4 ms·

I guess you could print out the hash & get Dorsey to sign it by hand as well. That should be part of the deal. That way you know it's the one. Also, in the hig

I guess you could print out the hash & get Dorsey to sign it by hand as well. That should be part of the deal. That way you know it's the one. Also, in the highly unlikely event of a hash collision, the Dorsey hash wins and the other hash has to go back to to /dev/null, metaphorical head held down in shame.

hn_throwaway_99 6y ago
Doesn't that completely defeat the point of the NFT if the thing you really need to prove ownership is a signed autograph from the author? We've valued signed autographed copies of original works highly for a very long time without NFTs.
- dontblink 6y ago
  I think that was the point (in other words, yes).
- qqii 6y ago
  It would if it worked that way, but it doesn't: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26372052 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26372052
qqii 6y ago
What's unique here isn't just a plain hash but the tuple (ethereum contact id, nft token id, address public key) on the blockchain. Having the tuple is worthless becuase ownership is having the associated private key.