7 ms·

Seems it has only around 10GB of data, the rest are zeros hashed. https://gist.github.com/zhuowei/ebd5601f7dd8e5ee186bf302874e0a4c https://gist.github.com/zhuo

Seems it has only around 10GB of data, the rest are zeros hashed. https://gist.github.com/zhuowei/ebd5601f7dd8e5ee186bf302874e0a4c https://gist.github.com/zhuowei/ebd5601f7dd8e5ee186bf302874e... https://www.twitter.com/zhuowei/status/1461576936241733638 https://www.twitter.com/zhuowei/status/1461576936241733638

samwillis 5y ago
I think that is kind of the point. This a social commentary on the absurdity of NFTs and crypto. There was the study yesterday that showed that 70% of crypto trading was wash trading. I.e junk to inflate the appearance of the market. I see this being mostly zeros as effectively the same. It was meant to be found to be junk, to show how stupid it all is.
- ganzuul 5y ago
  It is a matter of signal to noise ratio of the network.
- episteme 5y ago
  It was 70% of the trading done on -unregulated- exchanges.
  - boldslogan 5y ago
    right, but doesnt the alledged spill over effect of increasing the price on the unregulated exchange, impact the price regardless of exchange? You don't ask for btc price X on coinbase versus btc price Y on biance? Wouldn't you just care about the price of btc? and if it rises on certain exchanges, then it would arbitrage until it rose on other exchanges as well?
    - jstanley 5y ago
      > if it rises on certain exchanges, then it would arbitrage until it rose on other exchanges as well? More like the opposite. The fake price rise would be arbitraged away to match the real price. At some point there has to be a real buyer/seller, otherwise arbitrage doesn't work. And a real buyer/seller is trading at the real price.
  - codebolt 5y ago
    Well, then how many % of crypto volume happens on properly 'regulated' exchanges? And what are the requirements those exchanges must meet (are they held to the same standard as major stock exchanges, for example?)
  - qeternity 5y ago
    Given that Coinbase paid a fine for wash trading, performed by none other than former Coinbase employee and Litecoin creator Charlie Lee, I’m not sure what you’re suggesting here.
    - jimmydorry 5y ago
      Regulation working as intended?
- leppr 5y ago
  That study was not rigorous and their claim easily falsifiable. You can't prove wash trading on centralized exchanges. It's a study specifically made for people to quote in arguments such as yours. Not commenting on the general sentiment.
  - qeternity 5y ago
    > That study was not rigorous and their claim easily falsifiable. Specifically, what part of their methodology is not rigorous? Given that a substantial chunk of the top tier exchanges have been caught and charged with wash trading (Bitmex, Coinbase), I think we already have quite a bit of circumstantial evidence to suggest it is likely an issue.
setr 5y ago
I don’t understand; did the author of the torrent toss in a bunch of nothing to pad out the number, or is there that many references to nothing in the NFT chain? The former seems pointless, but for the latter, I’m under the assumption that the NFT chain stores the image hashes directly, and those hashes are enforced to be unique — so there should be only one instance of a zero hash? Or I suppose a ton of images with like three bytes set and bunch of nothing for padding
- wrfitch 5y ago
  Most NFTs do not hash media themselves; instead, they hash a link to the media that only exists as long as it is hosted. I'd imagine the zero hashes are links that are already dead.
  - miracle2k 5y ago
    Given the authors deleting of tickets on the matter it stands to reason that he didn't want to actually go through the trouble of pulling all images and is kind of being a fraud. Of course, given enough unreasonably scepticism someone might instead intuit that 18.99 TB of 19TB of data has disappeared.
- originalcvk 5y ago
  No, it was quite deliberate. The "RAR" files in there are not even RAR files, they are ext4 filesystems filled with zeros. There is literallt nothing in there - the 10GB of "data" is ext4 FS metadata. https://twitter.com/originalcvk/status/1462099991858753547?s=20 https://twitter.com/originalcvk/status/1462099991858753547?s...

samwillis 5y ago

I think that is kind of the point. This a social commentary on the absurdity of NFTs and crypto. There was the study yesterday that showed that 70% of crypto trading was wash trading. I.e junk to inflate the appearance of the market. I see this being mostly zeros as effectively the same. It was meant to be found to be junk, to show how stupid it all is.

ganzuul 5y ago
It is a matter of signal to noise ratio of the network.
episteme 5y ago
It was 70% of the trading done on -unregulated- exchanges.
- boldslogan 5y ago
  right, but doesnt the alledged spill over effect of increasing the price on the unregulated exchange, impact the price regardless of exchange? You don't ask for btc price X on coinbase versus btc price Y on biance? Wouldn't you just care about the price of btc? and if it rises on certain exchanges, then it would arbitrage until it rose on other exchanges as well?
  - jstanley 5y ago
    > if it rises on certain exchanges, then it would arbitrage until it rose on other exchanges as well? More like the opposite. The fake price rise would be arbitraged away to match the real price. At some point there has to be a real buyer/seller, otherwise arbitrage doesn't work. And a real buyer/seller is trading at the real price.
- codebolt 5y ago
  Well, then how many % of crypto volume happens on properly 'regulated' exchanges? And what are the requirements those exchanges must meet (are they held to the same standard as major stock exchanges, for example?)
- qeternity 5y ago
  Given that Coinbase paid a fine for wash trading, performed by none other than former Coinbase employee and Litecoin creator Charlie Lee, I’m not sure what you’re suggesting here.
  - jimmydorry 5y ago
    Regulation working as intended?
leppr 5y ago
That study was not rigorous and their claim easily falsifiable. You can't prove wash trading on centralized exchanges. It's a study specifically made for people to quote in arguments such as yours. Not commenting on the general sentiment.
- qeternity 5y ago
  > That study was not rigorous and their claim easily falsifiable. Specifically, what part of their methodology is not rigorous? Given that a substantial chunk of the top tier exchanges have been caught and charged with wash trading (Bitmex, Coinbase), I think we already have quite a bit of circumstantial evidence to suggest it is likely an issue.

setr 5y ago

I don’t understand; did the author of the torrent toss in a bunch of nothing to pad out the number, or is there that many references to nothing in the NFT chain? The former seems pointless, but for the latter, I’m under the assumption that the NFT chain stores the image hashes directly, and those hashes are enforced to be unique — so there should be only one instance of a zero hash? Or I suppose a ton of images with like three bytes set and bunch of nothing for padding

wrfitch 5y ago
Most NFTs do not hash media themselves; instead, they hash a link to the media that only exists as long as it is hosted. I'd imagine the zero hashes are links that are already dead.
- miracle2k 5y ago
  Given the authors deleting of tickets on the matter it stands to reason that he didn't want to actually go through the trouble of pulling all images and is kind of being a fraud. Of course, given enough unreasonably scepticism someone might instead intuit that 18.99 TB of 19TB of data has disappeared.
originalcvk 5y ago
No, it was quite deliberate. The "RAR" files in there are not even RAR files, they are ext4 filesystems filled with zeros. There is literallt nothing in there - the 10GB of "data" is ext4 FS metadata. https://twitter.com/originalcvk/status/1462099991858753547?s=20 https://twitter.com/originalcvk/status/1462099991858753547?s...