6 ms·

NFTs have created a global liquid permissionless marketplace for digital art. This never existed before. Ever.

by kranke155 5y ago

sam_bristow 5y ago
Quite often that 'permissionless marketplace' is happening without the permission of the artists.
- kranke155 5y ago
  This is a shame but technical solutions are possible and being worked on. A quick verification can also be done in any of the major markets to determine the art is being sold by the artists, which is something I always do.
  - ShamelessC 5y ago
    What's the technical solution? That seems intractable.
    - kranke155 5y ago
      intractable? how? If it's possible to detect fakes in the real world, it's possible to detect duplicates in digital art. Eventually some sort of image scraping through all the major art networks - Artboard, Behance - will be integrated into NFT platforms to prevent most of this.
      - ShamelessC 5y ago
        That all sounds very hypothetical. Content-based de-duplication is an unsolved problem facing many known tradeoffs that can't satisfy the demands of all digital artists in a fair way. The use of sheer automation for this task will fail - humans need to be in the loop. If you're positing a solution with deep learning - again, you're going to have false positives/negatives and humans will need to be in the loop. As in - humans with eyeballs visually examining and verifying claims made by NFT platforms using automated tools. I am not saying any of this is uncertain. But assuming it as a guarantee (unless you are personally working to help create this tech, which I gather you are not) is naive.
        kranke155 5y ago
        The system in the real world requires a lot of humans in the loop as well. What's your point? We just need to make it harder for people to do it, you will never be able to make it impossible. That's holding the digital world to a far higher standard than meatspace, where fraud happens. Youtube has a huge problem with re-uploading of videos where multiple accounts will download and re-upload a video of anything they can get away with. Does that make Youtube useless?
        ShamelessC 5y ago
        My point is that a system which claims to be highly decentralized ultimately has similar flaws to existing implementations when it becomes dependent on centralized trust in the real-world e.g. "humans manually verifying things". I'm aware of YouTube's specific issues and almost brought it up as a point against NFT's. YouTube is not useless, no. But, its automated copyright system is draconian and serves elites and lawyers more than it does individual content creators (who it often actively harms). This issue arises specifically because YouTube operates at massive scale and because Google refuses to hire enough people to deal with content moderation and copyright complaints _properly_ and would prefer to automate things as much as possible. I don't think NFT's would present these exact problems; but I guarantee you similarly horrible inequities surface in NFT markets. I don't believe currency should be less regulated. I believe financial regulation should be drastically increased as e.g. tax loopholes is one method that the ultra-wealthy use to remain that way - at the expense of everyone else. I would be _substantially_ more interested in cryptocurrencies if institutions were up to the task of regulating it to prevent abuse. I've seen a bit of this lately but it's honestly not enough.
        kranke155 5y ago
        I’m afraid you’re right. I’m not a crypto utopian - I think the dystopian outcome for crypto is equally likely. In fact it’s likely that both utopian and dystopian outcomes will all happen simultaneously. I do like NFTs as a way to support digital artists and I think they’ve gotten a really bad rap in the press. But they’re not going to empower some kind of utopia. They just allow digital artists to profit from their work directly in a novel way. That’s good to me. The fact that they have problems doesn’t stop them from being an innovative solution with real usage. The decentralisation aspect of it is only interesting from my POV insofar that it’s allowed this market to exist.
spzb 5y ago
It created a market for something. I don’t think it was art though. Unless you consider the whole concept to be some kind of performance art.
- kranke155 5y ago
  You can consider whatever you like but eventually it will cross into reality denial. It’s a marketplace for digitally watermarked digital art. Being anti-crypto like this is similar to being an anti-vaxxer for tech. You’re analysing everything through an ideological reality-confirmation bias instead of acting like a scientist and looking for the truth. You don’t want something to be true because you don’t like mRNA/Bill Gates or Bitcoin/Libertarians are at its origin. Instead you should face the truth that this is a marketplace for digital art and that it works. Far simpler than concocting wild theories about 5G or NFTs being performance art. It just works, it’s real and people are using it. Saying “NFTs have no value” is like saying “Bitcoin is not money”. It has been the equivalent of money for 10 years now, so when are you going to give it up?
  - gus_massa 5y ago
    I was very skeptical of ICOs a few years ago, and they now disappeared. Is was like a permissionless stock exchange. Is any of them still worth something?
    - kranke155 5y ago
      The ICOs were mostly trash. That was obvious. But yes, Ethereum is still around that was ICO. Polkadot. Algorand. Lots of serious projects with interesting solutions. You’re clearly out of the loop so. Just do more research. There are still ICOs for instance there are auctions happening right now on Polkadot.
    - TrevorAustin 5y ago
      ICOs disappeared because the SEC stepped into what had been a kind of legal gray area and said “Lol, no. All of this is illegal.” They didn’t really go away on their own.
ethanbond 5y ago
What? You email a gallery and they reply with a price and you pay them and your art is shipped to you. NFT people act like art is some unattainable mythical artifact that their JPEGs have somehow liberated.
- kranke155 5y ago
  You’re literally ignoring half of what I said. Digital art couldn’t be “shipped” to anyone. Having a gallery means you have to be featured in one in the first place - ie gatekeepers. Not permissionless. You have to be not working in the arts to think like this. NFTs were a revolution for digital artists.
  - ethanbond 5y ago
    Ah, I did skim over the “digital” part.
ketanip 5y ago
NFT Bay go brrr !!!

NFTs have created a global liquid permissionless marketplace for digital art. This never existed before. Ever.

sam_bristow 5y ago

Quite often that 'permissionless marketplace' is happening without the permission of the artists.

kranke155 5y ago
This is a shame but technical solutions are possible and being worked on. A quick verification can also be done in any of the major markets to determine the art is being sold by the artists, which is something I always do.
- ShamelessC 5y ago
  What's the technical solution? That seems intractable.
  - kranke155 5y ago
    intractable? how? If it's possible to detect fakes in the real world, it's possible to detect duplicates in digital art. Eventually some sort of image scraping through all the major art networks - Artboard, Behance - will be integrated into NFT platforms to prevent most of this.
    - ShamelessC 5y ago
      That all sounds very hypothetical. Content-based de-duplication is an unsolved problem facing many known tradeoffs that can't satisfy the demands of all digital artists in a fair way. The use of sheer automation for this task will fail - humans need to be in the loop. If you're positing a solution with deep learning - again, you're going to have false positives/negatives and humans will need to be in the loop. As in - humans with eyeballs visually examining and verifying claims made by NFT platforms using automated tools. I am not saying any of this is uncertain. But assuming it as a guarantee (unless you are personally working to help create this tech, which I gather you are not) is naive.
      - kranke155 5y ago
        The system in the real world requires a lot of humans in the loop as well. What's your point? We just need to make it harder for people to do it, you will never be able to make it impossible. That's holding the digital world to a far higher standard than meatspace, where fraud happens. Youtube has a huge problem with re-uploading of videos where multiple accounts will download and re-upload a video of anything they can get away with. Does that make Youtube useless?
        ShamelessC 5y ago
        My point is that a system which claims to be highly decentralized ultimately has similar flaws to existing implementations when it becomes dependent on centralized trust in the real-world e.g. "humans manually verifying things". I'm aware of YouTube's specific issues and almost brought it up as a point against NFT's. YouTube is not useless, no. But, its automated copyright system is draconian and serves elites and lawyers more than it does individual content creators (who it often actively harms). This issue arises specifically because YouTube operates at massive scale and because Google refuses to hire enough people to deal with content moderation and copyright complaints _properly_ and would prefer to automate things as much as possible. I don't think NFT's would present these exact problems; but I guarantee you similarly horrible inequities surface in NFT markets. I don't believe currency should be less regulated. I believe financial regulation should be drastically increased as e.g. tax loopholes is one method that the ultra-wealthy use to remain that way - at the expense of everyone else. I would be _substantially_ more interested in cryptocurrencies if institutions were up to the task of regulating it to prevent abuse. I've seen a bit of this lately but it's honestly not enough.
        kranke155 5y ago
        I’m afraid you’re right. I’m not a crypto utopian - I think the dystopian outcome for crypto is equally likely. In fact it’s likely that both utopian and dystopian outcomes will all happen simultaneously. I do like NFTs as a way to support digital artists and I think they’ve gotten a really bad rap in the press. But they’re not going to empower some kind of utopia. They just allow digital artists to profit from their work directly in a novel way. That’s good to me. The fact that they have problems doesn’t stop them from being an innovative solution with real usage. The decentralisation aspect of it is only interesting from my POV insofar that it’s allowed this market to exist.

spzb 5y ago

It created a market for something. I don’t think it was art though. Unless you consider the whole concept to be some kind of performance art.

kranke155 5y ago
You can consider whatever you like but eventually it will cross into reality denial. It’s a marketplace for digitally watermarked digital art. Being anti-crypto like this is similar to being an anti-vaxxer for tech. You’re analysing everything through an ideological reality-confirmation bias instead of acting like a scientist and looking for the truth. You don’t want something to be true because you don’t like mRNA/Bill Gates or Bitcoin/Libertarians are at its origin. Instead you should face the truth that this is a marketplace for digital art and that it works. Far simpler than concocting wild theories about 5G or NFTs being performance art. It just works, it’s real and people are using it. Saying “NFTs have no value” is like saying “Bitcoin is not money”. It has been the equivalent of money for 10 years now, so when are you going to give it up?
- gus_massa 5y ago
  I was very skeptical of ICOs a few years ago, and they now disappeared. Is was like a permissionless stock exchange. Is any of them still worth something?
  - kranke155 5y ago
    The ICOs were mostly trash. That was obvious. But yes, Ethereum is still around that was ICO. Polkadot. Algorand. Lots of serious projects with interesting solutions. You’re clearly out of the loop so. Just do more research. There are still ICOs for instance there are auctions happening right now on Polkadot.
  - TrevorAustin 5y ago
    ICOs disappeared because the SEC stepped into what had been a kind of legal gray area and said “Lol, no. All of this is illegal.” They didn’t really go away on their own.

ethanbond 5y ago

What? You email a gallery and they reply with a price and you pay them and your art is shipped to you. NFT people act like art is some unattainable mythical artifact that their JPEGs have somehow liberated.

kranke155 5y ago
You’re literally ignoring half of what I said. Digital art couldn’t be “shipped” to anyone. Having a gallery means you have to be featured in one in the first place - ie gatekeepers. Not permissionless. You have to be not working in the arts to think like this. NFTs were a revolution for digital artists.
- ethanbond 5y ago
  Ah, I did skim over the “digital” part.

ketanip 5y ago

NFT Bay go brrr !!!