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

Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 138 posts

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#121

Post by GDC7 »

mattdesl wrote: post #118
GDC7 wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you own a JPG, do you own the artwork? According to the artist who is distributing the work as a token, and also according the social consensus of others who are collecting art in this way, the answer is no. But according to the rest of the world the answer is 'Yes' The rest of the world thinks that in order for something to be considered original that thing has to be hard to replicate Replicating an NFT is as e…

> But according to the rest of the world the answer is 'Yes' It depends who you ask, and when you ask it. The understanding of 'digital ownership' may be shifting, as we can see in real-time with the OP thread, where Visa is making a claim that their ownership over the digital token is distinctly different than their ownership over the digital JPG file (and, apparently, distinct enough that they felt it worth paying…

> ownership of digital art is not a notion that had much social consensus around it before the advent of NFTs.

I don't mean to disrespect artists but when all is said and done the only question that matters is:

"Will a museum pay me, the owner of the piece of art to have it in their collection, so I can generate passive income from it?"

In the case of real pieces of art the answer is positive.

If this critical component is missing then you are left with a market where you can only sell for profit to an individual bigger fool.

2-D NFTs won't ever pass this test, 3-D NFTs are also in bad shape because museums are a social activity, something the regular person does to shield themselves from the summer heat while at the park with their SO.

Nobody dreams of logging into a 3-D museum , alone in their living while wearing an Oculus.

Art is a real world, social activity. The process of distributing art is a real world, social activity. Blockchain won't change this.

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#122

Post by bokohut »

The grand picture here is what many fail to see. The Starbucks proven payments model staging "unearned income" is what will continue to transpire as the payments world continues the devest control from the larger entities which will have no choice but to interface and interact with the changing tide. For those in the know we are seeing an explosion in demand of companies wanting to own and control the payments process as with so many middlemen in the fray everyone is being "fee'd to death". The card brands are becoming more and more like toll road operators which dictate who can use the roads all the while cutting off their own noses and therefore pushing adoption to the very thing that will challenge their superiority, the OnlyFans Mastercard impact on crypto for example. Exciting times in FinTech for sure as this window in time resonates with me just as the build up to the dotcom bubble was a blast too!

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#123

Post by stiltzkin »

carlosdp wrote: post #102

It's wild to me the top comments on HN are still "crypto has no actual use case," despite the literal billions of actual dollars ($) being transacted every day through projects like Uniswap, Axie Inifinity (a video game), and the plethora of DeFi apps and NFT projects out there. Despite the massive UX problems that still exist. It's willful ignorance at this point. Like, I get it, I was a crypto skeptic for a good wh…

I highly believe this space is moving to the metaverse too, and many non-believers are going to get a reality check in the future.

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#124

Post by tablespoon »

practice9 wrote: post #48
gokhan wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you go to Louvre to see Mona Lisa if you have an atom-by-atom identical copy at home? How much would you pay for the original? What is "original" in this case? Which ship of Theseus is the original one? I don't say, as art, some NFTs are not pretty. I just say they don't represent the same value (for me) as some people think. A CryptoPunk does not have a physical representation, so the one you and I see on our…

> Would you go to Louvre to see Mona Lisa if you have an atom-by-atom identical copy at home? The point is moot, as you can look at super ultra high def scans of many paintings from the comfort of your home. And you can see more details this way and not pay any museum fees too

> The point is moot, as you can look at super ultra high def scans of many paintings from the comfort of your home.

That's a scan, a first-generation analog copy, and thus subject to generation-loss.

CryptoPunks, being 100% digital, can be copied exactly an infinite number of times. If I download the PNG from the URL in the NFT, I have in my possession the exact same thing as the so-called "owner."

The only thing that differentiates the NFT "owner" from anyone else is a bookkeeping entry totally divorced from the infinitely-copyable and publicly-available thing it represents.

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#125

Post by tablespoon »

lottin wrote: post #41

Very disappointing to see a supposedly serious corporation giving legitimacy to such a blatant scam.

> Very disappointing to see a supposedly serious corporation giving legitimacy to such a blatant scam.

This is marketing, and marketing can be one of the less legitimate corporate endeavours (being in most cases literal manipulative propaganda). Serious corporations don't really care what negative externalities they cause, just as long as they don't have to pay for them.

They've bought a little cred with whoever they wanted to impress (be that the crypto kids, or olds painfully trying to be hip).

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#126

Post by basch »

mgh2 wrote: post #104
carlosdp wrote: post #102

It's wild to me the top comments on HN are still "crypto has no actual use case," despite the literal billions of actual dollars ($) being transacted every day through projects like Uniswap, Axie Inifinity (a video game), and the plethora of DeFi apps and NFT projects out there. Despite the massive UX problems that still exist. It's willful ignorance at this point. Like, I get it, I was a crypto skeptic for a good wh…

Please enlighten us: provide resources I am sure the HN community will be open to actual proof - not marketing material please Note: The fact that this comment was downvoted says something

an example of an interesting article from today

https://www.notboring.co/p/solana-summer

the fourth picture down (the TPS Chart) probably has every current relevant name on it, from a current size and momentum perspective. binance smart chain, cardano, solana, avalanche, polkadot are all locked in a battle to dethrone ethereum. Now its a question of what wins, the incumbent, the fastest mover, the most advanced tech, the shiniest, the most colorful, the coolest name, the loudest. If/when multiple survive in the long run, which niche do they each occupy.

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#127

Post by basch »

victor106 wrote: post #75
wc- wrote: post #74

There's a lot of back and forth about the general idea of NFT's, why would visa do this, the usual HN pros and cons of crypto, etc, in this thread. To the software devs on HN that might scroll past this, before you close this tab because of all the crypto stuff when you want to read about coding, hang on a sec! There are some really really cool new user experiences being unlocked with so-called "web3" tech. Micro tra…

Thanks for the suggestion. Any tips on how or where to find these communities?

https://www.notboring.co/p/solana-summer

is a good article for this crowd.

Besides Avalanche and ethereum, look at Cardano and Solana which are both having their moment (along with Avalanche) the last couple weeks.

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#128

Post by csomar »

hanklazard wrote: post #2

I find their explanation so strange… they are adding it to their “collection of historic commerce artifacts”? Do they run a financial network or a museum? If I were a shareholder, I would not be happy with this move.

If it pumps their stock, why would shareholder be not happy about it.

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#129

Post by mattdesl »

lottin wrote: post #119
mattdesl wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It comes through a combination of the artist's intent ("I am distributing this artwork in the form of a limited series of tokens") and social consensus ("We recognize that the artefact is an artwork, created by the artist"). What you are asking is similar to Found Art. A signed toilet is not "Art" until social consensus decides that it is. An blockchain-signed Eiffel Tower is also not art, unless society says it to b…

Thanks for taking the time. My question was about the supposed connection between the NFT and the object of art. You're arguing about what constitutes art, but that wasn't the question. In fact, the object doesn't have to be artistic at all, it can be anything. At any rate, I'm not disputing that the object is "art". I'm questioning that there's a connection between the NFT and the object.

The connection at a technical level depends on the art project and token. For example ArtBlocks tokens are tied to a unique pseudorandom hash that is generated at the time of purchase, and that hash is used as input to the JavaScript software that is embedded within the smart contract in order to produce a matching visual. Autoglyphs does something like that directly in a smart contract without JS. Many 1/1 NFTs act more like hyperlinks to an IPFS hash with the media file for reference. Other art projects on the blockchain may use tokens and smart contracts in different ways.

At a conceptual level, I think the connection is more to do with “this NFT was minted by the artist’s hand (wallet), the same hand that created the artwork it points to.”

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#130

Post by mattdesl »

GDC7 wrote: post #121
mattdesl wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But according to the rest of the world the answer is 'Yes' It depends who you ask, and when you ask it. The understanding of 'digital ownership' may be shifting, as we can see in real-time with the OP thread, where Visa is making a claim that their ownership over the digital token is distinctly different than their ownership over the digital JPG file (and, apparently, distinct enough that they felt it worth paying…

> ownership of digital art is not a notion that had much social consensus around it before the advent of NFTs. I don't mean to disrespect artists but when all is said and done the only question that matters is: "Will a museum pay me, the owner of the piece of art to have it in their collection, so I can generate passive income from it?" In the case of real pieces of art the answer is positive. If this critical compon…

It sounds like you have decided what you think the future will look like based on your own narrow experience of technology, and are not open to alternative viewpoints.

And to answer your question: museums and institutions have been collecting 2D and 3D digital art, VR, code based art, etc for years. The NFT space provides new technologies that can be used here, and an alternative distribution channel & market for this type of work.

Post reply on HN