4 ms·

Agree with bits are bits, the point would be to not rely at all on centralized hosting of those bits. For example, if NBA TopShots shuts down and I didn't save

Agree with bits are bits, the point would be to not rely at all on centralized hosting of those bits. For example, if NBA TopShots shuts down and I didn't save my video clip it could be lost forever. The URLs currently stored on-chain point at something mutable, ideally they would point to something as immutable as the signature itself.

zepto 6y ago
Sure - understood, but not backing up your valuable data seems like an entirely separate problem and really orthogonal to NFTs.
- thebean11 6y ago
  Even with a good backup strategy you're still prone to the link going down, something you can't fix since you don't own the domain. That's pretty non-ideal IMO
  - zepto 6y ago
    My point is that the link is not very relevant. It’s just an interesting piece of metadata. Like a certificate of authenticity saying which gallery a piece of artwork was first shown in. You could even make the case that the original storage company ceasing to exist increases the historical value and rarity of the artwork since it becomes anchored to an era which is now past.
    - thebean11 6y ago
      The link is super relevant when I'm trying to sell the NFT. Without it, you need some communication channel / hosting _outside_ of the blockchain to communicate what I'm trying to sell, it complicates things for a NFT market smart contract. I don't buy that a broken link on an NFT would make it worth more. In a year 99% of these NFT projects will be gone, broken links won't be anything special..
      - zepto 6y ago
        > you need some communication channel / hosting _outside_ of the blockchain to communicate what I'm trying to sell Don’t you always need a communication channel outside the blockchain to communicate what you are trying to sell? It’s not clear what a smart contract would do differently with the URL from any other kind of seller.
        thebean11 6y ago
        No, you might need some front-end on top of the data stored on chain, but you don't necessarily need (and ideally shouldn't need) an additional storage layer.

zepto 6y ago

Sure - understood, but not backing up your valuable data seems like an entirely separate problem and really orthogonal to NFTs.

thebean11 6y ago
Even with a good backup strategy you're still prone to the link going down, something you can't fix since you don't own the domain. That's pretty non-ideal IMO
- zepto 6y ago
  My point is that the link is not very relevant. It’s just an interesting piece of metadata. Like a certificate of authenticity saying which gallery a piece of artwork was first shown in. You could even make the case that the original storage company ceasing to exist increases the historical value and rarity of the artwork since it becomes anchored to an era which is now past.
  - thebean11 6y ago
    The link is super relevant when I'm trying to sell the NFT. Without it, you need some communication channel / hosting _outside_ of the blockchain to communicate what I'm trying to sell, it complicates things for a NFT market smart contract. I don't buy that a broken link on an NFT would make it worth more. In a year 99% of these NFT projects will be gone, broken links won't be anything special..
    - zepto 6y ago
      > you need some communication channel / hosting _outside_ of the blockchain to communicate what I'm trying to sell Don’t you always need a communication channel outside the blockchain to communicate what you are trying to sell? It’s not clear what a smart contract would do differently with the URL from any other kind of seller.
      - thebean11 6y ago
        No, you might need some front-end on top of the data stored on chain, but you don't necessarily need (and ideally shouldn't need) an additional storage layer.