261–270 of 786 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What stops an original owner (of the to-be-digitized asset) from selling an NFT on the same thing multiple times? Perhaps on multiple different platforms?
Nothing, but they can only sign the "first" once
Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy: Earth - a small planet in the outer reaches of spiral galaxy M7529, so far the only planet on record that the semi-intelligent biped inhabitants managed to overheat so badly that they became extinct. Overheating has happened before, of course, however the method of overheating is unique - the inhabitants invented a method of identifying uniqueness by making large calculations and atta…
This was hilarious and well-written. I've become extremely alarmed at the number of completely non-technical people who don't know anything about how cryptocurrency works getting extremely into it via YouTube click holes. It's obvious that these NFTs are capitalizing on it. A guy I ran into at the hardware store today was talking to me and he didn't understand the concept of a cryptocurrency that has a stable value s…
"made a ton of money on it." Until he has sold those assets and turned them into a major, stable currently like USD in his bank account or a diversified collection of other assets, they are as reliable a store of value as Enron stock was in July of 2000.
Why can't NFTs be done without a blockchain? Please explain. Just add multiple hash, public/private-key cryptography, downsample discrete cosine transform, etc. You can just create a file format and a protocol. Why do you need to dump tons of CO2 into the atmosphere just for this purpose?
> Why can't NFTs be done without a blockchain?
In the physical world it is rather involved to check wether eg. a painting is the original one and not a copy. A simple way to define original is that it came first, before any of its copies. In the digital world the blockchain acts as the canonical timeline. You or anyone else can always tell what came first.
> Why do you need to dump tons of CO2 into the atmosphere just for this purpose?
In short we don't. The author of the article conflates blockchains and PoW:
- There are blockchains that don't rely on PoW
- The ones that are currently PoW might not be PoW in the future
- The ones that stay PoW might solely use non-CO2 producing methods in the future
Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy: Earth - a small planet in the outer reaches of spiral galaxy M7529, so far the only planet on record that the semi-intelligent biped inhabitants managed to overheat so badly that they became extinct. Overheating has happened before, of course, however the method of overheating is unique - the inhabitants invented a method of identifying uniqueness by making large calculations and atta…
This was hilarious and well-written. I've become extremely alarmed at the number of completely non-technical people who don't know anything about how cryptocurrency works getting extremely into it via YouTube click holes. It's obvious that these NFTs are capitalizing on it. A guy I ran into at the hardware store today was talking to me and he didn't understand the concept of a cryptocurrency that has a stable value s…
When betting in any market understanding people and psychology seems to be more important than understanding the product.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The NFTs are meant to prove ownership over digital items, aren’t they? Not ownership as in «I am the only one who can share this GIF in Facebook», but as in «I own the copyright to this GIF».
No, not really. (without license terms saying so not even the former, but those can be a thing)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The artist can sign a message including your public key. The message is verifiable using the artist's public key. If other people copy it, they're just copying the proof that it belongs to you. If you want to sell it to someone else, you sign a message saying you give it to them and so on, forming a "chain" of signed transactions.
Congratulations, you just invented an inefficient PoS for a single use case!
I’m curious as to how NFTs will compare to a sales contract from a legal point of view. E.g. if say an artist sells the rights to a digital artwork via both an NFT and via a normal sales contract. Both buyers claim ownership to the artwork and end up in court. Who wins? And what implications will a legal presedence have for the vaule of NFTs one way or the other?
If the artist sells the same exclusive right to two people, he's committing fraud and could do that without NFTs.
NFTs make perfect sense for representing a claim on things that can be used, like event tickets or in-game virtual goods. But as certificates layered on top of collectibles... I'm not so sure. With something like CryptoKitties, you can do something with the tokens (play a virtual pet game). But with something like CryptoPunks you're essentially paying for digital beanie babies, which are worse than real ones since an…
> You can brag about owning such-and-such an image [...] How? You don’t own a (digital) image. You own a token that references an image. Everyone else can view the image and send it to their friends. But you have some token allegedly signed by the author of the image — who cares?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What property of NFTs has suddenly made them make money where previously they weren't? Like how did adding NFTs to the mix suddenly make their art start selling?
Previously there was no way to credibly sell an "original". You can produce a commission for someone, but the nature of a digital artwork is that anyone you show it to has the whole thing. To a certain extent this was already the case with photos, and IMO that's part of the reason that prices for photographic artwork are much lower than other media. You'll sometimes see photographers selling a series of 500 numbered…