5 ms·

I'm deep into cryptocurrencies / blockchain tech and still don't see the appeal of current generation NFTs. Anyone have a positive perspective they can share?

runbathtime 5y ago
NFTs are a tool. If they can convince regulators they are art, then they can be donated, and you can write it off on your taxes. You just need a service that produces estimates of value. The one good thing about NFTs is the ability to manipulate prices legally (just like they do with art), and create arbitrary value out of nothing. If the main point of cryptos is speculation, not payments, then NFTs are a better crypto. You can better inflate them and sell them, the only problem is you need to create demand, which is harder if you are not a celeb. Better to partner with someone well known and split the profits.
seibelj 5y ago
Currently, NFT is about collecting and speculation, which is currently the exact same use case as many collectibles like baseball cards. I believe the space will evolve to allow NFT holders to have additional rights and utility, such as copyright and ability to earn royalties from licensing the art. NFT is simply provable ownership of a digital asset. What that asset actually is and what it provides is an experimental and evolving space. I think HNers need to think less narrow about this. I think the gaming and mass-market collectible space will be huge. See NBA Topshot for a recent successful example (~$300 million in sales this year) https://nbatopshot.com/ https://nbatopshot.com/
- CharlesW 5y ago
  > NFT is simply provable ownership of a digital asset. No. NFTs are provable ownership of a token representing a digital asset, but not ownership of the asset itself. Buying an NFT doesn't confer copyright ownership, for example. Nothing prevents minters from just lying about their ownership of an asset, and they do.
  - seibelj 5y ago
    I'm not sure I follow you. According to ERC-721 spec, there is a token owner, and it is assigned to a blockchain address. Signing a message with that address proves you own it. If the source code of the smart contract shows that no one can seize it from you, then you are indeed the owner. What an NFT actually is can be different for every token. Nothing stops the creator of an image from declaring the owner of the NFT the owner of the copyright. Like I said, I think this is an area of future innovation. But right now, ownership of the NFT declares ownership of the NFT. What you can do with that is where companies and software engineers are experimenting. It is a very raw, early space that is exceedingly well-funded, and I expect many clever inventions to come out of it.
    - aikah 5y ago
      > I'm not sure I follow you. According to ERC-721 spec, there is a token owner, and it is assigned to a blockchain address. Signing a message with that address proves you own it. If the source code of the smart contract shows that no one can seize it from you, then you are indeed the owner. Anybody can sell a NFT of the Mona Lisa. It's worthless.
      - Tenoke 5y ago
        Anyone can sell a proof of ownership of the Mona Lisa, too. That doesn't mean that the proof of ownership in the Louvre is worthless.
        aikah 5y ago
        > Anyone can sell a proof of ownership of the Mona Lisa, too. That doesn't mean that the proof of ownership in the Louvre is worthless. Except that there is only one Mona Lisa, the painting. There can be as many NFT of Mona Lisa as one wants. It's worthless, and your proof is a proof of ownership of something worthless. Good luck defending your ownership of a NFT in a court of law.
        bondarchuk 5y ago
        If you steal the proof of ownership of the Mona Lisa from the Louvre, do you think they'd give the Mona Lisa to you?
mike_d 5y ago
Traditional art is 90% money laundering and recent laws worldwide have attempted to address that with AML/KYC. I believe that is one of the reasons we have seen a huge influx of money into NFTs.
- weeblewobble 5y ago
  > Traditional art is 90% money laundering Is this a real number or did you just make it up?
  - bboreham 5y ago
    73% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
aikah 5y ago
It's a scam, no more, no less. Just like ICOs. People poured billions in ICOs a few years ago because of FOMO, the only people that got rich is the ones that did the coin offering.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

runbathtime 5y ago

NFTs are a tool. If they can convince regulators they are art, then they can be donated, and you can write it off on your taxes. You just need a service that produces estimates of value. The one good thing about NFTs is the ability to manipulate prices legally (just like they do with art), and create arbitrary value out of nothing. If the main point of cryptos is speculation, not payments, then NFTs are a better crypto. You can better inflate them and sell them, the only problem is you need to create demand, which is harder if you are not a celeb. Better to partner with someone well known and split the profits.

seibelj 5y ago

Currently, NFT is about collecting and speculation, which is currently the exact same use case as many collectibles like baseball cards. I believe the space will evolve to allow NFT holders to have additional rights and utility, such as copyright and ability to earn royalties from licensing the art. NFT is simply provable ownership of a digital asset. What that asset actually is and what it provides is an experimental and evolving space. I think HNers need to think less narrow about this. I think the gaming and mass-market collectible space will be huge. See NBA Topshot for a recent successful example (~$300 million in sales this year) https://nbatopshot.com/ https://nbatopshot.com/

CharlesW 5y ago
> NFT is simply provable ownership of a digital asset. No. NFTs are provable ownership of a token representing a digital asset, but not ownership of the asset itself. Buying an NFT doesn't confer copyright ownership, for example. Nothing prevents minters from just lying about their ownership of an asset, and they do.
- seibelj 5y ago
  I'm not sure I follow you. According to ERC-721 spec, there is a token owner, and it is assigned to a blockchain address. Signing a message with that address proves you own it. If the source code of the smart contract shows that no one can seize it from you, then you are indeed the owner. What an NFT actually is can be different for every token. Nothing stops the creator of an image from declaring the owner of the NFT the owner of the copyright. Like I said, I think this is an area of future innovation. But right now, ownership of the NFT declares ownership of the NFT. What you can do with that is where companies and software engineers are experimenting. It is a very raw, early space that is exceedingly well-funded, and I expect many clever inventions to come out of it.
  - aikah 5y ago
    > I'm not sure I follow you. According to ERC-721 spec, there is a token owner, and it is assigned to a blockchain address. Signing a message with that address proves you own it. If the source code of the smart contract shows that no one can seize it from you, then you are indeed the owner. Anybody can sell a NFT of the Mona Lisa. It's worthless.
    - Tenoke 5y ago
      Anyone can sell a proof of ownership of the Mona Lisa, too. That doesn't mean that the proof of ownership in the Louvre is worthless.
      - aikah 5y ago
        > Anyone can sell a proof of ownership of the Mona Lisa, too. That doesn't mean that the proof of ownership in the Louvre is worthless. Except that there is only one Mona Lisa, the painting. There can be as many NFT of Mona Lisa as one wants. It's worthless, and your proof is a proof of ownership of something worthless. Good luck defending your ownership of a NFT in a court of law.
      - bondarchuk 5y ago
        If you steal the proof of ownership of the Mona Lisa from the Louvre, do you think they'd give the Mona Lisa to you?

mike_d 5y ago

Traditional art is 90% money laundering and recent laws worldwide have attempted to address that with AML/KYC. I believe that is one of the reasons we have seen a huge influx of money into NFTs.

weeblewobble 5y ago
> Traditional art is 90% money laundering Is this a real number or did you just make it up?
- bboreham 5y ago
  73% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

aikah 5y ago

It's a scam, no more, no less. Just like ICOs. People poured billions in ICOs a few years ago because of FOMO, the only people that got rich is the ones that did the coin offering.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]