4 ms·

With an NFT you own a token with a link to a resource, but the perception is that you own an actual artwork. Think is, the artwork (e.g. a jpg) can be copied an

With an NFT you own a token with a link to a resource, but the perception is that you own an actual artwork. Think is, the artwork (e.g. a jpg) can be copied an infinite amount of times. So the baseball card analogy falls short, at least as far as the posession of an actual item.

koonsolo 5y ago
The baseball card also doesn't give you ownership of the baseball player, or over the photograph or stats of that player. You can copy the photograph and stats as much as you want (the player not so much ;)), but the card still stays the card. So conceptually: the NFT doesn't refer to the baseball card, it is the baseball card. Baseball card refers to something real, but doesn't take ownership of that thing. NFT refers to something real, but doesn't take ownership of that thing.
- newswasboring 5y ago
  I think I might be close to getting it. But with a baseball card, I control the baseball card. Right? With the NFT, I have no control over the resource linked to from the NFT. If that server goes away, doesn't the thing that provided NFTs its value also go away? Its like if someone scratched off the photo from my baseball card, doesn't that baseball card become valueless at that point?
  - koonsolo 5y ago
    NFT and baseball cards are both pointers: they point to something you don't control. You control the pointer, not the thing they point to. So if we can agree that the card has value because "it's about Honus Wagner", and not really about the picture on the card, then NFT's and those cards are very similar. But on the other hand, you could indeed claim that the card has value because of the picture itself. But I still feel the picture on the card is really to act as a pointer, and not about providing value in itself. Because I would think that in that case, a real picture, or a bigger picture, or the original photographic film would be worth more. So in the end, the baseball card also doesn't become valueless when the player dies. That's just how I look at it.
    - newswasboring 5y ago
      Yes when the player dies I still have the card. If the hosting server dies I have nothing but the purchase receipt
      - koonsolo 5y ago
        Blockchain is decentralized, so there is no "hosting server" of the NFT
        newswasboring 5y ago
        There is, we are commenting on an article describing whats on the hosting server, namely the JSON for tokenURI field.
        koonsolo 5y ago
        That is just a bad implementation of NFTs. Take a look at the Flow blockchain for example, which is probably the most famous NFT blockchain out there. They store all metadata in the token itself. It's not fair to discuss NFT's by only looking at a bad implementation. Metadata is stored on-chain.
        newswasboring 5y ago
        I thought that was still in ideation phase[1]. [1]https://github.com/onflow/flow-nft/issues/9 https://github.com/onflow/flow-nft/issues/9
  - nazka 5y ago
    Continuing with the analogy you can own a rare baseball card of an all star player but many other people also own it. With NFT there is (usually) one and only one owner so it’s like there is only one card that have been produced. For instance check what they did with the NBA and dunks. They are selling short videos of every dunk. So there is only one possible owner of a dunk sold. That’s it. So only one guy own the one of the best dunk of Michael Jordan.
    - newswasboring 5y ago
      Yes but NBA can unilaterally delete this data from the server, right? Then how am I getting any control?
      - koonsolo 5y ago
        First of all, who cares about the video? You "own" the dunk, not the video of the dunk. So even if the video goes down, you still "own" the dunk. How would you delete the history of a dunk? And in any other case: archive.org
        newswasboring 5y ago
        What does it mean to "own" the dunk?
        koonsolo 5y ago
        > What does it mean to "own" the dunk? For some people it's the NFT that the NBA sold. You only need 2 people with a lot of money to believe that. Do I believe that? No. Do I believe others can believe that? Yes. Do I therefore believe it's a scam? No.
    - aflag 5y ago
      That feels like these websites that have a list of stars with names associated with them. Sure, people do pay to be in those lists, but it feels a bit scamy.

koonsolo 5y ago

The baseball card also doesn't give you ownership of the baseball player, or over the photograph or stats of that player. You can copy the photograph and stats as much as you want (the player not so much ;)), but the card still stays the card. So conceptually: the NFT doesn't refer to the baseball card, it is the baseball card. Baseball card refers to something real, but doesn't take ownership of that thing. NFT refers to something real, but doesn't take ownership of that thing.

newswasboring 5y ago
I think I might be close to getting it. But with a baseball card, I control the baseball card. Right? With the NFT, I have no control over the resource linked to from the NFT. If that server goes away, doesn't the thing that provided NFTs its value also go away? Its like if someone scratched off the photo from my baseball card, doesn't that baseball card become valueless at that point?
- koonsolo 5y ago
  NFT and baseball cards are both pointers: they point to something you don't control. You control the pointer, not the thing they point to. So if we can agree that the card has value because "it's about Honus Wagner", and not really about the picture on the card, then NFT's and those cards are very similar. But on the other hand, you could indeed claim that the card has value because of the picture itself. But I still feel the picture on the card is really to act as a pointer, and not about providing value in itself. Because I would think that in that case, a real picture, or a bigger picture, or the original photographic film would be worth more. So in the end, the baseball card also doesn't become valueless when the player dies. That's just how I look at it.
  - newswasboring 5y ago
    Yes when the player dies I still have the card. If the hosting server dies I have nothing but the purchase receipt
    - koonsolo 5y ago
      Blockchain is decentralized, so there is no "hosting server" of the NFT
      - newswasboring 5y ago
        There is, we are commenting on an article describing whats on the hosting server, namely the JSON for tokenURI field.
        koonsolo 5y ago
        That is just a bad implementation of NFTs. Take a look at the Flow blockchain for example, which is probably the most famous NFT blockchain out there. They store all metadata in the token itself. It's not fair to discuss NFT's by only looking at a bad implementation. Metadata is stored on-chain.
        newswasboring 5y ago
        I thought that was still in ideation phase[1]. [1]https://github.com/onflow/flow-nft/issues/9 https://github.com/onflow/flow-nft/issues/9
- nazka 5y ago
  Continuing with the analogy you can own a rare baseball card of an all star player but many other people also own it. With NFT there is (usually) one and only one owner so it’s like there is only one card that have been produced. For instance check what they did with the NBA and dunks. They are selling short videos of every dunk. So there is only one possible owner of a dunk sold. That’s it. So only one guy own the one of the best dunk of Michael Jordan.
  - newswasboring 5y ago
    Yes but NBA can unilaterally delete this data from the server, right? Then how am I getting any control?
    - koonsolo 5y ago
      First of all, who cares about the video? You "own" the dunk, not the video of the dunk. So even if the video goes down, you still "own" the dunk. How would you delete the history of a dunk? And in any other case: archive.org
      - newswasboring 5y ago
        What does it mean to "own" the dunk?
      - koonsolo 5y ago
        > What does it mean to "own" the dunk? For some people it's the NFT that the NBA sold. You only need 2 people with a lot of money to believe that. Do I believe that? No. Do I believe others can believe that? Yes. Do I therefore believe it's a scam? No.
  - aflag 5y ago
    That feels like these websites that have a list of stars with names associated with them. Sure, people do pay to be in those lists, but it feels a bit scamy.