artist’s wallet https://etherscan.io/address/0x4de5ae339b406a8cd5037e9138a62...

I just picked a random entry, I don’t know this piece or artist. There are a lot of examples easily found on the major markets (opensea is one such market)

Re: The Merge

#86

Post by coralreef »

derefr wrote: post #75
scottiebarnes wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One relevant question is which system allows for the pooling of resources easier. In PoW you have mining pools, and a member changing pools is trivial as changing an address. In PoS you have large organizations like Coinbase running staking for users. Don't know how withdrawls will work, but that could be a very significant amount of eth. Coinbase would have to vote a certain way to comply with laws.

From the Coinbase User Agreement ( https://www.coinbase.com/legal/user_agreement/united_states#... ): > 1.4. Governance and Voting. For certain Digital Assets, the underlying protocols offer stakers the ability to vote on matters related to the governance of protocol-level issues. Coinbase may or may not support voting for such assets, and may cease supporting voting at any time in its discretion. Coinbase will compl…

But what happens if/when a large amount of user ETH gets staked in a single country, in a few entities? End users don’t have the motive or skills to move their ETH to platforms or systems that better protect decentralization. The downsides of PoS is worth exploring.

Re: The Merge

#87

Post by dale_glass »

mpeg wrote: post #81
dale_glass wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The problem of authenticating art before this, for a digital artist, was that you HAD to have a gallery do it with you in order for it to work. No one trusted anyone, not even the artist, to say that there would only be "10 copies" of that digital artwork, since they couldn't do any follow through if the artist decided to say there were ten copies but sold 10 000. This was an issue with digital art that was previou…

This is incorrect, as the parent explained the point of an NFT is the signature, this proves you bought from a certain collection that was created by a certain wallet You can create your own BAYC, scammers do it all the time but they aren’t too successful because it’s trivial to see it came from an unknown wallet. Sure, you could infringe on the copyright of a non-crypto artist and pretend to be the artist in an NFT…

> This is incorrect, as the parent explained the point of an NFT is the signature, this proves you bought from a certain collection that was created by a certain wallet

Note that the parent seems to be arguing something in the system removes the need to trust in the artist, that it stops the artist from creating more items than they promised. But how? Nothing stops the artist from creating a second wallet, or a second collection.

> NFTs don’t replace the legal system, they simply remove the need for the artist to be trusted by a third party (an art gallery, etc) before they can authenticate their own work to a buyer.

I don't see how. How do I know that a given wallet ID is connected to the right person? OpenSea or whoever just takes the place of the gallery, and is effectively in charge of answering takedown requests.

Re: The Merge

#88

Post by Keeeeeeeks »

thematrixturtle wrote: post #22

A less starry-eyed take: https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2022/08/20/proof-of-sta...

The core axiom is unfalsifiable because it hinges on asserting the intent, and relying on other unfalsifiable questions to try and ascertain intent ("why do decentralization if not to avoid legal risk of doing bad things?"), but the answers proposed by crypto proponents aren't ideals or scenarios that the writer empathizes with, it seems

Re: The Merge

#89

Post by wanderingbort »

dale_glass wrote: post #69
kranke155 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure what you mean. NFTs allow for a market for digital art, in that there's an immutable ledger where artists can say "I am selling 10 'signed artworks' of this piece". Because the ledger is known to be immutable, and it allows for transactions between users, you have a market where there wasn't one before. The problem of authenticating art before this, for a digital artist, was that you HAD to have a gallery do…

> The problem of authenticating art before this, for a digital artist, was that you HAD to have a gallery do it with you in order for it to work. No one trusted anyone, not even the artist, to say that there would only be "10 copies" of that digital artwork, since they couldn't do any follow through if the artist decided to say there were ten copies but sold 10 000. This was an issue with digital art that was previou…

You are correct. NFTs do not prevent counterfeiting. One could argue that it makes counterfeiting easier due to their open nature.

However, it also makes detecting counterfeits trivial. So trivial that the consumer can detect it using their own devices and freely available wallet software. No need for special skills or trust anchors like appraisers (other than the public blockchain and public standards).

This isn’t a complete solution for scams because most people don’t realize how trivial it is to check before they buy. I believe the remaining problems are in usability and education problem. The tech does lower the barrier to achieving a safer ecosystem.

We could have a healthy debate over whether the tech solved the hard side or the easy side of the problem.

Re: The Merge

#90

Post by Kbelicius »

kranke155 wrote: post #57
Kbelicius wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In this particular case - it is better than a standard contract because the previous method of authenticating work is hugely expensive for the artist and has immense gatekeeping. Minting an NFT takes 30 seconds. As you said NFT is just a signature so how do the NFTs solve the problems of authenticating art?

I'm sure what you mean. NFTs allow for a market for digital art, in that there's an immutable ledger where artists can say "I am selling 10 'signed artworks' of this piece". Because the ledger is known to be immutable, and it allows for transactions between users, you have a market where there wasn't one before. The problem of authenticating art before this, for a digital artist, was that you HAD to have a gallery do…

> Does that answer your question?

No it doesn't. Your claim was that NFTs make authenticating art easier. What you wrote has nothing to do with art authentication.

Basically I can take some digital art made by somebody else and be the first to release an NFT of it. What now? How does an NFT help us here?

Post reply on HN