Thread resurrection: Some of you might enjoy sending (the value of) NFTs straight back to hell with your BSG (Big Screenshot Gun) 9000 in NFT Doom:
https://www.pcgamer.com/right-click-and-tear-through-this-doom-nft-mod/
Thread resurrection: Some of you might enjoy sending (the value of) NFTs straight back to hell with your BSG (Big Screenshot Gun) 9000 in NFT Doom:
https://www.pcgamer.com/right-click-and-tear-through-this-doom-nft-mod/
Another related story, turns out a major problem with NFTs is that many are created with "stolen" IP in the first place:
The only rational explanation I have ever heard for making an NFT valuable is attaching something else to it. For example, if you buy a work from an artist, you also get to go to dinner with the artist and hang out. Other than that, they make little sense other allowing artists to make money. To me, its the same as a copyright, you own the original and people have to pay you to use it to make money.
I think some of youse is getting this wrong* in that the "value" is in the blockchain and not the image.
Of course a digital image can be recreated exactly and owning the "original" really means nothing as far as provenance. But maybe it's the 'certificate of authencity' aspect of it...who knows.
I also think many artists are thinking or being told wrongly on this re: how it could benefit them.
*I also could be totally wrong
In reply to jamscal :
Okay, then what is so valuable about a blockchain? It's still just 1's and 0's inside a computer.
In reply to Javelin :
I don't know...and I could be wrong. Just saying that some people wrongly think it's the art that's worth something but in 'reality' its just that it represents a unique digital 'signature' of some sort....I'll stop talking now until i know or care enough to be able to explain it better :)
(But our current currency is valuable basically because we all think it is...and is also mostly 1's and 0's)
In reply to jamscal :
That's why I don't have much currency and mostly physical things...
Javelin said:In reply to jamscal :
Okay, then what is so valuable about a blockchain? It's still just 1's and 0's inside a computer.
As noted, it is simply "proof" of ownership of something unique (even it is #86 of 150). It's generally what people are using these as proof of ownership (simple digital files) is where it goes kind of stupid. Could it be used for other things? Maybe, but the reason why it is useful for digital files is because there is a direct link between the "item" and the "block chain code" which verifies is ownership (probably not the proper name for those).
Of note, most of these things are "collectibles". My general rule is that anything that is called a collectible, by definition, is not. (Most collectibles of any real value are valuable because people did NOT collect them and thus they are rare).
As with anything. Something is only worth someone else will pay you for it (also sometimes called the bigger idiot equation).
Javelin said:In reply to jamscal :
Okay, then what is so valuable about a blockchain? It's still just 1's and 0's inside a computer.
Software consists of 1's and 0's in a computer and it is worth what you can do with it. You can balance your checkbook or write a letter or play a game. 1's and 0's that can do something are worth something. Random 1's and 0's that keep track of nothing are worth not so much. A currency can be tracked by a blockchain but it is still worth only as much as the country that backs it up. Say what you will about fiat money, but a country has armies and navies and nukes. A country is a piece of land. It exists. A currency backed up by hackers and money launderers and dark internet people you don't know from who knows where is phantom money backed by nobody knows who and that's kind of scary.
this seems like a pretty good critique of NFTs; and might give some answers to questions that were asked here:
^Wow, the technological dumpster-fire factor is surprising. Failing to store a hash in the blockchain is something I couldn't have imagined, that just seems like basic common sense for the intended task.
I think NFT's have finally reached their peak:
Summary: Woman who makes money farting in jars and sending them to people who pay her overdid creating her "product" and ended up in the hospital with what turned out to be sever gas. She has now determined she can sell virtual farts in virtual jars....
....and people will buy them....
... uh... yeah....
...so, you are saying, you have absolute proof you paid money for a virtual fart in a virtual jar....
In reply to aircooled :
Humanity deserves to go extinct.
NickD said:In reply to aircooled :
Humanity deserves to go extinct.
Or at least that part of humanity that is buying farts in jars, either real or virtual.
I have very little constructive to add regarding nft's (I think they're largely a dumb novelty)
But the farts in jars thing made me think of this
sleepyhead the buffalo said:this seems like a pretty good critique of NFTs; and might give some answers to questions that were asked here:
That was extremely interesting and eye opening.
1988RedT2 said:NickD said:In reply to aircooled :
Humanity deserves to go extinct.
Or at least that part of humanity that is buying farts in jars, either real or virtual.
Honestly, how much fart could realistically be expected to get in the jar?
I mean the existing air in the jar is going to cause positive pressure to form when another gas tries to enter and then you've got the dispersion effect from the jar lid fanning away gas as you place it on the jar. Heck, we haven't even considered the biomechanical requirements of holding both a jar and lid at arms length while twisting...not many could pull that off.
I'm pretty sure that jar you spent so much money on is going to be 95+ percent air. Before I'd part with my hard earned money, I'd want to see a proper filling system in place.
Thinking out loud, maybe you could fill a jar with water and turn it upside down in a large tank of water that you're sitting in. Now, have a big inverted funnel over your abdomen and place the spout well within the inverted jar.
Maybe I'm over thinking this but I just don't like seeing people get ripped off.
In reply to RX Reven' :
Getting ripped off is a matter of perception. Value is all what you make of it. That and the fart in a jar market is pretty new. Not like used panties.
RX Reven' said:... Before I'd part with my hard earned money, I'd want to see a proper filling system in place....
Oh, you definitely get to see the "filling system". That's included with the price, in video form, with audio of course.
In reply to RX Reven' :
I agree the displacement of water method has merit here. Fart passes through tube into inverted water-filled container, resulting in 100% pure fart gas. I think there might be an opportunity here for someone willing to go the extra effort and provide a high-quality product.
I'm not sure if this example helps...
Years back I was involved in extensive inventory work. A chemical company with 50,000 chemical products on site.
There were inventory issues in every product, both in the nature of the product, and in the quantifying of it.
Chemical Product A + Chemical Product B= Chemical Product C. Sounds simple.
But A was bought by the metric ton, B was bought by the 50 gallon drum, and C was sold by the milligram. Plus, in manufacturing C, 17 different chemical bi-products were created. Some were useful for other products, some were waste, some were long term inventory. And some went up the chimney or down the drain in the manufacturing process.
So, how much of each product and bi-product do we have? Obviously, it's complicated.
But the relevant part was my conversation with the CFO. I would be counting product (physical product), and the physical quantity varied from the quantity in the records (it always did). But my argument was that I thought he should adjust his books to reflect the physical quantities on site. In other words, I though my count was "right", and his was "wrong".
He strongly countered me. He said that the value of the business was defined (in part) by the value of the inventory, and the "right" quantity was what was in his electronic records, NOT what was physically on site.
From a business sense, he was right. The value of the company was defined electronically. If we suddenly started changing the quantities that HE said were on site (in his electronic records), then we would be randomly changing the intrinsic value of the company, without any explanation or justification. THAT was not ok.
So, contrary to the way that many of us think, the actual VALUE is not based in the tangible product, but rather in the electronic record. I know that seems backward, but it's the way business and economics works.
The blockchain is the value, not the image.
(I think) 
A simpler version...
If I own a Ferrari and set it on fire, I still own the Ferrari.
It may need its value adjusted, but I still own it.
Nothing is changing my impression that NFTs are, at best, artificial scarcity.
Which, IMHO, is diametrically opposed to progress.
If I go hand-wavey enough I can imagine an iteration (of web3 from the moxie link?) where checks for ownership of a given hash (or more useful file ID since a hash changes for any digital difference and so an album could be aurally indistinguishable but hash differently) are built into the entire ecosystem to allow or disallow access... That is, if you don't own a copy of "The Very Best of Elvis Costello and the Attractions" according to blockchain records then you won't be able to play it. But this, too, seems like a crushing level of bureaucracy and overhead for the web, even while we could use a better answer to making sure that people get paid for making digital things, even if those things are trivial to reproduce.
Owning "the official copy" is also not the same as owning the rights to a piece of work, correct?
I do think the notion of owning "an official copy" of a string of ones and zeroes is somewhat useful, as opposed to owning "the official copy" which is just dumb. If my copy is digitally identical to yours, just give the artist a giant pile of money and be recognized as a significant patron of the arts, don't pretend your .flac is different when it patently isn't. And here when I say "an official copy" I'm referring to "I gave the artist a listening-to-the-album fee," not "I bought 1 of the 25 official $10k NFTs."
I'm spinning off into the ether, but maybe that's a significant point: Why would we place more societal value or prestige on owning a ludicrously ostentatious but immaterial thing privately than on being a noted patron? When we talk about (over)paying an artist for something of no practical value, aren't we just putting the former label rather than the latter on the same movement of goods and funds? "You have given the artist known as __________ $5,000,000. Would you like that recorded as a power pose or public service?"
No, you can't sell a donation on when you're done with the headline buzz, but I'll be disappointed if NFTs have long-term value without developing some actual exclusive rights. Right now the value is in buzz, and I have every hope that that's more fleeting than the 20% of new car value that disappears driving off the lot (real, physical car shortages and their temporary valuations notwithstanding).
We had a day long technology seminar on blockchain, that actually gave me some piece of mind on this. The short version: think of blockchain as the paper receipt, and the NFT as what you bought in the store (they used email server framework vs. actual message as the example in the seminar, same idea). You can have a receipt for anything, from a stack of post-it notes to a McLaren F1. In my opinion, NFT's trend WAY closer to the post-it note end of the product spectrum, or maybe even closer to a $0.05 stick of gum. Mildly entertaining for about 5 min, ultimately disposable. But the value is in the receipt/blockchain for other applications. Unique encryption and record tracking has all kind of valuable uses....for instance, reducing fraud in driver's licenses and other forms of ID.
Summary: NFTs of GIFs and other digital art is indeed stupid and likely of minimal value. The underlying encryption technology could have valuable authentication applications.
You'll need to log in to post.
