4 ms·
Yeah except you could sell the NFT on a different blockchain. As far as NFTs are concerned, the existence of multiple incompatible blockchains is indistinguish
by DarylZero 5y ago
Yeah except you could sell the NFT on a different blockchain.
As far as NFTs are concerned, the existence of multiple incompatible blockchains is indistinguishable from what would be considered a network partition within a single blockchain for cryptocurrency.
@stagas:
> Can't they have a public personal ledger somewhere for people to audit?
Then you need to coordinate on a common authority to rely upon for the timestamping. Blockchain's whole purpose is to eliminate this dependency.
- stagas 5y agoThe signed message can have a timestamp on it. The only authority necessary is the signature of the author or the previous owner.
- DarylZero 5y agoYou need an authority to enforce that the author isn't signing a timestamp that does not match the actual clock time.
- stagas 5y agoStill not convinced. I can audit the message so the only way to game this is we both have to be playing a game. Against who? A third person who we will try to sell afterwards? Same thing can happen in the blockchain as well, no-one can audit what happens off the chain which could be people coordinating.
- DarylZero 5y agoI don't know what you mean by "audit the message." Without third-party timestamping or blockchain, the same token can be sold to multiple buyers, and nothing can be used to determine which buyer is the first ("real") buyer. This is the whole reason blockchain was invented. It wasn't possible to do it at all before that.
- qqii 5y agoThis is true, except there would at least be a record on some blockchain where the artwork was first proven to exist via a hash. This is at least stronger proof against the artist and for the buyer. As it stands this isn't very valuable yet but in my mind an important milestone.