3 ms·

That's actually not true IMO. Blockchain is great as a secondhand market for things like art as it allows the buyer and seller to both know that they have the

That's actually not true IMO. Blockchain is great as a secondhand market for things like art as it allows the buyer and seller to both know that they have the original and it allows for a digital art (and even assets to increase in value) This is a real problem where a non-centralized version actually is the only viable solution (because you can include other things than just digital art). You don't need a specific token for it you could use a satoshi or some token but it's definitely important if you want to see a digital art market that allow you to have unique items. (You don't have to want that but if you do it's definitely the only solution i can think of that would make sense)

lucozade 9y ago
If you want to attribute uniqueness to digital assets then cryptography definitely could help. But beyond that why do you need decentralisation? There's a nice to have that you can track ownership transfers more accurately but, as the previous poster said, that's probably not high on the TODO list. And I think that's the current situation in a nutshell. Blockchain, as a monotonically ordered ledger, possibly trustless, is a useful idea. But it's not the wheel.
- ThomPete 9y ago
  Because you want a secondhand (not secondary) market where things can move far far away from the originator plus you can prove it's history which in itself can have value (Bill Gates used to own it). It can live its own life so to speak. And thats just art, then there is digital art which is an even bigger problem. It's the unique history + decentralized that creates the value as it becomes more like a physical object. I don't think it's the situation in a nutshell. It takes time but the art world (especially involving China and Russia) is filled with fakes and fraud.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
ABCLAW 9y ago
>Blockchain is great as a secondhand market for things like art as it allows the buyer and seller to both know that they have the original and it allows for a digital art Does it? Someone with a blockchain registered Rembrandt has a forged copy produced and passes on the forged copy to you along with the registration, then years later sells the original in another deal through another entity and has the original verified forensically. This doesn't do shit.
- ThomPete 9y ago
  If you are buying a Rembrandt you are also going to get a forensic verification. That's an edge case. No one is talking about a perfect solution, you have fake paintings being sold today. This reduces the risk for fraud and helps propel a digital art industry. And thats just for the art world. It's fine if you don't believe it to happen, I do and so I am acting accordingly.

lucozade 9y ago

If you want to attribute uniqueness to digital assets then cryptography definitely could help. But beyond that why do you need decentralisation? There's a nice to have that you can track ownership transfers more accurately but, as the previous poster said, that's probably not high on the TODO list. And I think that's the current situation in a nutshell. Blockchain, as a monotonically ordered ledger, possibly trustless, is a useful idea. But it's not the wheel.

ThomPete 9y ago
Because you want a secondhand (not secondary) market where things can move far far away from the originator plus you can prove it's history which in itself can have value (Bill Gates used to own it). It can live its own life so to speak. And thats just art, then there is digital art which is an even bigger problem. It's the unique history + decentralized that creates the value as it becomes more like a physical object. I don't think it's the situation in a nutshell. It takes time but the art world (especially involving China and Russia) is filled with fakes and fraud.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

ABCLAW 9y ago

>Blockchain is great as a secondhand market for things like art as it allows the buyer and seller to both know that they have the original and it allows for a digital art Does it? Someone with a blockchain registered Rembrandt has a forged copy produced and passes on the forged copy to you along with the registration, then years later sells the original in another deal through another entity and has the original verified forensically. This doesn't do shit.

ThomPete 9y ago
If you are buying a Rembrandt you are also going to get a forensic verification. That's an edge case. No one is talking about a perfect solution, you have fake paintings being sold today. This reduces the risk for fraud and helps propel a digital art industry. And thats just for the art world. It's fine if you don't believe it to happen, I do and so I am acting accordingly.