131–140 of 184 posts
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?!
You can't realistically expect exchanges to trade all possible fork coins.
A less starry-eyed take: https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2022/08/20/proof-of-sta...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It takes a certain amount of development work for an exchange to support a new coin so sometimes they don't do it.
I'm not sure it's that much work if there's something of tangible current value being held from their rightful owners, esp when they keep adding all sorts of coins. There should at least be a way to extract them even if the exchange doesn't support trading them
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So, are you saying that you run a centralized third party that is charged with collecting the royalties and passing it on to the artists? Because nowhere in the ERC-721 standard is there a way to differentiate between a "sale" and a "transfer between wallets". So tell me, please, exactly how "blockchain" is bringing "decentralization" to the art field. I am all ears.
A sale happens in a marketplace. Marketplaces collect royalties and forward them to the address specified. We are indeed a centralized player, just as all NFT creators are centralized entities (i.e. people) but the assets trade on decentralized networks. I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how all of this works and have a sneering, dismissive affect because this is something you don’t understand embrac…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
“The idea of apolitical money is a fantasy” Yannis Varoufakis, London, circa 2017 Either crypto follows the law or it gets banned. IMO this was inevitable.
You present a problem with Proof of Stake as an inevitable run in with the law and/or some folly of the crypto community. That's not very sound logic. I personally believe in apolitical decentralized money winning against fiat which is governed on the whims of central bankers and crony capitalism. Every system where technology brings fairness, power to all, and hard rules wins. This will not be an exception. It is th…
This is true and always and trumps whatever your software says is meaningless if there is any conflict ("you and what army" is a very valid question.
Now, the law (a court) can of course allow your software and might even enforce a contract bases on your software
In good systems the governed people have a say in how those laws are created. In Bad ones it's literally whatever one person mutters with a mouth full of breakfast cereals and headaches.
The idea that Proof of Stake is more secure against attack is beyond absurd, frankly. However you feel about the energy usage of proof of work consensus mechanisms, they are far more resistant to attack and centralization.
Many meanings of "attack". A year ago China attacked the miners and they mostly left China. A nation attacking the btc network is real, and the miners physically moved.
It is easier to move a PoS validator, and harder to locate the validator in the first place.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It takes a certain amount of development work for an exchange to support a new coin so sometimes they don't do it.
I'm not sure it's that much work if there's something of tangible current value being held from their rightful owners, esp when they keep adding all sorts of coins. There should at least be a way to extract them even if the exchange doesn't support trading them
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://opensea.io/collection/nickelodeon-rugrats-heyarnold-... My company is one of the largest NFT companies. This is one of our projects. Millions of dollars in secondaries on OpenSea and our hosted marketplace at https://Nickelodeon.xyz/ We collect all royalties and remit payment to the rights holders which include all artists and creators with residuals on Rugrats, of which there are many. They get their check q…
So, are you saying that you run a centralized third party that is charged with collecting the royalties and passing it on to the artists? Because nowhere in the ERC-721 standard is there a way to differentiate between a "sale" and a "transfer between wallets". So tell me, please, exactly how "blockchain" is bringing "decentralization" to the art field. I am all ears.
https://hackernoon.com/enabling-nft-royalties-with-eip-2981
ERC721, 1155 & 2981 together act as a toolkit for the encoding of royalty administration.
For example, if an NFT collection owner only implemented one of Rarible’s royalty distribution schemes mentioned above, another marketplace that’s not aware of that interface can simply call the common registry’s getRoyaltyView function. It tries to query all known royalty interfaces on the token contract and translates any response to a commonly useable result.
Collection owners who haven’t put any royalty signaling scheme into their contract can deploy an extended “override” contract and register it with the common registry. This registration method will ensure that only collection owners (identified by the owner public member) can call it
The Rarible exchange contract supports all kinds of external royalty interfaces, among them two that Rarible defined themselves, being an early player in the NFT space:
For example, if an NFT collection owner only implemented one of Rarible’s royalty distribution schemes mentioned above, another marketplace that’s not aware of that interface can simply call the common registry’s getRoyaltyView function. It tries to query all known royalty interfaces on the token contract and translates any response to a commonly useable result.
Collection owners who haven’t put any royalty signaling scheme into their contract can deploy an extended “override” contract and register it with the common registry. This registration method will ensure that only collection owners (identified by the owner public member) can call it
```function royaltyInfo(uint256 _tokenId, uint256 _salePrice) external view returns (address receiver, uint256 royaltyAmount);```
The interface also completely works off-chain, so marketplaces that trade assets on alternative infrastructure can still query the creator fee without knowing anything else besides the interface signature of the EIP-2981 method.
PaymentSplitters: Sending NFT Royalties To More Than One Receiver.
Open Zeppelin's PaymentSplitter primitive allows setting up individual split contracts that keep funds safe until their payees claim them, and their receive function requires the bare minimum of gas to run. NFT collection builders can create an inline PaymentSplitter containing the wanted list of beneficiaries and their respective share amounts and let their EIP-2981 implementation yield the address of that split contract.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s the same with staking. If you aren’t solo staking, you are just delegating to a staking pool. And you can withdraw that and deposit it elsewhere if they do not align with your values.
Again, it is not possible for staking pools to differ on "values". If a validator does not vote with the majority, their funds will be slashed by the protocol.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What "hard rules" can compete with actually enforced law? Don't you expect more "whims" (and scams) from private adventurers than from governments?
I expect all parties to act in their own best interests. I do in fact expect more scams from private bodies, but the government conducts a much larger scam in printing without accountability a currency unbacked by anything and not bound to any rules, a billion ton gorilla that moves the "free" markets at it's whim. The people's interest imo is in fairness to all not asset owners who aren't as affected by money printi…