5 ms·

I struggle to find legitimate use cases for NFTs - and I say this with confidence that it’ll age like warm milk. That said, the one really obvious use case tha

I struggle to find legitimate use cases for NFTs - and I say this with confidence that it’ll age like warm milk. That said, the one really obvious use case that jumps out at me is in-game loot. At least the inherent value of the NFT is tied back to something that people may want but otherwise can’t just copy-and-paste on their own. The only problem with the above is that it doesn’t benefit publishers to allow third parties to freely buy-and-sell commercial content without a cut, so I can’t see why they’d ever go for it.

wmf 6y ago
The smart contract could give a cut to the publisher. But ultimately if an NFT can only be used in one game why not just store it as a database entry on the game server?
- capableweb 6y ago
  > But ultimately if an NFT can only be used in one game why not just store it as a database entry on the game server? That's the nice thing. Once you've created something with the ERC721 interface, it can be used in multiple places. Let's say you attach a hash pointing to a .glTF 3D object as well, and now multiple games can share the same items between them. Imagine buying a in-game hat in Counter-Strike and later bringing it to Fortnite. Silly? yes, but also useful in that world of sillyness and fun? Yes.
- headmelted 6y ago
  Exactly this, but my thinking was that it might have some value to the publisher to build a marketplace around the content. As an example - games like Fortnite, Warzone and Apex Legends rely on loot as the sole driver of revenue. Having in-game rare items freely tradable akin to the trading card concept that NFTs are constantly compared to could have value in itself. If I’m a real fan of one of those games and I stumble upon a diamond-encrusted level 100 golden sniper rifle (sorry I’ve no idea what a good example of a rare item is in one of those games), then the money someone may pay for that is (e.g.) $1k. Giving me the ability to sell that on to someone could not only drive publicity for the game (EVE online made world news years ago because of the real monetary value lost in their battles) but encourage me to play that game over rivals as there’s perceptible real-world value for my invested time and effort. The downside I was thinking of above is that the publisher may not want to enable that for a bunch of reasons - the suggestion above sounds like a good way to resolve their revenue on the transactions, but the status quo of the items being non-transferable may be preferable as they’ll overall sell more loot directly to individual customers under the current system.
noman-land 6y ago
Domain names are a perfect use case for NFTs. That what the Ethereum Name Service is doing. Doesn't have to tie back to real world anything. It's like a digital plot of land.
- imtringued 6y ago
  I can create a Ethereum fork and transfer ownership of the domain in that fork. What gives the first fork more legitimacy than my private fork that nobody other than me gets to control?
  - nybble41 6y ago
    You can't transfer ownership of the domain in your fork without either changing the rules—in which case it won't be accepted as a valid Ethereum blockchain by any other Ethereum node—or else rewinding the blockchain back to a point before the domain was first claimed by anyone and starting over. In the end your private fork is pointless unless visitors to the domain actually refer to it as a source of information about the domain. Transferring the domain from the current owner in a way other nodes will accept requires private keys you don't have. Rewinding the blockchain means that your fork is much shorter than the first fork and has a lower cumulative proof of work, so other nodes following the consensus-based rules of the Ethereum blockchain will ignore it.
brodock 6y ago
Isn't the whole NFT a piramide scheme where "Auction" platforms incentivize artist A and B to buy each other arts (while taking a cut) in the hope it will boost "fame" and have someone unadvised of the deal think it's worth anything?
- headmelted 6y ago
  I don’t want to inflame the wrath of anyone by expressing an opinion on that, but it’s probably worth seperating two things: 1) The concept of NFTs - essentially a tradeable hash that infers rights to digital content. 2) What that digital content is and what its being used for currently. I can easily believe (1) has some very real use cases. Off the top of my head - game publishers could sell seat licenses direct to consumers - essentially digital games that you can trade-in when finished. Not sure if they’d want to as the status quo involves them getting a majority of the revenue for every player currently. As for (2) and what’s being traded currently being worth what’s being paid for it? It certainly seems like Euphoria to my eyes, but that’s one person’s opinion that could well be wrong. It’s 2021, nothing should surprise anyone at this point.
mac01021 6y ago
I think they're clearly useful for tracking ownership of genuinely-unique physical entities - I could sell farming rights to a bit of land or sell my car without the state DMV or a county government having to coordinate the transaction. But I don't understand the application to digital art. I can watch a movie or read a book without owning the movie/book's NFT, just as I can what a movie or read a book for which there exists no NFT. So it seems clear that NFTs cannot function as a DRM mechanism.

wmf 6y ago

The smart contract could give a cut to the publisher. But ultimately if an NFT can only be used in one game why not just store it as a database entry on the game server?

capableweb 6y ago
> But ultimately if an NFT can only be used in one game why not just store it as a database entry on the game server? That's the nice thing. Once you've created something with the ERC721 interface, it can be used in multiple places. Let's say you attach a hash pointing to a .glTF 3D object as well, and now multiple games can share the same items between them. Imagine buying a in-game hat in Counter-Strike and later bringing it to Fortnite. Silly? yes, but also useful in that world of sillyness and fun? Yes.
headmelted 6y ago
Exactly this, but my thinking was that it might have some value to the publisher to build a marketplace around the content. As an example - games like Fortnite, Warzone and Apex Legends rely on loot as the sole driver of revenue. Having in-game rare items freely tradable akin to the trading card concept that NFTs are constantly compared to could have value in itself. If I’m a real fan of one of those games and I stumble upon a diamond-encrusted level 100 golden sniper rifle (sorry I’ve no idea what a good example of a rare item is in one of those games), then the money someone may pay for that is (e.g.) $1k. Giving me the ability to sell that on to someone could not only drive publicity for the game (EVE online made world news years ago because of the real monetary value lost in their battles) but encourage me to play that game over rivals as there’s perceptible real-world value for my invested time and effort. The downside I was thinking of above is that the publisher may not want to enable that for a bunch of reasons - the suggestion above sounds like a good way to resolve their revenue on the transactions, but the status quo of the items being non-transferable may be preferable as they’ll overall sell more loot directly to individual customers under the current system.

noman-land 6y ago

Domain names are a perfect use case for NFTs. That what the Ethereum Name Service is doing. Doesn't have to tie back to real world anything. It's like a digital plot of land.

imtringued 6y ago
I can create a Ethereum fork and transfer ownership of the domain in that fork. What gives the first fork more legitimacy than my private fork that nobody other than me gets to control?
- nybble41 6y ago
  You can't transfer ownership of the domain in your fork without either changing the rules—in which case it won't be accepted as a valid Ethereum blockchain by any other Ethereum node—or else rewinding the blockchain back to a point before the domain was first claimed by anyone and starting over. In the end your private fork is pointless unless visitors to the domain actually refer to it as a source of information about the domain. Transferring the domain from the current owner in a way other nodes will accept requires private keys you don't have. Rewinding the blockchain means that your fork is much shorter than the first fork and has a lower cumulative proof of work, so other nodes following the consensus-based rules of the Ethereum blockchain will ignore it.

brodock 6y ago

Isn't the whole NFT a piramide scheme where "Auction" platforms incentivize artist A and B to buy each other arts (while taking a cut) in the hope it will boost "fame" and have someone unadvised of the deal think it's worth anything?

headmelted 6y ago
I don’t want to inflame the wrath of anyone by expressing an opinion on that, but it’s probably worth seperating two things: 1) The concept of NFTs - essentially a tradeable hash that infers rights to digital content. 2) What that digital content is and what its being used for currently. I can easily believe (1) has some very real use cases. Off the top of my head - game publishers could sell seat licenses direct to consumers - essentially digital games that you can trade-in when finished. Not sure if they’d want to as the status quo involves them getting a majority of the revenue for every player currently. As for (2) and what’s being traded currently being worth what’s being paid for it? It certainly seems like Euphoria to my eyes, but that’s one person’s opinion that could well be wrong. It’s 2021, nothing should surprise anyone at this point.

mac01021 6y ago

I think they're clearly useful for tracking ownership of genuinely-unique physical entities - I could sell farming rights to a bit of land or sell my car without the state DMV or a county government having to coordinate the transaction. But I don't understand the application to digital art. I can watch a movie or read a book without owning the movie/book's NFT, just as I can what a movie or read a book for which there exists no NFT. So it seems clear that NFTs cannot function as a DRM mechanism.