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

The Tinkerbell Griftopia

stephendiehl.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 251 posts

Re: The Tinkerbell Griftopia

#121

Post by casi18 »

phillipcarter wrote: post #34
casi18 wrote: post #4

> "Information doesn't want to be free anymore" “Information Wants To Be Free. Information also wants to be expensive....That tension will not go away” - Stuart Brand Think about the whole quote and NFTs will make more sense to you. NFT != DRM go wild, right click and torrent. i'll send you my nft images myself if you want them. the signatures and the economic security of that signature taking place is valuable. ther…

> I don’t have the time to try to convince you, sorry. I'm willing to bet you do :)

lol maybe today on a friday afternoon i do haha :)

but in general the conversations are getting exhausting and distracting. I feel like it is at a point where we will just keep building the things we find useful for ourselves and our communities, maybe others will join in.

hopefully he people with such extreme anti-crypto views recognise that we are human; we'll try and we'll fail and maybe we'll make some cool stuff too. maybe they dont share the same values and maybe theyre scared of what might happen, but the continual insults and accusations of everyone being scammers/scammed because we linked some metadata with some signatures is absurd and weird.

if theyre so worried about culture and society maybe they should take a moment to think of what energy they are putting out into the world and if its at all healthy.

Re: The Tinkerbell Griftopia

#122

Post by Tossrock »

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #117
Tossrock wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So why didn't people do that? There has been the option to give artists money forever, and yet as a society, we generally haven't. NFTs are demonstrably transferring massive amounts of wealth from crypto bros with too much money to artists who need it. It's revolutionary because _it's actually happening_. Even though it was theoretically possible in the past, _people didn't actually do it_. The traditional art market…

So your argument isn't that this is a useful and revolutionary tool that will change the world for the better, your argument is that it is a useful way for artists to exploit idiots? A.K.A, a scam?

I'm not convinced this dialog is in good faith, but no, my argument is that it is a way for artists to get paid, at a much larger scale than they have in the past. Personally, I think artists getting paid does change the world for the better, but I suppose that's open to disagreement. I'm not sure which part of that you think is a scam - are the people buying the NFTs being misled? Is the product sold not what was claimed?

Re: The Tinkerbell Griftopia

#123

Post by whateveracct »

seibelj wrote: post #42
NikolaeVarius wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you admit all NFTs are just bragging rights, That is FUCKING STUPID.

I can get a super zoomed in high-res version of the Mona Lisa, print it out with the highest quality, and mount it on my wall, but I don't own the Mona Lisa.

You only technically "own" art with an NFT.

The Mona Lisa is actual oil laid down on canvas hundreds of years ago by a foundational artist. I suppose it's a philosophical difference, but pretty much everything about art is gonna be.

I guess NFTs are fun if you're crypto-drunk?

Re: The Tinkerbell Griftopia

#124

Post by gordian-mind »

vehemenz wrote: post #18
reedf1 wrote: post #10

It's hard to take takes like this seriously when they get the basic premise wrong. It's flowery and cute but its a lot of writing with very little substance.

How did they get the premise wrong? What premise? If you're going to try undercutting a 1,000 word essay, you'll need to work to get there.

He thinks that being able to download every NFT's as a torrent is an own. But nobody cares about this.

Also, to me this is not a '1,000 word essay' but a 'carefully crafted attempt to gaslight people without any substantive claims'. Since I qualified it that way, there is no need to refute it. :)

Re: The Tinkerbell Griftopia

#125

Post by whateveracct »

cool_dude85 wrote: post #54
jimbob45 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why couldn't you just have a SQL DB where you store the ownership of these assets though? There's no reason to use an NFT - it's overkill.

What, and trust the central planners at Sotheby's to not steal my apes and slimers? They'll sell off half the pixels to the government because of my back taxes.

A simple example:

You wouldn't trust your NBA Topshot ownership to .. the NBA? Of course you would - SQL DB strictly better.

Re: The Tinkerbell Griftopia

#126

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet »

trevyn wrote: post #113
AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That kinda just reinforces the point though that all of this cryptononsense is a scam. Sure, here's a group exploiting Bitcoin Iditiots LLC for a good cause, but they're still exploiting.

It's completely orthogonal to whatever you believe about crypto.

The preface to your link was:

> We're just starting to rebuild critical functions using new ways of thinking. One of my favorite examples:

Which I think any rational person would take to mean that you believe the linked project was enabled to do something revolutionary[0] by the technology of cryptocurrencies. But that isn't what the project does. The technology of cryptocurrencies is irrelevant to what they do, it's the hype they're taking advantage of.

[0] "new ways of thinking".

Re: The Tinkerbell Griftopia

#128

Post by 127 »

Seems to me there's a conversation about the technology and conversation about how people react to that technology. Would be nice to talk about only the technology, but I guess in this case the social dimension is impossible to separate.

Re: The Tinkerbell Griftopia

#129

Post by gammarator »

Tossrock wrote: post #111
AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think you are confusing the cost of production of these things, and the cost to you personally. No, I'm not. The fact that artists need to be paid for their work so they can continue to exist within world of scarcity economics is orthogonal to the fact that information can be copied and disseminated for an effective zero-cost. Let me put it this way: if, instead of minting and purchasing an NFT, the potential buy…

So why didn't people do that? There has been the option to give artists money forever, and yet as a society, we generally haven't. NFTs are demonstrably transferring massive amounts of wealth from crypto bros with too much money to artists who need it. It's revolutionary because _it's actually happening_. Even though it was theoretically possible in the past, _people didn't actually do it_. The traditional art market…

> So why didn't people [just give money to artists]?

Because there’s no way to make a speculative profit off a donation?

Re: The Tinkerbell Griftopia

#130

Post by NoGravitas »

iskander wrote: post #44

I think what Stephen misses in his campaign against crypto is that the old ideals have already been coopted and smothered with the corporatization of the web and splintering of what was a decentralized ecosystem into a megacorp walled gardens. I know there's a tiny community of non-crypto decentralized web advocates and I hope they win. But, the main force for a return to decentralization is in crypto and the only re…

> the only realistic alternative to a web3 future is one where everything is a property of Google, Facebook, Microsoft, &c

Take heart! Living in a mud hut and drying jellyfish on racks over a tire fire is also a realistic alternative to a "web3" future, and a more likely one for most of us!

Post reply on HN