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

NFT Canon

a16z.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 114 posts

Re: NFT Canon

#21

Post by xur17 »

MrMan wrote: post #19
xur17 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I see a lot of crypto enthusiasts speak highly about NFTs which I find odd. They generally have very well thought out and reasoned arguments for Bitcoin as a digital store of wealth, but then they go into NFTs and talk about scarcity. I've seen the opposite - most crypto enthusiasts I have spoken to don't seem to understand NFTs at all / why they are considered valuable by other people. I fit into that camp. > Over…

Why does defi imply higher interest rates?

I'm not 100% sure of all of the reasons - I imagine some of it is defi being harder to access, some of it is the increased risk (uncertainty / it's reasonably new), some of it is removal of middlemen, and some of it is incentivized behavior as a growth hack (similar to Uber subsidizing rides). Curious for other peoples' thoughts on what drives the higher interest rates.

Re: NFT Canon

#22

Post by nostrademons »

Judgmentality wrote: post #18
nostrademons wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a simulacrum, in the post-modern sense. For those who are unfamiliar with the concept, a simulacrum is a copy of something that has itself become hyper-real and usurped the reality of the original. The canonical example is Disney World, which is a copy of Disneyland, which is itself a copy of many elements of Americana (Louisiana Bayou, the frontier West, Main Street USA, etc.) Disney World has eclipsed Disneyla…

> And just as there's only one original Mona Lisa, there's only one original NFT of the Mona Lisa I apologize if I'm misunderstanding, but can't you create as many NFTs of the Mona Lisa as you want? What's to stop someone from just creating a second one, even the original owner of the Mona Lisa? You can't copy the Mona Lisa (at least not in such a way as to call it the original), but you can make another NFT of the r…

My understanding is that the NFT also contains a hash of the work that it represents, so there really is only one of a given digital work. You can create another NFT of a different digitization, but there's still distinguishing factors between them that would make one "better" than the other (higher resolution, maybe, or more ubiquitous file format). Also over time a particular digitizations' status of being the first gives it its own legitimacy, unless the environment changes in a way that makes competing ones significantly more convenient.

It's sort of like the forking problem for cryptocurrencies in general. Anyone can fork the Bitcoin code and say they made a new cryptocurrency, and many people have done exactly that (Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin SV, Bitcoin ABC). In practice, the fork tends to die out, because much of a cryptocurrency's value is in who agrees that it's valuable, and there's a big first-mover advantage there.

Re: NFT Canon

#24

Post by billytetrud »

cma wrote: post #12
bko wrote: post #2

It might be covered in one of the resources, but when people talk about NFTs, they just mean some token on Ethereum that the issuer of said coin say is "the" product. For instance, the NFT for "the first tweet" that sold is just someone created an Ethereum token and said "this one is the first tweet", presumably w/ some text in the token that states the tweet. In that regard, its kind of centralized. There can be mul…

> there is no dispute about what the original is Still though, the value of collectible goes up if you have extensive documentation proving it is the original, vs it just merely being the original, or worse, it being the original and someone else having extensive documentation convincingly making the case that their counterfeit is actually the original.

NFTs can't prove originality, only ownership. Since digital things are easily copied exactly, that's all you can do

Re: NFT Canon

#25

Post by bko »

MrMan wrote: post #19
xur17 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I see a lot of crypto enthusiasts speak highly about NFTs which I find odd. They generally have very well thought out and reasoned arguments for Bitcoin as a digital store of wealth, but then they go into NFTs and talk about scarcity. I've seen the opposite - most crypto enthusiasts I have spoken to don't seem to understand NFTs at all / why they are considered valuable by other people. I fit into that camp. > Over…

Why does defi imply higher interest rates?

You earn interest by "lending" your digital asset. People want to speculate against the asset (i.e. bet the price will go down). The only way to do that is borrow someone else's crypto (pay them an interest rate for the trouble), sell it, and eventually buy it back later at a lower price.

The interest rate is determined by the market, and since its pretty early on in defi world, the owners of the crypto demand a higher interest rate to make it worth their while. Also, the more volatile the asset the more valuable it is in terms of derivatives.

Re: NFT Canon

#26

Post by bko »

nostrademons wrote: post #22
Judgmentality wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And just as there's only one original Mona Lisa, there's only one original NFT of the Mona Lisa I apologize if I'm misunderstanding, but can't you create as many NFTs of the Mona Lisa as you want? What's to stop someone from just creating a second one, even the original owner of the Mona Lisa? You can't copy the Mona Lisa (at least not in such a way as to call it the original), but you can make another NFT of the r…

My understanding is that the NFT also contains a hash of the work that it represents, so there really is only one of a given digital work. You can create another NFT of a different digitization, but there's still distinguishing factors between them that would make one "better" than the other (higher resolution, maybe, or more ubiquitous file format). Also over time a particular digitizations' status of being the firs…

> My understanding is that the NFT also contains a hash of the work that it represents, so there really is only one of a given digital work

I've never heard that before. Can someone confirm this is true? Is it solving for a hash of the original digitization of the work or something?

Re: NFT Canon

#27

Post by clpm4j »

bko wrote: post #26
nostrademons wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding is that the NFT also contains a hash of the work that it represents, so there really is only one of a given digital work. You can create another NFT of a different digitization, but there's still distinguishing factors between them that would make one "better" than the other (higher resolution, maybe, or more ubiquitous file format). Also over time a particular digitizations' status of being the firs…

> My understanding is that the NFT also contains a hash of the work that it represents, so there really is only one of a given digital work I've never heard that before. Can someone confirm this is true? Is it solving for a hash of the original digitization of the work or something?

My understanding is that John can take a picture/jpg of the Mona Lisa, mint an ERC-20 token and sell his picture/jpg on a NFT marketplace. Jane can also take a picture/jpg of the Mona Lisa, mint an ERC-20 token and sell her picture/jpg on a NFT marketplace. I think the difference shows up when Jack Dorsey mints a screenshot of his first tweet and sells it, it's worth $2m because it's sold by Jack. Whereas I could screenshot Jack's first tweet, mint it and sell it for $0.01 because it's sold by me.

Very happy to be corrected if this is incorrect.

Re: NFT Canon

#28

Post by jcpham2 »

Absolutely delighted that cryptocurrency has spawned this larger conversation of digital ownership and proof of work, proof is stake, etc.

This is great stuff to read other people discuss and curate on the internet now 10 or 11 years in.

Re: NFT Canon

#29

Post by rideontime »

bko wrote: post #26
nostrademons wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding is that the NFT also contains a hash of the work that it represents, so there really is only one of a given digital work. You can create another NFT of a different digitization, but there's still distinguishing factors between them that would make one "better" than the other (higher resolution, maybe, or more ubiquitous file format). Also over time a particular digitizations' status of being the firs…

> My understanding is that the NFT also contains a hash of the work that it represents, so there really is only one of a given digital work I've never heard that before. Can someone confirm this is true? Is it solving for a hash of the original digitization of the work or something?

It's not.

Re: NFT Canon

#30

Post by Judgmentality »

clpm4j wrote: post #27
bko wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My understanding is that the NFT also contains a hash of the work that it represents, so there really is only one of a given digital work I've never heard that before. Can someone confirm this is true? Is it solving for a hash of the original digitization of the work or something?

My understanding is that John can take a picture/jpg of the Mona Lisa, mint an ERC-20 token and sell his picture/jpg on a NFT marketplace. Jane can also take a picture/jpg of the Mona Lisa, mint an ERC-20 token and sell her picture/jpg on a NFT marketplace. I think the difference shows up when Jack Dorsey mints a screenshot of his first tweet and sells it, it's worth $2m because it's sold by Jack. Whereas I could scr…

This is also my understanding, and my point was (in this example) Jack Dorsey can just do it a second time, and a third time, and so on.

And it's not like Monet making more paintings, because each painting is unique. This is an identical digital copy from the same person, with no guarantee of its longevity.

Post reply on HN