601–610 of 769 posts
You can't replace an entire infrastructure, this large, overnight.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know you're being a bit snarky, but the miners voted on that decision and decided, collectively, to fork. It's decentralized in the sense that there's no central mandate, and everyone needs to agree with a decision or that decision will ultimately fizzle.
This is a distorted retelling of history. Mining pools ultimately did settle on voting in favor of the hard fork, but did so through collusion and lack of transparency. Most notably, ethermine miners voted against the hard fork, but the pool operators contributed the entire pools votes in favor of the fork any way. There were similar situations with other mining pools, and in general the actual miners were left in th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
the similarity is that they store images for viewing neuro-typical people got it
Except for the fact that they don't store images and can't display them, sure. I'm probably too thick to understand it. But please keep repeating your bullshit analogy.
NFTs can in-fact store complete binary data and complete vector data. There are some examples and some production projects doing both of those things. But more commonly they typically load a URL to an image, and people prefer that instead of a URL that its on an IPFS URI, but people accept an IPFS proxy URL.
In all scenarios, a separate technology/viewer/website is used to access the standard method which returns the data to be interpreted. Which is where things are dissimilar. Analogies don't compare aspects that are dissimilar [0]. Any one similarity satisfies the criteria for an analogy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem of paper trails being changed. When something goes wrong, if you can't trust your paper trail, you can't attribute fault with certainty. Without an immutable shared database standard, it's difficult for processes like that to cross company lines. And supply chain is a fancy phrase for processes that cross many company lines.
It doesn't ensure that the data is correct, valid, hasn't been tampered with, or even entered. A supply chain involves 3rd parties who have nothing to gain from this. If the issue is the middle man between A and C, blockchain isn't solving any problem. The distrust is with B, having a blockchained backed paper trail doesn't provide anything a database gives you right now. You're asking for a single source of truth be…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't guarantee that. As I said, it guarantees that paper trails are permanent and cannot be fudged after the fact.
No it doesn’t. Private blockchains aren’t immutable. Whoever controls all the nodes can just edit the blockchain however they want.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Random example I found on reddit: https://old.reddit.com/r/MichaelReeves/comments/js1ib8/someo... Now let's say instead of Reddit he posted it on OpenSea. The person that owns it OpenSea then lists the image on Redbubble for financial gain. Who then owns it? Clearly the person who owns it on OpenSea? How do we know the person that posted it on Redbubble isn't the true owner and bblaineC isn't the scammer?
Wait, did someone suggest to you that NFT's were a solution to this millennium old reality? Because they aren't. In both scenarios like on Reddit or your NFT version of the scenario, it is up to the consumer to discern (the person that buys a piece of work). These are consumer protection issues before NFTs and after NFTs. People buy non-original work, thats not an NFT problem. People might or might not be able to res…
You just stumbled on the problem. NFTs are inherently confusing.
> you could check with the artist.
Ugh. How do I check with the artist when I don't know who the artist is?! That was precisely my point...in that reddit scenario I can only build consensus about ownership if I have ALL OF THE FACTS. But I don't.
> FT's automate all of those things, and that's a massive tweak to a large market that I can see has been a very misunderstand large market. NFT's won't solve a copyright and license dispute.
> NFT's help after consensus on provenance has been reached once. It helps that consensus persevere. Something the art world has lacked for several millennium.
Ok, so NFTs help with lineage and ownership of value but does nothing to determine who actually originated the art? In other words, NFTs don't care about origination, as long as there is a traceable consensus of monetary value and ownership, regardless of whether that ownership was derived unintentionally.
> Something the art world has lacked for several millennium.
So you solve one half of the equation (lineage and transfer of ownership) but not the other (origination ownership)? Why on earth would an artist want to pursue that model if both aren't true?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
An immutable database guarantees that the "paper trail" has not been tampered with. In supply chains, there's a lot to be said for having a paper trail even if (or especially if) some of the papers are fraudulently written.
You don't need a blockchain for that, though; just hash chaining or similar.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can resell your paper, or email ticket already. How does blockchain make it interesting?
No need to expose yourself, possible anonimity and most important one, the absolute lack of need of a third party which is the thing that most find intresting about blockchains usecases.
That is an advantage if you're going to engage in behavior any reasonable person would despise you for.
> the absolute lack of need of a third party
If you're scalping tickets, you are the third party.