3 ms·
But the ledger is meaningless. You make 10 copies of a PNG and put them on a blockchain to sell them, nothing prevents me from making a million identical copies
by jonathankoren 6y ago
But the ledger is meaningless. You make 10 copies of a PNG and put them on a blockchain to sell them, nothing prevents me from making a million identical copies of that PNG and give them for free. It’s not even counterfeit. They’re the exact same item. NFTs aren’t even DRM.
Even if you wanted to keep track of who “owned” something, what does blockchain provide that a relational database doesn’t? Commit privileges on a GitHub repo have more real world impacts than who “owns” a no exclusive link to a URL (not even the domain or content hosted on the domain!), but that’s managed through an database.
- waynesonfire 6y agoI could careless that it's on a blockchain. In fact, I suspect the ledger that wins won't be. The claim I was making is that it doesn't matter whether it's a crypto-ledger or a central DB. The winner is the solution with the strongest network. I wouldn't be surprised if FB got into this space.
- jonathankoren 6y agoMy point is even more meta. A ledger — of any type — is completely meaningless without access controls on reads. It’s the ACL that ensures rarity and “ownership.
- waynesonfire 6y agoI don't follow. Why?
- ryandvm 6y agoBecause who gives a shit if I own a rare waynesonfire PNG if literally anyone in the world can access it?
- usehackernews 6y agoAnyone can print out a picture of the Mona Lisa. Yet, millions go and visit it. Notice how you used the term ‘access’ instead of ‘own’ at the end of your question? Sure, anyone can access it, only you can own it. That’s why people give a shit.
- briangerman 6y agoSo wait we could potentially disrupt the NFT by adding a primitive form of DRM?