19 ms·
NFT Replicas: An app to mint a replica of virtually any NFT
- cfstras 5y ago> The price for a replica starts at 0.001 ETH. Each time a particular NFT piece is replicated, its next replication cost will double. So be sure to replicate popular pieces early! So who gets the replication fees? Is this just a cash grab by the authors of the site?
- selectodude 5y agoIt's crypto. The entire idea is a cash grab.
- vmception 5y agoLooks like SaaS to me. Looks like the funnel is superior and small too. We should just be discussing the revenue multiple, since the same standard should apply. What year does that start?
- hatware 5y agoIt's technology. If people want to use it as a cash grab. So be it. If people want to do more with it, they can do that too.
- delecti 5y agoMy understanding is that minting an NFT always costs money (gas fees that go to the broader mining network to pay the miners for doing the processing). So the cost isn't solely for the benefit of the website maintainers, though I'm sure they're taking a cut too.
- berberous 5y agoThe quoted fee is 100% a fee to the website and is separate from gas cost. He could charge no fee, but you would still pay gas. It's a cash grab.
- globetro 5y agoI'm the creator of the app. I just wanted to create something that was fun/useful with some very mild sense of urgency and scarcity to it. With a starting price of 0.001 ETH per replica, I highly doubt I'll even recoup the >$400 in gas fees I paid to deploy the contract.
- danuker 5y agoI was about to praise this tool for exposing the artificial scarcity that are NFTs. It is trivial to mint your own copy. Then I read the following in the FAQ: > The price for a replica starts at 0.001 ETH. Each time a particular NFT piece is replicated, its next replication cost will double. So be sure to replicate popular pieces early!
- andybak 5y agoSo somebody will launch a rival without this limitation. The quicker can we play through this entire thing, the sooner it will be over.
- Kiro 5y agoThey are not copies though. They are replicas. The original is still unique. You're buying an entry on the blockchain and the scarcity of that is real.
- andybak 5y ago> the scarcity of that is real. Scarcity on it's own does not equal value. The value comes either from social consensus or direct utility. Real numbers are scarce. There's only one of each.
- theWreckluse 5y ago> Real numbers are scarce. There’s only one of each. This gives me ideas! Who wants to join me in this new fad?
- andybak 5y agoI've already claimed all the rationals so hurry up.
- reaperducer 5y agoScarcity on it's own does not equal value This is an important point that a lot of the crypto bros don't seem to grasp. Antiques and thrift stores are crammed with millions of things that are scarce. One-of-a-kind, even. But still nobody wants them. Eventually the cost of storing them becomes more than they're worth, and they go into the trash.
- akoumjian 5y agoI was hoping somebody would make this.
- smt88 5y agoSoon you'll need a way to authenticate NFTs (prove that the one you're bidding on was minted by the advertised artist), and then you'll immediately lose the proposed benefits of NFTs -- decentralization and anonymous trust.
- suikadayo 5y agoIt’s not that difficult. Artists, original creators will write down their .eth or wallet address on their profile. Or just compare the timestamps of the creation of the smart contracts and the tokens.
- gokhan 5y agoWho guarantees that the profile is the real one?
- max48 5y agoThat doesn't solve the issue. You have no way of knowing if the art I'm selling as NFT was made by me or if I copied it from the webpage/DeviantArt of an other artist. Being the first to create an NFT of an image doesn't mean you created the image. And if the images are slightly edited to prevent google image searches (or similar technique), people might never know that 3 people are selling the same stolen image.
- suikadayo 5y agoThat’s why I’ll rely on the .eth or wallet address listed by the artist on deviantart. NFT buyers buying from scammers aren’t doing their due diligence to check if it’s legit or not; they could simply contact the artists directly to confirm if the listing is real.. I’ve done just that, contacting the artist directly to make sure. If you ask “well, how do you know that’s their real deviant profile?”, at that point, it’s not a crypto/NFT problem, but an identity problem. My understanding is that keybase.io was one way to do that, but I never used it so I can’t say much. What if a scammer registered the keybase first before the real artist? Not sure what happens in that case.
- lettergram 5y agoI have to be honest. I view NFTs as one of the dumbest things to come out of the crypto space. I see the use cases, but frankly I don’t think it’s innovative nor does it solve something in a really unique way. Part of the point of digital assets are that they can be copied. If you don’t want to copy them, you can validate with the issuing authority (which is virtually all NFTs as it is).
- me_me_mu_mu 5y agoIt makes for mega cringe lords like Gary Vee. Dude is like 60 and dresses like a Fortnite teenager so he can peddle NFTs to kids as an investment strategy. I always found him to be annoying and the NFT space basically confirmed it.
- Aloha 5y agoHe's 46. I think NFT's are laughable, but if you're gonna play the agism card, at least get the details right.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- afterburner 5y agoJust Gen X being called boomers, once again
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- hn_throwaway_99 5y agoDon't know who this guy is but just looked him up online. As someone in their mid 40s, scares me if some people think this is what a 60 year old looks like...
- 5y ago
- seibelj 5y agoPrints are a near-perfect replica of any painting, and also professional forgers routinely copy works of, or create original works of, major artists in order to make a lot of money. However prints are typically worth a fraction of the original work, and the moment a forged painting is discovered its value plummets. The value of the NFT is not primarily in how it looks. The value of the NFT is in the provenance, the history, the background of the creator, etc. This why Onement V, a blue background with a lighter blue vertical stripe, is worth $30 million https://www.wikiart.org/en/barnett-newman/onement-v-1952 https://www.wikiart.org/en/barnett-newman/onement-v-1952 The painting is something my toddler could create. The background of the artist and the piece's history is what gives it value https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnett_Newman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnett_Newman
- noutella 5y agoTbh, a large part of the art market can indeed be called a scam that only exists as a tax evasion opportunity. Maybe that shouldn’t be the template for the so called Web3.
- seibelj 5y agoHowever even HN must admit the art world is a real industry, with a lot of big money players, and the reason things have value is not in the quality of the art. I see the same argument rehashed over and over, and it's the same reason HN as a collective never understood or embraced crypto in general - a total lack of understanding combined with a total lack of imagination.
- natechols 5y agoSo you're telling me NFTs are exactly like an industry that exists almost entirely to service the ultra-wealthy looking for new ways to hide their assets and/or show off with conspicuous consumption? That's pretty much all I need to hear to decide it's a bunch of BS. Find a use for NFTs that affects those of us without massive disposable income, and maybe I'll be impressed.
- 58x14 5y agoI love this. What a great way to show, not tell. The FAQ is brilliant: "Why would I want to create a replica?" Many NFTs have [rocket emoji] in price and are not affordable for most people. This allows you to still own a replica of a famous NFT. Think of it like an exact print of a favorite piece of art. The source of the NFT will be exactly the same as the original and it will even show up in your crypto wallet. "How much does it cost?" The price for a replica starts at 0.001 ETH. Each time a particular NFT piece is replicated, its next replication cost will double. So be sure to replicate popular pieces early! "Why can't I replicate a replica?" Do you want black holes? Because that's how you get black holes. Who would have thought these three letters could be so controversial? I see both incredible promise and terrible trends, hallmarks of a 'new' technology. This reminds me of the 'save as' art theft meme.
- douglaswlance 5y agoA Michael Jordan rookie card is worth tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars depending on grade. If I print a Michael Jordan rookie card onto cardstock, it will be worth basically nothing. The reason that something is valuable to collectors is the social contract between creator and recipient. The value in NFTs exists by that same social contract. You can't ignore that relationship when criticizing them, otherwise you're attacking a strawman. Try attacking a steelman argument for NFTs, and you may actually convince some proponents.
- pg5 5y agoThis is not a good comparison, because an NFT gives you neither legal ownership nor physical access to the item it is for. For digital items, NFTs don't even provide the actual file.
- zepto 5y ago> The reason that something is valuable to collectors is the social contract between creator and recipient. No, it’s because the valuable object is physically scarce, and exists as a material historical artifact independent of any ledger. NFTs have never and will never have these attributes. You can't ignore this reality when advocating for them, otherwise you're peddling a fantasy.
- danuker 5y ago> independent of any ledger This seems an arbitrary restriction to me. Why must something be independent of a ledger to have value?
- zepto 5y agoThis is a property that NFTs can never have, so claiming that NFTs are equivalent to physical collectibles is certainly false. If you are saying that something requires a ledger entry to have value, then you are simply proving that it has no intrinsic value.
- 5y ago
- moonbug 5y agoChrist, NFTs are bullshit.
- okwubodu 5y agoFun fact: if you go to Facebook.com and press ctrl + s you now have a perfect replica of Facebook. Shareholders hate this trick!
- geoffeg 5y agoThat's considered hacking in Missouri!
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- lawrenceyan 5y agoThis is great. It's important to recognize what iteration we’re at and stay humble with respect to the development of meaningful virtual / in-game assets.
- blueski 5y agoI want to be excited about Web3 and feel I'm missing something, given how many smart minds are. But every time someone talks about NFTs on a podcast I feel there are many questions not answered. For example - Kevin Rose has minted 1000 NFT's for "membership" of his podcast VIP group. Users had to pay ~3 ETH (~$12k) for each one - but he hasn't yet told them what the benefits of holding will be, when they'll come, and how long they'll be offered for. As a user, I might be prepared to pay a membership for these benefits (being able to cancel any time) - but why would I risk $12k up front, having no idea what I'm getting? What incentive does he have to offer beyond the bare minimum to sustain his reputation? The only way it makes sense is if it's about pure price speculation. Can anyone enlighten me on how this is progress?
- miracle2k 5y agoYes, that is speculation. But there is also great art being sold that you may feel good about owning.
- blueski 5y agoIn what sense would I "own" the art? Do I have more rights over it than anyone else - and if so, how are these legally enforced? What prevents the artist from minting a different type of NFT (or whatever comes next) on that same artwork?
- miracle2k 5y agoNo, you don't have more rights than anyone else, and nothing prevents the artist from minting more NFTs of the same artwork. But this is no different than buying say a print of a fine art photograph (that print would be physical, yet only artificially limited and easily mass-produced; you may or may not care about this quality).
- blueski 5y agoFeels a little different, in that I'd then have a fine art print to put on my wall and enjoy. In this case I have a string of characters on a hard drive. If I didn't care only about price appreciation, why would I pick the latter?
- mmaunder 5y agoThe most interesting aspect of NFTs IMO is that they explore what ownership really means. Is it physically possessing something? Is it a receipt? Is it provenance? Is it the ability to destroy something permanently? Is it the ability to deny others access? Is it irrefutable and verifiable proof, without trusting any single entity, that an entity holds an exclusive status relative to a good?
- max48 5y agoit's none of these things because all you buy is an hyperlink. If the art itself was hosted on the blockchain directly (they are not, it would be too expensive), then it would be interesting.
- vmception 5y agosome are. some people care about completely onchain art. minting a completely image onchain is also not too expensive and can also be passed on to the community, as most relevant NFT collections are minted by the community and not the artist. people stand up their own websites for this, the people minting their own artwork directly on the marketplaces are their own segment and that has remained a race to the bottom with starving artists crowding it.
- tagami 5y agoNFTs aside, this is a solid question: "what is ownership"?
- swalsh 5y agoIt's a pretty simple question. It's control. As the owner of an asset, I have control over how I use it. I own a house, I can control what I do to it (within the limits of the outside laws). I own a source repository, I can control what changes are accepted. I own a domain, I can control what it points to. I own a digital soward in a game, I can sell it or I can use it in game. Ownership has limits, in the real world those are regulated by the government. In the digital world they can be regulated by a DAO. But ultimately, there are benefits of ownership, and responsibilities to ownership.
- angio 5y agoSince they're minted from a different address than the original they're not a replica aren't they? They're a different token.
- slap_shot 5y agoI've never bought an NFT - but do people actually look at block addresses to validate things like this? I just read https://networked.substack.com/p/web3-i-have-my-daots https://networked.substack.com/p/web3-i-have-my-daots and there's a cute analogy about buying the Mona Lisa, but only getting a record written in some obscure room saying that you own it, i.e. you never actually take possession of the Mona Lisa. You can tell people you own it, but they have to go the obscure room and verify your ownership. Who would do that, for literally anything, especially a jpg? I forget the name of assets that designed merely to show wealth (e.g. a Hummer), but those work because everybody sees you with that asset, constantly. For NFTs to work in the long term, you would have to expect people to validate authenticity of these things. edit: Veblen is what I was looking for. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veblen_good https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veblen_good
- angio 5y agoYes, it's very common to look at the address of an NFT before buying it. Marketplaces do this for you and provide a "verified" badge for NFTs that match well-known collections. No one would mistake the NFT minted on this website for the originals and they would get flagged as scams pretty quickly.
- bootlooped 5y agoIt's a different token, but I think the only difference is token id and creation time. In all other respects it's identical. It's like having two brand new dollar bills, but they have different serial numbers.
- m3kw9 5y agoThis site is irony for the crypto world. This is not really true replication, is false marketing.
- qaq 5y agoWould be nice to have a list of VCs that are not all about web3
- capnorange 5y agowill minting a replica give me gated access to discord? or showcase my collection on gallery.so? also some of the popular NFTs these days are cc0 licensed, so they do in fact encourage copies! I hope the trend continues. cc0 nft - nouns.wtf
- capnorange 5y agosome of the cc0 licensed NFTs encourage replicas :) nouns.wtf
- vulcan01 5y agoIs there a reason you posted this comment when you have previously posted a similar one[0]? [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29664071 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29664071
- CrankyBear 5y agoSo long as we're talking about the value of NFTs, I have some Beanie Babies and Pogs for sale for cheap! No? No one? Well darn, it's like these artificial scarcity have no real value at all!
- dqpb 5y agoSo much hate for a data structure.
- koboll 5y agoNeat. Is this the collection? https://opensea.io/collection/nftreplicas https://opensea.io/collection/nftreplicas
- globetro 5y agoYep, that's the one!
- shiado 5y agoNFTs are essentially a technical fraud that combines the failures of DRM technologies with the failures of perceptual hash functions. Whereas blockchains provide a novel solution to the double-spending problem through distributed consensus to enforce scarcity and have real applications based on proven technical merit, NFTs tokenize digital media which can be copied through analog means as with any other piece of digital media hence zero scarcity and zero need for tokenization, and the uniqueness of an NFT is impossible due to the limitations of hash functions hence scarcity also fails in this respect. NFTs aren't actually technically possible. Imagine going to an art gallery and seeing hundreds of Mona Lisa prints next to each other that look the same and taking pictures of them with your DSLR good enough that you don't need to buy a print and some guy says they are all unique and special because they are one pixel different, that's NFTs.
- shawnb576 5y agoIf only there was some sort of central authority to work out which NFT was the original one
- mc32 5y agoI wonder… People are seeing NFTs as a kind of payment system of sorts. A modern turn on donations or alms. Can the likes of the Times, National Review, WaPo, WSJ, etc., use NFTs in lieu of a subscription model? You buy the rights to “own” an article or whatever.