5 ms·
NFTs are signed-and-hashed JSON blobs that contain the URL to the content. There's no actual content being purchased. It really is that crazy.
by jameskilton 6y ago
NFTs are signed-and-hashed JSON blobs that contain the URL to the content. There's no actual content being purchased. It really is that crazy.
- RandallBrown 6y agoYou could embed the data in the JSON if you wanted though couldn't you?
- freeone3000 6y agoFor fairly small images. It costs gas to store data in the chain -- the bigger the transaction (in bytes), the more it costs to process. Rates fluctuate, but you can estimate around 0.03 ETH per KB. Since you have to exchange the token every transfer, it becomes clear quickly why you want to offload the file itself from the main chain.
- RandallBrown 6y agoInteresting. I thought the whole point of an NFT was to have a unique copy of a digital item that only existed for you. If you're just "buying" a URL, it's even sillier than I thought.
- freeone3000 6y agoThe unique copy of the URL exists only for you. It's equally as silly as you thought. (Or perhaps imagined that the blockchain wasn't 100% public 100% visible)
- ksm1717 6y agoPeople/platforms are also making embedded scripts that render generative work
- tudorw 6y agoHow different is this to me purchasing the rights to watch an online movie that is then no longer available?
- maxerickson 6y agoWith the movie, the bullshit starts when it is no longer available. With the NFT, it's bullshit every step of the way.
- gerikson 6y agoYou can resell the rights to watch that no-longer-available movie to someone else...
- PurpleFoxy 6y agoI don’t think NFTs come with any legal or copyright rights. And even if the nft did give you some rights, legally they probably wouldn’t transfer to the next person.
- tom_mellior 6y agoIt's different in that you're only buying an URL, not necessarily the right to watch the content that's (maybe) hosted there.
- xur17 6y agoWhy wouldn't they at least point the NFT at a hash of the image, or an ipfs link? You still have the issue of the file disappearing because no one is hosting it, but at least no one could swap out the content..
- TedDoesntTalk 6y agoIPFS is not mandated. The URL could be https://xur17.is/url-expires-in-2022-ha-ha-ha-ha https://xur17.is/url-expires-in-2022-ha-ha-ha-ha
- xur17 6y agoThat's my point.
- banana_giraffe 6y agoIs there at least some attempt to normalize the URL, or could I sell twenty versions of my tweet if I wanted to by making different URLs that all point to the same tweet? (and could find buyers, which in my case, wouldn't happen)
- qeternity 6y agoWorse. You can just make 20 NFTs of the same URL. The token is non fungible. The contents don’t have to be.
- banana_giraffe 6y agoSometimes I hear about some fancy new thing and don't get it, and think it doesn't do what it claims to do. I like to assume I don't get it because I don't understand the problem space, or am just missing something basic for whatever reason. I'm beginning to suspect that's not why I don't get NFTs.
- spoonjim 6y agoWhy are museums upset to discover that a painting they own is a forgery? Clearly it was indistinguishable from the original even to experienced curators, the “content” is the same as an original Vermeer. But the difference is that on one person can own the original, and they get to thumb their nose at all the losers who can’t. NFTs are the same. So what really “crazy” is the infantile human desire for exclusivity, not NFTs in particular.