4 ms·

The Real Real is a $1b company because people care about provenance in the real world and now there's a place for it in a digital space. Do I think Bored Apes a

The Real Real is a $1b company because people care about provenance in the real world and now there's a place for it in a digital space. Do I think Bored Apes are worth thousands of dollars? Absolutely not. Will it crash? Absolutely. Do I think it is starting as a stupid toy and may eventually do more interesting things? Yes. If Reddit gives you an NFT for being a top poster for a year in a specific subreddit so you can show it off on Discord and Twitter, I don't see much value in that, but there are plenty of people who do, a lot.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
matwood 5y ago
Exactly, it's all about showing off social status. All communities have way to convey status, even HN.
- zepto 5y ago
  Medals for distinguished service to a social media corporation’s mission to sell advertising.
fwip 5y ago
There's no reason for that Reddit thing to be an NFT. Twitter or Discord could simply integrate w/ Reddit API and pull that shit up.
- lifeformed 5y ago
  And with the NFT, it doesn't show that you are the rewarded user, just that you have the trophy, since it could be transferred.
  - eightysixfour 5y ago
    Just that you are the wallet holder, the contract could block transfers.
  - 3371 5y ago
    - This is the case only if we put aside web3. - NFT can have data on the .json file, so the rewarded user can be recorded.
- eightysixfour 5y ago
  Or the blockchain is the API, which is public, and requires only a single integration point for everyone.
  - hiq 5y ago
    > Or the blockchain is the API, which is public, and requires only a single integration point for everyone. You don't need a blockchain for interoperability, neither does it enforce interoperability.
    - eightysixfour 5y ago
      You do not NEED it, but it can enable it. In the situation above the benefit is you, the recipient, are never again dependent on Reddit to validate that award for you. As long as the blockchain continues to exit, you, the wallet owner, maintain “ownership” over that award. Considering how much most HN users rail against centralized services and things others not to turn stuff off, it seems like the value is obvious to me.
      - hiq 5y ago
        > You do not NEED it, but it can enable it. How so? Why is it any better than a public API? > In the situation above the benefit is you, the recipient, are never again dependent on Reddit to validate that award for you. You're assuming that Reddit would create an NFT that doesn't grant them any special power. Why would they do that? Why wouldn't they create a blockchain NFT with an admin address that they own and which can do pretty much anything? > Considering how much most HN users rail against centralized services and things others not to turn stuff off, it seems like the value is obvious to me. You can be centralized on a blockchain though, e.g. using an admin address as I described.
        acdha 5y ago
        > How so? Why is it any better than a public API? Specifically in that using my API won't require you to pay him money. There are other reasons they'll claim but once you dig through the chaff that's what it comes down to.
XorNot 5y ago
Is the trophy for winning a sporting event actually worth anything beyond it's material cost to someone who didn't actually win the event?
thinkmassive 5y ago
Except a token is unnecessary unless it needs to be transferrable. Reddit is a centralized entity, so they can attest to you being the top poster (and even cryptographically sign that attestation) without the extra cost of posting it on a blockchain.
- hypertele-Xii 5y ago
  Which is what StackExchange has been doing for years.
- vintermann 5y ago
  A token is hardly necessary then either. 1. Artist creates work, signs it with his good old fashioned PGP key, publishes it. 2. Patron pays to "sponsor" the work. Artist makes a bundle of the work and patron's public key, and signs it with his own. Publishes it. 3. Patron decides he has to "sell" his patronage. He takes the bundle from 2, adds the buyer's public key, and signs it. Optionally, the artist signs it too to indicate he's OK with the "transfer". They publish it. Are there ways to cheat? Yeah, if you're confident no one has downloaded the signed document that you published, you can try double-selling. But that's risky: if you're wrong, someone can publish the signed document and prove that you are a fraud. This illustrates that most of the utility of "distributed blockchains" come from simple digital signatures. If all parties are accountable, public identities, this simplified scheme is strictly superior. And remember, we're talking about art and public patronage here, not trade of illegal goods. The whole point is that you want people to see it and associate it with a public, accountable identity.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

matwood 5y ago

Exactly, it's all about showing off social status. All communities have way to convey status, even HN.

zepto 5y ago
Medals for distinguished service to a social media corporation’s mission to sell advertising.

fwip 5y ago

There's no reason for that Reddit thing to be an NFT. Twitter or Discord could simply integrate w/ Reddit API and pull that shit up.

lifeformed 5y ago
And with the NFT, it doesn't show that you are the rewarded user, just that you have the trophy, since it could be transferred.
- eightysixfour 5y ago
  Just that you are the wallet holder, the contract could block transfers.
- 3371 5y ago
  - This is the case only if we put aside web3. - NFT can have data on the .json file, so the rewarded user can be recorded.
eightysixfour 5y ago
Or the blockchain is the API, which is public, and requires only a single integration point for everyone.
- hiq 5y ago
  > Or the blockchain is the API, which is public, and requires only a single integration point for everyone. You don't need a blockchain for interoperability, neither does it enforce interoperability.
  - eightysixfour 5y ago
    You do not NEED it, but it can enable it. In the situation above the benefit is you, the recipient, are never again dependent on Reddit to validate that award for you. As long as the blockchain continues to exit, you, the wallet owner, maintain “ownership” over that award. Considering how much most HN users rail against centralized services and things others not to turn stuff off, it seems like the value is obvious to me.
    - hiq 5y ago
      > You do not NEED it, but it can enable it. How so? Why is it any better than a public API? > In the situation above the benefit is you, the recipient, are never again dependent on Reddit to validate that award for you. You're assuming that Reddit would create an NFT that doesn't grant them any special power. Why would they do that? Why wouldn't they create a blockchain NFT with an admin address that they own and which can do pretty much anything? > Considering how much most HN users rail against centralized services and things others not to turn stuff off, it seems like the value is obvious to me. You can be centralized on a blockchain though, e.g. using an admin address as I described.
      - acdha 5y ago
        > How so? Why is it any better than a public API? Specifically in that using my API won't require you to pay him money. There are other reasons they'll claim but once you dig through the chaff that's what it comes down to.

XorNot 5y ago

Is the trophy for winning a sporting event actually worth anything beyond it's material cost to someone who didn't actually win the event?

thinkmassive 5y ago

Except a token is unnecessary unless it needs to be transferrable. Reddit is a centralized entity, so they can attest to you being the top poster (and even cryptographically sign that attestation) without the extra cost of posting it on a blockchain.

hypertele-Xii 5y ago
Which is what StackExchange has been doing for years.
vintermann 5y ago
A token is hardly necessary then either. 1. Artist creates work, signs it with his good old fashioned PGP key, publishes it. 2. Patron pays to "sponsor" the work. Artist makes a bundle of the work and patron's public key, and signs it with his own. Publishes it. 3. Patron decides he has to "sell" his patronage. He takes the bundle from 2, adds the buyer's public key, and signs it. Optionally, the artist signs it too to indicate he's OK with the "transfer". They publish it. Are there ways to cheat? Yeah, if you're confident no one has downloaded the signed document that you published, you can try double-selling. But that's risky: if you're wrong, someone can publish the signed document and prove that you are a fraud. This illustrates that most of the utility of "distributed blockchains" come from simple digital signatures. If all parties are accountable, public identities, this simplified scheme is strictly superior. And remember, we're talking about art and public patronage here, not trade of illegal goods. The whole point is that you want people to see it and associate it with a public, accountable identity.