5 ms·

This article is not about crypto, but cryptoart, and I couldn’t determine what that is by skimming the article, and not sure I want to care about it. Is this w

This article is not about crypto, but cryptoart, and I couldn’t determine what that is by skimming the article, and not sure I want to care about it. Is this worth looking into?

yrgulation 6y ago
Not really. But the gist of it is that you can "sell art" encapsulated in NFT tokens. Something like you would encode an image into such a token and then it's "forever" stored in the chain and can't be replicated. At least that's how I understand it.
cinntaile 6y ago
Most of his argument is based on the ecological impact. His other complaints are stated as facts and lack arguments. It's about how he's against the tokenization of art, which happens on the public ethereum blockchain. Tokenization brings uniqueness to digital goods, because it allows you to prove ownership if all parties involved accept the blockchain as a source of truth. Edit: I see I am getting downvoted for simply stating facts again. Perhaps you could try and debate instead?
- meepmorp 6y ago
  FWIW, I downvoted you for complaining about downvotes.
  - cinntaile 6y ago
    That's fine, you state why you downvote. Now there's something to discuss at least, that's not the type of downvote that is deleterious for discussions. Not saying anything and just downvoting is simply silencing people you disagree with and that's why I mentioned it.
    - faeyanpiraat 6y ago
      I don’t get the downvote system, sometimes I get downvoted for no reason, sometimes I get downvoted for asking on legit but grey comments without comments why it got downvoted, etc.. Downvoting without providing a reason is indeed demoralizing and toxic imho.
gitrog 6y ago
There is a subtheme about crypto, in that he kind of argues it isn't really useful enough as a financial instrument to warrant the ecological cost (my words, not his). That's an opinion - one I tend to share - so feel free to disagree.

This article is not about crypto, but cryptoart, and I couldn’t determine what that is by skimming the article, and not sure I want to care about it. Is this worth looking into?

yrgulation 6y ago

Not really. But the gist of it is that you can "sell art" encapsulated in NFT tokens. Something like you would encode an image into such a token and then it's "forever" stored in the chain and can't be replicated. At least that's how I understand it.

cinntaile 6y ago

Most of his argument is based on the ecological impact. His other complaints are stated as facts and lack arguments. It's about how he's against the tokenization of art, which happens on the public ethereum blockchain. Tokenization brings uniqueness to digital goods, because it allows you to prove ownership if all parties involved accept the blockchain as a source of truth. Edit: I see I am getting downvoted for simply stating facts again. Perhaps you could try and debate instead?

meepmorp 6y ago
FWIW, I downvoted you for complaining about downvotes.
- cinntaile 6y ago
  That's fine, you state why you downvote. Now there's something to discuss at least, that's not the type of downvote that is deleterious for discussions. Not saying anything and just downvoting is simply silencing people you disagree with and that's why I mentioned it.
  - faeyanpiraat 6y ago
    I don’t get the downvote system, sometimes I get downvoted for no reason, sometimes I get downvoted for asking on legit but grey comments without comments why it got downvoted, etc.. Downvoting without providing a reason is indeed demoralizing and toxic imho.

gitrog 6y ago

There is a subtheme about crypto, in that he kind of argues it isn't really useful enough as a financial instrument to warrant the ecological cost (my words, not his). That's an opinion - one I tend to share - so feel free to disagree.