3 ms·
This is potentially the beginning of a very interesting trend, and something I have spent some time thinking about. My sense is that owning an NFT should allow
by dlevine 5y ago
This is potentially the beginning of a very interesting trend, and something I have spent some time thinking about. My sense is that owning an NFT should allow you to control access to that content (even if your choice is just to make it publicly accessible). NFT doesn't have an ACL layer built in, so this would need to be added (has anyone already done this?)
One open question is whether it actually makes sense to have an ACL for an electronic asset, because once someone has access to it, they can easily make a perfect copy of the bits and give it to anyone they want. But I guess you could make the same argument about selling access to digital content that is available on a torrent somewhere.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- matkoniecz 5y ago> owning an NFT should allow you to control access to that content are you aware that anyone may sell NFT for anything? I could produce and sell NFT pointing to say Walmart website. Or HN. Or Wikipedia.
- dlevine 5y agoYes, and I believe that's one of the reasons why there is so much hate for NFTs on this thread. People are selling tokens for huge amounts of money that confer no rights other than being able to say that you own the NFT. Obviously you would need to actually own the asset to be able to hand over access control as part of the NFT sale. NFTs potentially have real use cases, but the technology and infrastructure isn't mature enough to support those use cases.
- duskwuff 5y agoRight. The question that people keep coming back to is what ownership rights are actually conveyed with an NFT. The most common answer I'm seeing is "none", which makes it feel dishonest to equate the sale of the NFT as a sale of the thing it (supposedly) represents.