5 ms·

I'm no expert at all, but this is how see it from an outsider perspective. With an NFT you can prove the ownership of X digital asset, that proof of ownership

I'm no expert at all, but this is how see it from an outsider perspective. With an NFT you can prove the ownership of X digital asset, that proof of ownership is what is non-fungible In order for NFTs-art to make sense to me, artist must attest that "whoever owns that digital asset in the ______ (ethereum blockchain?) " has the artist's recognition of ownership, and is a big UX problem for artists to really prove that, which I believe it's "solved" by platforms like opensea attesting on behalf of artist So in practice, your buying the recognition of opensea that you own X asset, which opensea claims that is approved by X artist (it's also claimed by the artist on social networks or alike). there's still a problem there if the relationship between artist and opensea will be intact in the future, I don't know if or how they try to solve it So in practice, most of it could have been done with a centralized database, but that would be missing the point. There surely are knowledgeable NFT-creators who knows what they are doing and they can provide the attestation by themselfs, without any intermediary party, and that's where things get interesting with NFTs, look for example in gaming, especially where assets are shared among multiple games (otherwise it still could have been done with a database), it's just all impractical for non crypto-savvy folks

pornel 5y ago
NFT can't prove ownership of anything but itself. Anyone can make a new NFT for the same artwork/game-asset/bridge/moon-plot and claim they own it. There isn't even a uniqueness check, so there's no limit to copying other people's NFTs. It's like buying a copy of an artwork in a museum gift shop. Your print is yours, but there can be thousands of other copies and there can be printed more at any time. None of them are the original artwork anyway.
- cslarson 5y ago
  > and claim they own it. But that claim means nothing if the in-game asset is not recognized in the game, and that copied artwork is for some crazy reason not recognized by other interested parties as the actual original NFT. None of them are the original NFT, minted by the creator.
  - shuger 5y ago
    NFTs are completely useless for this. Why would game use blockchain to store ownership of an item? There are exactly 0 benefits to doing that instead just tracking it on their won servers in old normal database. Since anyone can create duplicate NFTs they would have to track which ones are genuine which defeats the whole purpose.
    - cslarson 5y ago
      You cannot create duplicate NFTs. That is the whole point. The reason to have NFTs (and also fungible tokens) in games is that the gamers would know and be able to trust that the quantity of a given item was fixed. There may be more appeal to play a game where the economy was predictable and couldn't be later manipulated by the company or original game creators.
      - madeofpalk 5y ago
        But the game developers own the database, so if they want something to be unique, they can already do that! None of this are either actual problems that developers have, or things that users want. Never once has someone playing a game say "boy I sure wish all these hats were more expensive!"
        cslarson 5y ago
        The developers cannot make something trustlessly unique. If they control the database it is a simple query to up the count to 2!
        friendzis 5y ago
        NFTs neither do nor can enforce uniqueness too. Blockchain is a method to, as you put it, trustlessly couple a particular instance of a datum with a keypair. Game developers can duplicate the blob describing in-game asset in their own database or on the blockchain. For off-chain data blockchains are nothing more than a datastore which provides immutable link between a datum and a keypair.
- madacol 5y ago
  > NFT can't prove ownership of anything but itself That's why the artist has to publicly attest which NFTs he approves > There isn't even a uniqueness check Even if there were, it wouldn't change anything, it's too easy to change one bit, or the metadata, and voilá, a new totally different digital asset that looks exactly the same to the naked eye Again, none of these work without the artist approval of the NFT itself, that's the only thing that adds value to it

pornel 5y ago

NFT can't prove ownership of anything but itself. Anyone can make a new NFT for the same artwork/game-asset/bridge/moon-plot and claim they own it. There isn't even a uniqueness check, so there's no limit to copying other people's NFTs. It's like buying a copy of an artwork in a museum gift shop. Your print is yours, but there can be thousands of other copies and there can be printed more at any time. None of them are the original artwork anyway.

cslarson 5y ago
> and claim they own it. But that claim means nothing if the in-game asset is not recognized in the game, and that copied artwork is for some crazy reason not recognized by other interested parties as the actual original NFT. None of them are the original NFT, minted by the creator.
- shuger 5y ago
  NFTs are completely useless for this. Why would game use blockchain to store ownership of an item? There are exactly 0 benefits to doing that instead just tracking it on their won servers in old normal database. Since anyone can create duplicate NFTs they would have to track which ones are genuine which defeats the whole purpose.
  - cslarson 5y ago
    You cannot create duplicate NFTs. That is the whole point. The reason to have NFTs (and also fungible tokens) in games is that the gamers would know and be able to trust that the quantity of a given item was fixed. There may be more appeal to play a game where the economy was predictable and couldn't be later manipulated by the company or original game creators.
    - madeofpalk 5y ago
      But the game developers own the database, so if they want something to be unique, they can already do that! None of this are either actual problems that developers have, or things that users want. Never once has someone playing a game say "boy I sure wish all these hats were more expensive!"
      - cslarson 5y ago
        The developers cannot make something trustlessly unique. If they control the database it is a simple query to up the count to 2!
        friendzis 5y ago
        NFTs neither do nor can enforce uniqueness too. Blockchain is a method to, as you put it, trustlessly couple a particular instance of a datum with a keypair. Game developers can duplicate the blob describing in-game asset in their own database or on the blockchain. For off-chain data blockchains are nothing more than a datastore which provides immutable link between a datum and a keypair.
madacol 5y ago
> NFT can't prove ownership of anything but itself That's why the artist has to publicly attest which NFTs he approves > There isn't even a uniqueness check Even if there were, it wouldn't change anything, it's too easy to change one bit, or the metadata, and voilá, a new totally different digital asset that looks exactly the same to the naked eye Again, none of these work without the artist approval of the NFT itself, that's the only thing that adds value to it