11 ms·

Except the concept of authenticity doesn't really apply to digital information. There exist infinitely many copies of any piece of digital art and none of them

by lottin 6y ago

Except the concept of authenticity doesn't really apply to digital information. There exist infinitely many copies of any piece of digital art and none of them is more authentic than the others. They are all equally authentic.

chrisco255 6y ago
No. The whole point of blockchain and crypto is digital scarcity. Bitcoin has been proving this concept since 2009. Why is a BCH coin cheaper than a BTC coin? Why is a Doge coin cheaper than either? The supply & demand of each is completely different. NFTs are not infinite. They are provably scarce. They not only cost money to mint, but any artist who cheapens their NFTs by distributing too many copies will see the effects in the price and valuation of their art.
- lottin 6y ago
  Of course, but a work of digital art, which is what we are talking about, is not scarce. There are infinitely many exact copies of it and each copy costs nothing to produce. Anyone pretending that one of the copies is more authentic than the others are kidding themselves.
- curryst 6y ago
  > NFTs are not infinite. They are provably scarce. But the art itself is not scarce. In the physical realm, it's like a painting that can exactly replicate itself. The certificate of authenticity doesn't, though, and is the scarce component. I think it's reasonable for someone to ask "if the duplicates are always exactly the same, what is the value of a certificate of authenticity? It would be drastically harder to forge a fake than it is to hit the button to make an exact copy". It shifts the entirety of the value away from the art. The art itself is worthless. Anyone that wants a copy of the art can do so with a Google search. You have a scarce digital token proving that you are the rightful owner of a worthless piece of art. That's why I don't see it working.
  - vgel 6y ago
    I'm not necessarily an NFT proponent, but to be fair, you can also duplicate art in the real world. Forgeries and replicas of the Mona Lisa and other famous art exist, and are sometimes so good they fool museum curators for years. Yet, they're almost worthless compared to the original. Why?
    - dwrowe 6y ago
      Because they’re still “almost”. The NFT is made up of digits values that can be replicated exactly - a brush stroke or photography negative cannot.
    - lottin 6y ago
      Reproductions are not "worthless" by any stretch of the imagination. They are worth less than the original but this is easily understandable. It's because they are not the same thing. On the other hand, digital copies are exact to one another and also mass produced by a machine (a computer) and thus not having a different "story" that could set them apart.

by lottin 6y ago

chrisco255 6y ago

No. The whole point of blockchain and crypto is digital scarcity. Bitcoin has been proving this concept since 2009. Why is a BCH coin cheaper than a BTC coin? Why is a Doge coin cheaper than either? The supply & demand of each is completely different. NFTs are not infinite. They are provably scarce. They not only cost money to mint, but any artist who cheapens their NFTs by distributing too many copies will see the effects in the price and valuation of their art.

lottin 6y ago
Of course, but a work of digital art, which is what we are talking about, is not scarce. There are infinitely many exact copies of it and each copy costs nothing to produce. Anyone pretending that one of the copies is more authentic than the others are kidding themselves.
curryst 6y ago
> NFTs are not infinite. They are provably scarce. But the art itself is not scarce. In the physical realm, it's like a painting that can exactly replicate itself. The certificate of authenticity doesn't, though, and is the scarce component. I think it's reasonable for someone to ask "if the duplicates are always exactly the same, what is the value of a certificate of authenticity? It would be drastically harder to forge a fake than it is to hit the button to make an exact copy". It shifts the entirety of the value away from the art. The art itself is worthless. Anyone that wants a copy of the art can do so with a Google search. You have a scarce digital token proving that you are the rightful owner of a worthless piece of art. That's why I don't see it working.
- vgel 6y ago
  I'm not necessarily an NFT proponent, but to be fair, you can also duplicate art in the real world. Forgeries and replicas of the Mona Lisa and other famous art exist, and are sometimes so good they fool museum curators for years. Yet, they're almost worthless compared to the original. Why?
  - dwrowe 6y ago
    Because they’re still “almost”. The NFT is made up of digits values that can be replicated exactly - a brush stroke or photography negative cannot.
  - lottin 6y ago
    Reproductions are not "worthless" by any stretch of the imagination. They are worth less than the original but this is easily understandable. It's because they are not the same thing. On the other hand, digital copies are exact to one another and also mass produced by a machine (a computer) and thus not having a different "story" that could set them apart.