4 ms·
Just bc people don't agree that a surprisingly shitty rendition of a pixel alien is worth $140,000,000, that doesn't mean they "don't understand NFTs", it just
by RattleyCooper 5y ago
Just bc people don't agree that a surprisingly shitty rendition of a pixel alien is worth $140,000,000, that doesn't mean they "don't understand NFTs", it just means their bullshit detector actually works.
- bejelentkezni 5y agoWell you see that's the whole idea, pixel alien isn't the NFT, the NFT is a cryptographically-secure blockchain that records ownership. They exist so that people can "own" the "real copy" of data that has no reason to be scarce. And like the article says, this worthless math is indeed mostly used for cash grabs and money laundering.
- oceanghost 5y agoThat's a bit of nonsense there. You don't own the artwork, you own an URL pointing to the artwork which can change or stop working at any moment and likely isn't maintained by you.
- RattleyCooper 5y agoYeah, I get that. You don't even own the thing at all, which makes it more of a ripoff. You essentially own a digital record that says that someone agrees that you paid money so that there is a record that you paid them money. As soon as 1 person issues a replacement NFT due to theft or something the entire idea comes crashing down bc now the "real copy" is actually "owned" by some thief and a new "real copy" is being created. From what I read a while back you kind of just have to trust that ppl won't sell the same "real copy" over and over again. This works fine in the real world of tangible goods but when people can be anonymous it's just begging for abuse.
- TearsInTheRain 5y agoI thought that going into the article but after reading it it provided some interesting analogies to luxury goods that expanded my perspective a bit.