5 ms·

In my previous comment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28289339 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28289339), I lamented how I missed the boat on BTC an

In my previous comment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28289339 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28289339), I lamented how I missed the boat on BTC and ETH, and then somebody commented about NFT. I want to like NFT, but I don't see how randomly generated stuff like this (no intention to dismiss author's work) can be valuable? First tweet — Yes you can't reproduce being first, but it's only valuable because it's the first on Twitter. If it's the first post on SomeRandomSocMed.com, I don't care. Original Disaster Girl meme — It's valuable because the meme is famous. If you create a new meme, I don't care. Unless it's famous. So, unless the randomly generated content somehow becomes popular, I don't see how it's more valuable than the another unique content by the same algorithm. Now, many artworks for sale as NFT are beautiful. I'm sure it took some time and effort to create. But, harsh as it may seem, it's no different than those cheap paintings being sold by the roadside. Or am I missing something?

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
csbartus 5y ago
I’m clearly missing something. I see NFTs a way to sign your digital work - which was previously impossible. Or a way to speculate, aka create (art)work which can have arbitrarily any value, from O to infinite, depending on how powerful the person / network is who sets the price.
- user-the-name 5y ago
  It's just a scam. There's not really any more depth to it than that.
gnrlst 5y ago
What really made me change my mind on NFT's is collectibles. Not so much random pixel art, but actual collectibles (e.g. think stamps, baseball cards, basketball cards, pokemon, etc). The success of NBA Top Shots is a case in point. The blockchain allows for decentralized verifiability of a collectible's origin/authenticity (making fakes impossible), and even more importantly: seamlessly allows to create a marketplace around the collectibles without needing to rely on ebay and shady sellers. I definitely think this pixel art fad will pass or remain a niche, but the concept of collectibles has been around for a long time and will stay for a long time to come.
- user-the-name 5y ago
  NFTs do not actually do any of that.
  - gnrlst 5y ago
    Call them pointers, or whatever you want. but to say they don't do any of that is not really true nor conducive to the discussion.
    - user-the-name 5y ago
      They don't, though. An NFT can't prove authenticity of a physical object.
      - stavros 5y ago
        This is an interesting thought: I buy an object and the NFT with it. Then I swap it and sell you a fake lookalike, and the NFT. Which one is the "original" object now? Who is the owner of the "valuable" object? Is it the person who holds the NFT, or the person who holds the original? Most people would say it's the latter, but what makes an object valuable is not as clear-cut. Yes, a fake Picasso isn't as valuable as a real Picasso, but the NFT was (presumably) verifiably minted by the original artist, so maybe the NFT is the art, and the object is just something that comes with.
        user-the-name 5y ago
        (It's not.)
        stavros 5y ago
        Because the art market is nothing if not perfectly rational.
        user-the-name 5y ago
rvz 5y ago
> So, unless the randomly generated content somehow becomes popular, I don't see how it's more valuable than the another unique content by the same algorithm. NFTs benefit famous people, celebrities and the creators of early famous internet memes. They know it is a scam and they are doing it quickly before the demand collapses because they can. The fool is the one that buys it off them for a high price and at the ATH of the crypto markets. It would take years and luck to find another fool to buy it off them for higher.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

csbartus 5y ago

I’m clearly missing something. I see NFTs a way to sign your digital work - which was previously impossible. Or a way to speculate, aka create (art)work which can have arbitrarily any value, from O to infinite, depending on how powerful the person / network is who sets the price.

user-the-name 5y ago
It's just a scam. There's not really any more depth to it than that.

gnrlst 5y ago

What really made me change my mind on NFT's is collectibles. Not so much random pixel art, but actual collectibles (e.g. think stamps, baseball cards, basketball cards, pokemon, etc). The success of NBA Top Shots is a case in point. The blockchain allows for decentralized verifiability of a collectible's origin/authenticity (making fakes impossible), and even more importantly: seamlessly allows to create a marketplace around the collectibles without needing to rely on ebay and shady sellers. I definitely think this pixel art fad will pass or remain a niche, but the concept of collectibles has been around for a long time and will stay for a long time to come.

user-the-name 5y ago
NFTs do not actually do any of that.
- gnrlst 5y ago
  Call them pointers, or whatever you want. but to say they don't do any of that is not really true nor conducive to the discussion.
  - user-the-name 5y ago
    They don't, though. An NFT can't prove authenticity of a physical object.
    - stavros 5y ago
      This is an interesting thought: I buy an object and the NFT with it. Then I swap it and sell you a fake lookalike, and the NFT. Which one is the "original" object now? Who is the owner of the "valuable" object? Is it the person who holds the NFT, or the person who holds the original? Most people would say it's the latter, but what makes an object valuable is not as clear-cut. Yes, a fake Picasso isn't as valuable as a real Picasso, but the NFT was (presumably) verifiably minted by the original artist, so maybe the NFT is the art, and the object is just something that comes with.
      - user-the-name 5y ago
        (It's not.)
        stavros 5y ago
        Because the art market is nothing if not perfectly rational.
        user-the-name 5y ago

rvz 5y ago

> So, unless the randomly generated content somehow becomes popular, I don't see how it's more valuable than the another unique content by the same algorithm. NFTs benefit famous people, celebrities and the creators of early famous internet memes. They know it is a scam and they are doing it quickly before the demand collapses because they can. The fool is the one that buys it off them for a high price and at the ATH of the crypto markets. It would take years and luck to find another fool to buy it off them for higher.