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

NFT misconception: JPEG aren't stored on the Blockchain

erickhun.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 264 posts

Re: NFT misconception: JPEG aren't stored on the Blockchain

#71

Post by crorella »

omgbear wrote: post #51
cloogshicer wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The analogy that helped me understand it (even though I would still not buy one myself and think the hype is way over the top): Think of a booth at Comic Con, where an artist hands out signed copies of their comic books. The comic book itself is nothing special, but the signature is. But there is a problem: if you ever want to sell the signed comic book, how do you prove it's a real signature? NFTs solve that problem…

How does it solve the problem? You still have to trust the physical object I hand over is the real signed copy.

exactly, anyone could alter the content the URL points to.

Re: NFT misconception: JPEG aren't stored on the Blockchain

#72

Post by MaxBarraclough »

mrtksn wrote: post #59
todd3834 wrote: post #17

I hate to admit it but I’m still struggling to understand why people would pay so much for NFTs. I feel like I fully understand what they are and why most people want me to believe it has value but I still don’t agree. I’m waiting for my mind to change but it hasn’t happened yet. It’s frustrating because so many people I respect are leaving their high paying jobs to work in web3 startups around NFTs and I feel dumb f…

Like any other coins, it's simply a note useful to figure out who owns what within the framework of the community. NFT's connection to art is just a way to put a face on new coins. Instead of creating a sum of a coin brand and trade those(HN coin with total of 100K coins), you create a new coin brand each time(The most upvoted post, the post that made something famous etc.) and trade those with each other. It looks l…

> it's simply a note useful to figure out who owns what within the framework of the community

Owning an NFT does not mean you own the underlying asset.

Re: NFT misconception: JPEG aren't stored on the Blockchain

#73

Post by cloudking »

todd3834 wrote: post #17

I hate to admit it but I’m still struggling to understand why people would pay so much for NFTs. I feel like I fully understand what they are and why most people want me to believe it has value but I still don’t agree. I’m waiting for my mind to change but it hasn’t happened yet. It’s frustrating because so many people I respect are leaving their high paying jobs to work in web3 startups around NFTs and I feel dumb f…

Think about collectables in the real world, and imagine how they could possibly work in the digital world. For example, people collect trading cards for various sports, and there is 1 owner per card who can trade/sell the card to others. How would you facilitate this idea in the digital world?

Well you can't use a regular database, because it's easy for it to be hacked/shutdown, and if it's run by a third-party then even if you have entry in that database you don't technically "own" it. Turns out blockchains are a good solution for facilitating the idea of digital ownership, it can't be easily hacked/shutdown, it's run by the community, and if you own the keys to the NFT token that represents your ownership, technically you own that "database entry". You can easily sell/trade your NFT to others via smart contracts, transferring the ownership of the collectable/object they represent. The market has decided that NFTs are a good way to represent digital ownership based on the technical solution.

Want to see a successful example of the trading card world gone digital with NFTs? https://nbatopshot.com/

Re: NFT misconception: JPEG aren't stored on the Blockchain

#74

Post by meheleventyone »

forgotmyoldname wrote: post #20

So how exactly is the "gas money" calculated? I was led to believe it was expensive because putting all that data into the blockchain costed a significant amount. Asking because, wanting to verify whether NFTs were really a scam or scheme instead of just following heated Twitter arguments, I looked into uploading my own NFT. Gas money for a single image was $250--estimated earnings for an NFT are in the low dollars f…

The cost is about how expensive it is to execute the smart contract. Plus a tip to get your transaction executed earlier.

https://ethereum.org/en/developers/docs/gas/

If you’re like “well those costs are ludicrous compared to the computational complexity” then you’re right. But then the entire thing is secured by the ludicrous overspend of power through computation.

Re: NFT misconception: JPEG aren't stored on the Blockchain

#75

Post by Freeboots »

mastazi wrote: post #10

I'm very surprised that those (the JSON and the picture) are not stored in a decentralised way e.g. IPFS or Swarm. So if I buy an expensive NFT, and the domain goes down, the NFT is now worthless? We should be on the lookout for any of these domains expiring, then we will buy them and upload Rick Astley GIFs

I honestly thought they had some kind of torrent pointer. I dont have a deep understanding of how ANY of this works, i just figured smarter minds had ironed out the kinks, such as 'what if the original source goes down or is coopted?'

Re: NFT misconception: JPEG aren't stored on the Blockchain

#76

Post by folli »

sbierwagen wrote: post #3

>ERC-721 is the standard that dictates how one should create an NFT. Each ERC721 NFT must have a tokenURI field, that is an external link to a JSON file stored on an external server ... You can notice the image field, which is a link to an image. Not just a link, a link to a link! And when that server goes down next year, all those JSON files will vanish.

I mean, as the article mentions, you could store the image on the chain. Or at least a Hash of the image to prevent a bait-and-switch.

But it would cost too much of added gas fees and the average user wouldn't understand the difference.

Re: NFT misconception: JPEG aren't stored on the Blockchain

#77

Post by mrtksn »

MaxBarraclough wrote: post #72
mrtksn wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like any other coins, it's simply a note useful to figure out who owns what within the framework of the community. NFT's connection to art is just a way to put a face on new coins. Instead of creating a sum of a coin brand and trade those(HN coin with total of 100K coins), you create a new coin brand each time(The most upvoted post, the post that made something famous etc.) and trade those with each other. It looks l…

> it's simply a note useful to figure out who owns what within the framework of the community Owning an NFT does not mean you own the underlying asset.

Define owning. Depending on your definition, it may mean or may not mean owning. In the NFT circles, the record on the chain indicating that you own something means you own something because ownership transfer will happen within the exact same framework.

NFT is not a media to purchase rights of an artwork to print it t-shirts or something like that. These things happen within the legal framework of a jurisdiction that has legislated stuff like copyright. Blockchain is not a jurisdiction, it's simply a list record and those records are valid for those accepting the blockchain as the authoritative record.

Re: NFT misconception: JPEG aren't stored on the Blockchain

#79

Post by tempestn »

MaxBarraclough wrote: post #70
todd3834 wrote: post #17

I hate to admit it but I’m still struggling to understand why people would pay so much for NFTs. I feel like I fully understand what they are and why most people want me to believe it has value but I still don’t agree. I’m waiting for my mind to change but it hasn’t happened yet. It’s frustrating because so many people I respect are leaving their high paying jobs to work in web3 startups around NFTs and I feel dumb f…

This topic turned up a week ago. [0] Personally I like the analogy to baseball cards. From [0]: > Owning an NFT generally doesn't grant you copyrights over the underlying work of art. Owning a baseball card doesn't mean the athlete now works for you. They can both still have value as collectible items, if that's something that interests you. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29050802

However with a baseball card you do own the card. With an NFT you don't even own the digital item, nor is it intrinsically associated with a blockchain entry that you can prove ownership of. You basically own a link to a url which for some period of time will hopefully point at the jpg (or whatever it is).

Re: NFT misconception: JPEG aren't stored on the Blockchain

#80

Post by sva_ »

meheleventyone wrote: post #41
mastazi wrote: post #10

I'm very surprised that those (the JSON and the picture) are not stored in a decentralised way e.g. IPFS or Swarm. So if I buy an expensive NFT, and the domain goes down, the NFT is now worthless? We should be on the lookout for any of these domains expiring, then we will buy them and upload Rick Astley GIFs

IPFS doesn’t guarantee safety either, it’s still possible for the link to rot and no longer be accessible.

At least the owner of the NFT would have an incentive to keep the file available.
Post reply on HN