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

Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 138 posts

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#71

Post by prestigious »

azemetre wrote: post #49
lottin wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The NFT is sold under the false pretence that is somehow connected with some object of art, when in fact there isn't any such connection. This is what makes NFTs a scam.

Yeah, when I realized you don't actually "own" it through any licenses it made me sour on the whole idea. Is there a reason why people couldn't be granted a license to do whatever they wanted with an NFT? Seems kind of arbitrary to do so, but I'm sure there's a reason why it's like that.

You own your BAYC for instance. Man it's like talking to my grandma in here.

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#72

Post by mgh2 »

dageshi wrote: post #56
Traster wrote: post #15

Well, congratulations to those NFT scammers, it finally paid off. They got their Whale. The entire game of pumping up NFTs to try and pass them off as a useful tool that'll see widespread adoption has finally paid out. This is a small sum of money for Visa to throw away, but this creates a fantastic permission structure for unsophisticated investors to throw away their life savings on a set of worthless e-certificate…

It's interesting to me, I've never bought a single crypto thing of any type but I look at the speed it's developing and popularity and it reminds me of the internet circa early 2000's when things were moving fast. The internet nowadays is a bit stale by comparison, crypto seems to be where the action and energy is.

The internet was really useful back in the days though, even for skeptics. Crypto is still an idea searching for a problem (not discounting the possibility that it won't find one though).

At this point, it seems like pure promotion, marketing & propaganda fueled by social media, a negative externality of the internet itself.

Simple equation: trash in, trash out. But sure, "a man's trash can be another's treasure".

Note: Visa's strategy is a no brainer as a business move. 150k is nothing on their marketing budget to gain exposure & PR targeting generation Z and millennials (future customers). Even if it fails, this acquisition has value as a stance because their customers (young adopters and old investors) want to be "supported", at least ideologically. Ex: "Progressive", "We were on your side, remember?"

I suggest reading their marketing whitepaper: https://usa.visa.com/content/dam/VCOM/regional/na/us/Solutio...

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#73

Post by Retric »

mikro2nd wrote: post #61
manigandham wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We already have (digital) ownership that can be publically verified.

Absent a trusted third-party? Please show us.

Just like the cloud still runs on physical computers, NFT’s require a trusted 3rd party.

For example crypto art can be uploaded that’s a direct copy of someone else’s artwork. Copyright doesn’t care about the NFT at that point you don’t own the image.

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#74

Post by wc- »

There's a lot of back and forth about the general idea of NFT's, why would visa do this, the usual HN pros and cons of crypto, etc, in this thread.

To the software devs on HN that might scroll past this, before you close this tab because of all the crypto stuff when you want to read about coding, hang on a sec!

There are some really really cool new user experiences being unlocked with so-called "web3" tech. Micro transactions, wallets embedded in your browser, these technologies offer so much potential for things far beyond a punk NFT or cryptokitty.

Any front-end dev I talk to in person I urge to get in contact with some of these communities and try out a consulting project or two, so I'll urge the same here. The pay rates right now are outrageous and you will get to try out some tech that might end up being useless or might end up being the next major comms layer, exciting times!

edit, adding some links here:

https://ethereum.org/en/developers/learning-tools/

https://ethereum.org/en/community/

https://ethereum.org/en/learn/

https://api3.org/

https://forum.w3f.community/

some of the above are ethereum specific, but there are always new communities popping up and out of ethereum. for example, Avalanche is ramping up their dev community funding right now with over $170m committed to the ecosystem.

https://www.avax.network/developers

https://www.avax-projects.com/

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#75

Post by victor106 »

wc- wrote: post #74

There's a lot of back and forth about the general idea of NFT's, why would visa do this, the usual HN pros and cons of crypto, etc, in this thread. To the software devs on HN that might scroll past this, before you close this tab because of all the crypto stuff when you want to read about coding, hang on a sec! There are some really really cool new user experiences being unlocked with so-called "web3" tech. Micro tra…

Thanks for the suggestion. Any tips on how or where to find these communities?

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#76

Post by mattdesl »

lottin wrote: post #45
pxue wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how is a NFT any more arbitrary than a hallmark card? both are "artistic" to a certain degree, completely useless after the purchase and initial exchange.

The NFT is sold under the false pretence that is somehow connected with some object of art, when in fact there isn't any such connection. This is what makes NFTs a scam.

Many artists would disagree.

The token is conceptually tied to the artwork. This is especially true with digital & software-driven work embedded within the blockchain, such as Deafbeef's tokens[1].

These issues are not new to crypto. Plenty of art is only 'conceptually' tied to their distributed editions. For example: an artist or photographer may own a digital master or photographic negative, and from that they may decide to produce and distribute 50 printed and signed editions. The distributed work is valued not because of the material (a piece of paper) or its contents (a rendered image), because it was distributed and signed by the artist's hand. Anybody could photocopy that print to produce the same rendered contents, or even print their own copy if they have access to a high resolution file and inkjet printer, but the copy would be worth no value, because it did not come from the artist's hand.

[1] - https://www.deafbeef.com/

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#77

Post by thebean11 »

criddell wrote: post #68
thebean11 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PAXG, each token is a claim to one physical ounce of gold, held by the issuer. Issued by a fully regulated NYC based financial institution.

What happens when the token is lost or destroyed? Is that the only way to claim ownership?

Unlikely you'd be able to redeem it. The token trades on 3rd party exchanges so there's no way to prove you lost it vs sold it. You have a choice between holding the tokens in a wallet vs on their platform (which is how you'd redeem for physical), I'm sure if you're using the latter it's a different story. I don't know for sure though.

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#78

Post by lostphilosopher »

garbagetime wrote: post #38
gokhan wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you go to Louvre to see Mona Lisa if you have an atom-by-atom identical copy at home? How much would you pay for the original? What is "original" in this case? Which ship of Theseus is the original one? I don't say, as art, some NFTs are not pretty. I just say they don't represent the same value (for me) as some people think. A CryptoPunk does not have a physical representation, so the one you and I see on our…

>Would you go to Louvre to see Mona Lisa if you have an atom-by-atom identical copy at home? How much would you pay for the original? What is "original" in this case? Which ship of Theseus is the original one? I am certain that if there was a perfect replica of the Mona Lisa, the original would retain most of its value. I don't really understand why this is the case, but I do understand that it is the case.

I'll take a stab at this.

The value for me is in knowing that I am standing in front of the same canvas that Da Vinci stood in front of. It's similar to going to a historical site and standing where history you've heard about was made and seeing/hearing/smelling something of what the people who made it did. It builds a sense of human connection, a shared experience, and makes something you "know" to be real "feel" more real.

Da Vinci never stood in front of the "atom for atom copy" of the Mona Lisa, and generations have not come from around the world to see it. We're receiving the same visual stimulus, but the ability to participate in the human connection is reduced because we know it's a copy. (Worth noting that if we didn't know it was a copy, then this wouldn't be a problem.)

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#79

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet »

prestigious wrote: post #66
dageshi wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting to me, I've never bought a single crypto thing of any type but I look at the speed it's developing and popularity and it reminds me of the internet circa early 2000's when things were moving fast. The internet nowadays is a bit stale by comparison, crypto seems to be where the action and energy is.

Absolutely it is. I turned $2000 into $200,000 in NFTs this summer and its just the beginning. It definitely has a Web 2.0 feel

I think it says a lot that the only thing you could mention about the technology was that you made money selling it. In what way did you make the world a better place?

Oh shit, sorry, I forgot: tech is about money, fuck the world.

Re: Visa Buys CryptoPunk #7610

#80

Post by ipaddr »

mgh2 wrote: post #72
dageshi wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting to me, I've never bought a single crypto thing of any type but I look at the speed it's developing and popularity and it reminds me of the internet circa early 2000's when things were moving fast. The internet nowadays is a bit stale by comparison, crypto seems to be where the action and energy is.

The internet was really useful back in the days though, even for skeptics. Crypto is still an idea searching for a problem (not discounting the possibility that it won't find one though). At this point, it seems like pure promotion, marketing & propaganda fueled by social media, a negative externality of the internet itself. Simple equation: trash in, trash out. But sure, "a man's trash can be another's treasure". No…

That was the internet in the beginning as well. For the average person in 1996/98/20 computers and the internet did not offer anything.

Today cryto provides the only way to perform a money transaction outside of the censored markets. An example, onlyfans, poor hub decided to ditch a type of content to please visa/mastercard. Cryto would allow society to ignore forced morals on money transactions. If what onlyfans provide is legal visa should not be allowed to shut them down on moral terms.

It may not be useful to you. The internet wasn't useful to most in 1995. It might be more useful in a few years where the masses have joined and the network effect is in place.

I remember when computers were seen as not useful in the 80s.. a toy that could do very little. Things change quickly.

Post reply on HN