5 ms·

> NFTs are still fundamentally stupid and only exist because people can make money selling worthless...nothings. What about games, or art?

ALittleLight 5y ago
Neither of which use or benefit from NFTs.
djur 5y ago
NFTs are not games or art and are not necessary or useful to sell games or art.
mminer237 5y ago
If I buy a license of a game, I gain the legal ability to play the game. If I buy a print of and associated license to art, I gain the legal ability to look at and resell my copy the art. If I invest and buy the copyright to something, I can sell the above rights to others. If I pay to record on a blockchain my ownership a hash, I gain...nothing. I guess I could brag about how I paid money for a hexadecimal string when no one else was willing to? The theoretical advantage is that I can try to pawn it off on someone else for more money by convincing him that he can do the same to someone else.
- X6S1x6Okd1st 5y ago
  > If I buy a print of and associated license to art, I gain the legal ability to look at and resell my copy the art. If I buy an NFT, I gain the defacto ability to resell my copy the art.
  - lottin 5y ago
    You don't own your own copy of the art. And you can't sell something you don't own.
    - X6S1x6Okd1st 5y ago
      Do you think anyone owns even a fraction of a bitcoin?
      - lottin 5y ago
        I don't know if "own" is the right word, but people do have bitcoins under their control, yes, which means they can transfer them. Why?
        X6S1x6Okd1st 5y ago
        I have NFTs under my control. I can transfer them, list them for sale, w/e. It's the same relationship to cryptocurrencies I have control over. The IRS sure seems to think that I owned bitcoin.
        lottin 5y ago
        > I have NFTs under my control. I can transfer them, list them for sale. An NFT is not a "copy of a the art". That's the part that you got wrong.
        X6S1x6Okd1st 5y ago
        > That's the part that you got wrong. That's quite confrontational, if this topic is making you upset I'll refrain from continuing.
        lottin 5y ago
        Confrontational? I'm disagreeing with your statement > If I buy an NFT, I gain the defacto ability to resell my copy the art. and telling you exactly why I think your statement is wrong. Why do you think this is confrontational? This is a discussion forum.
        5y ago
  - mminer237 5y ago
    NFTs are not a copy of the art. On a technical level, they're hashes of the item for which you're paying to store on the blockchain. You can't get the original work from a hash, only verify the accuracy if you already have both. Then on a legal level, you do not give you any legal right to even view the art. The artist isn't signing you a license to copy the work, and, as described, a hash is not a copy for which such a license could be implied. If you buy just an NFT and send the US registered artwork itself along with it to the buyer, that's copyright infringement, and the original artist could sue you for thousands of dollars.
StrLght 5y ago
You mean games that have been doing just fine with just usual microtransactions? Sure big publishers are going to throw that away and switch to NFTs because... Why exactly? Are there any surveys or something on how much gamers care about NFTs in their games? Because if there's no such data I can't think of a single reason for publishers to care about this.

ALittleLight 5y ago

Neither of which use or benefit from NFTs.

djur 5y ago

NFTs are not games or art and are not necessary or useful to sell games or art.

mminer237 5y ago

If I buy a license of a game, I gain the legal ability to play the game. If I buy a print of and associated license to art, I gain the legal ability to look at and resell my copy the art. If I invest and buy the copyright to something, I can sell the above rights to others. If I pay to record on a blockchain my ownership a hash, I gain...nothing. I guess I could brag about how I paid money for a hexadecimal string when no one else was willing to? The theoretical advantage is that I can try to pawn it off on someone else for more money by convincing him that he can do the same to someone else.

X6S1x6Okd1st 5y ago
> If I buy a print of and associated license to art, I gain the legal ability to look at and resell my copy the art. If I buy an NFT, I gain the defacto ability to resell my copy the art.
- lottin 5y ago
  You don't own your own copy of the art. And you can't sell something you don't own.
  - X6S1x6Okd1st 5y ago
    Do you think anyone owns even a fraction of a bitcoin?
    - lottin 5y ago
      I don't know if "own" is the right word, but people do have bitcoins under their control, yes, which means they can transfer them. Why?
      - X6S1x6Okd1st 5y ago
        I have NFTs under my control. I can transfer them, list them for sale, w/e. It's the same relationship to cryptocurrencies I have control over. The IRS sure seems to think that I owned bitcoin.
        lottin 5y ago
        > I have NFTs under my control. I can transfer them, list them for sale. An NFT is not a "copy of a the art". That's the part that you got wrong.
        X6S1x6Okd1st 5y ago
        > That's the part that you got wrong. That's quite confrontational, if this topic is making you upset I'll refrain from continuing.
        lottin 5y ago
        Confrontational? I'm disagreeing with your statement > If I buy an NFT, I gain the defacto ability to resell my copy the art. and telling you exactly why I think your statement is wrong. Why do you think this is confrontational? This is a discussion forum.
        5y ago
- mminer237 5y ago
  NFTs are not a copy of the art. On a technical level, they're hashes of the item for which you're paying to store on the blockchain. You can't get the original work from a hash, only verify the accuracy if you already have both. Then on a legal level, you do not give you any legal right to even view the art. The artist isn't signing you a license to copy the work, and, as described, a hash is not a copy for which such a license could be implied. If you buy just an NFT and send the US registered artwork itself along with it to the buyer, that's copyright infringement, and the original artist could sue you for thousands of dollars.

StrLght 5y ago

You mean games that have been doing just fine with just usual microtransactions? Sure big publishers are going to throw that away and switch to NFTs because... Why exactly? Are there any surveys or something on how much gamers care about NFTs in their games? Because if there's no such data I can't think of a single reason for publishers to care about this.