3 ms·

It's more about the token than the JPEG. Gated experiences, communities, in-game items, in-game art, etc is the driving force. And for digitally-native art, the

It's more about the token than the JPEG. Gated experiences, communities, in-game items, in-game art, etc is the driving force. And for digitally-native art, there's never been a better way to sell/trade it while preserving provenance. People are betting on the fact that we'll spend more and more of our time in digital spaces, and I don't think that's necessarily a bad bet.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
> Gated experiences, communities, in-game items, in-game art, etc is the driving force. It is incredibly sad that anyone is working towards a future where a post-scarcity space is fully subdued by artificial scarcity.
- rodiger 5y ago
  Agree to disagree- I think the incentives are better aligned for creators and it will create a much more vibrant digital space.
giantrobot 5y ago
> Gated experiences, communities, in-game items, in-game art, etc is the driving force. And for digitally-native art, there's never been a better way to sell/trade it while preserving provenance. It's a bunch of unnecessary synthetic scarcity. What the fuck is good about that? Why do you want to sign on to a model where you're going to be nickel and dimed for everything you see? As a consumer why do you want to pay for things that have zero marginal cost? What value do you get for buying an NFT to an image or virtual item that costs nothing to reproduce? You're not buying the copyright or any exclusive license to the things. Why would anyone ever buy an "experience" NFT for something they didn't experience? So they can be known to be a poser and a sucker so long as the blockchain exists? NFTs are just a way to enforce a class system in a virtual environment where there's no inherent system of haves and have-nots. Not only that but it's a system where an infinitude of intermediaries can extract payment out of any secondary market. It's sad that you're excited to participate in such needless rent seeking.
- rodiger 5y ago
  > What the fuck is good about that? I think it's more an economic incentive for digital creators who have historically been nickel and dimed every step of the way trying to monetize their work. > As a consumer why do you want to pay for things that have zero marginal cost? The value for a consumer is less about paying and more about earning (which sounds dystopic to some, but is very exciting imo). And beyond that, layered experiences mean you could get an item / art / skin / etc and carry it through disparate digital worlds. One could imagine a world where no longer are you playing one game with one set of items, but are instead able to carry your stuff into multiple experiences. Another point here: NFTs don't have to come into existance through some payment. E.g. playing an MMO and boss drops are NFTs, or by watching some sports game you're given an NFT (or in that case more correctly referred to as a POAP (Proof of Attendance Protocol)). This likely has no monetary value, but is more a social signalling device to show you care about something / did something in the past. > Why would anyone ever buy an "experience" NFT for something they didn't experience? Here I'm referring to digital experiences like concerts, parties, tours, AMAs, etc. where there is some set of rules to obtain the entry pass (in NFT form). > NFTs are just a way to enforce a class system in a virtual environment where there's no inherent system of haves and have-nots If people could altruistically create high-quality content and earn a living that way I'd agree with you. But, as we've seen with microtransactions, the model is changing as the world spends more and more time in digital 'spaces.' There is value in paying creators, and you're welcome to not participate if this isn't your cup of tea Overall I think we're coming into this with different images of the future- agree to disagree and I hope it's less dystopic than it could be.
  - giantrobot 5y ago
    > The value for a consumer is less about paying and more about earning (which sounds dystopic to some, but is very exciting imo). And beyond that, layered experiences mean you could get an item / art / skin / etc and carry it through disparate digital worlds. One could imagine a world where no longer are you playing one game with one set of items, but are instead able to carry your stuff into multiple experiences. This comes up all the time and is laughably naïve. What possible reason would Epic have to let you transfer a skin or player model to their game if you didn't pay them for it? Game DLC is already broken and consumer hostile. Assuming blockchains and NFTs will do anything to improve it is absurd. > Here I'm referring to digital experiences like concerts, parties, tours, AMAs, etc. where there is some set of rules to obtain the entry pass (in NFT form). An NFT has no utility here. Where's the secondary market of suckers wanting to buy an NFT for a thing they didn't experience? If there's no suckers further down the pyramid there's no point in an NFT. It's just an event ticket. > If people could altruistically create high-quality content and earn a living that way I'd agree with you. This is the core problem. You're positing a world where every system for some reason cares about things on some blockchain. You're trying to treat an entry on a blockchain like real physical ownership. All this does is port inequality and inequity to a virtual space where it does not naturally exist. Scarcity is not a sine qua non of virtual spaces. That's just a recipe for a hypercapitalist exploitive hellscape. Join the metaverse! You'll be just as poor as in real life! Join the fun!
Levitz 5y ago
So the driving force for the decentralized piece of tech is centralized tech?

AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago

> Gated experiences, communities, in-game items, in-game art, etc is the driving force. It is incredibly sad that anyone is working towards a future where a post-scarcity space is fully subdued by artificial scarcity.

rodiger 5y ago
Agree to disagree- I think the incentives are better aligned for creators and it will create a much more vibrant digital space.

giantrobot 5y ago

> Gated experiences, communities, in-game items, in-game art, etc is the driving force. And for digitally-native art, there's never been a better way to sell/trade it while preserving provenance. It's a bunch of unnecessary synthetic scarcity. What the fuck is good about that? Why do you want to sign on to a model where you're going to be nickel and dimed for everything you see? As a consumer why do you want to pay for things that have zero marginal cost? What value do you get for buying an NFT to an image or virtual item that costs nothing to reproduce? You're not buying the copyright or any exclusive license to the things. Why would anyone ever buy an "experience" NFT for something they didn't experience? So they can be known to be a poser and a sucker so long as the blockchain exists? NFTs are just a way to enforce a class system in a virtual environment where there's no inherent system of haves and have-nots. Not only that but it's a system where an infinitude of intermediaries can extract payment out of any secondary market. It's sad that you're excited to participate in such needless rent seeking.

rodiger 5y ago
> What the fuck is good about that? I think it's more an economic incentive for digital creators who have historically been nickel and dimed every step of the way trying to monetize their work. > As a consumer why do you want to pay for things that have zero marginal cost? The value for a consumer is less about paying and more about earning (which sounds dystopic to some, but is very exciting imo). And beyond that, layered experiences mean you could get an item / art / skin / etc and carry it through disparate digital worlds. One could imagine a world where no longer are you playing one game with one set of items, but are instead able to carry your stuff into multiple experiences. Another point here: NFTs don't have to come into existance through some payment. E.g. playing an MMO and boss drops are NFTs, or by watching some sports game you're given an NFT (or in that case more correctly referred to as a POAP (Proof of Attendance Protocol)). This likely has no monetary value, but is more a social signalling device to show you care about something / did something in the past. > Why would anyone ever buy an "experience" NFT for something they didn't experience? Here I'm referring to digital experiences like concerts, parties, tours, AMAs, etc. where there is some set of rules to obtain the entry pass (in NFT form). > NFTs are just a way to enforce a class system in a virtual environment where there's no inherent system of haves and have-nots If people could altruistically create high-quality content and earn a living that way I'd agree with you. But, as we've seen with microtransactions, the model is changing as the world spends more and more time in digital 'spaces.' There is value in paying creators, and you're welcome to not participate if this isn't your cup of tea Overall I think we're coming into this with different images of the future- agree to disagree and I hope it's less dystopic than it could be.
- giantrobot 5y ago
  > The value for a consumer is less about paying and more about earning (which sounds dystopic to some, but is very exciting imo). And beyond that, layered experiences mean you could get an item / art / skin / etc and carry it through disparate digital worlds. One could imagine a world where no longer are you playing one game with one set of items, but are instead able to carry your stuff into multiple experiences. This comes up all the time and is laughably naïve. What possible reason would Epic have to let you transfer a skin or player model to their game if you didn't pay them for it? Game DLC is already broken and consumer hostile. Assuming blockchains and NFTs will do anything to improve it is absurd. > Here I'm referring to digital experiences like concerts, parties, tours, AMAs, etc. where there is some set of rules to obtain the entry pass (in NFT form). An NFT has no utility here. Where's the secondary market of suckers wanting to buy an NFT for a thing they didn't experience? If there's no suckers further down the pyramid there's no point in an NFT. It's just an event ticket. > If people could altruistically create high-quality content and earn a living that way I'd agree with you. This is the core problem. You're positing a world where every system for some reason cares about things on some blockchain. You're trying to treat an entry on a blockchain like real physical ownership. All this does is port inequality and inequity to a virtual space where it does not naturally exist. Scarcity is not a sine qua non of virtual spaces. That's just a recipe for a hypercapitalist exploitive hellscape. Join the metaverse! You'll be just as poor as in real life! Join the fun!

Levitz 5y ago

So the driving force for the decentralized piece of tech is centralized tech?