3 ms·
The genesis of this discussion is “NFTs are a scam and are retroactively obsoleted by digital signatures”. I basically said “how to avoid double spend in digita
by quickthrower2 5y ago
The genesis of this discussion is “NFTs are a scam and are retroactively obsoleted by digital signatures”. I basically said “how to avoid double spend in digital signatures”, someone replied “but you can clone NFTs!”. I said “yes but that is different”.
You are correct double spend is not a problem with NFT because they piggy back on crypto layers.
However double spend is a problem with just digital signatures that “retroactively obsoleted” NFTs.
Since there are multiple people commenting and steering the thread in different directions I feel this is being filibustered. So ill stop replying. Im exhausted!
- root_axis 5y ago> However double spend is a problem with just digital signatures that “retroactively obsoleted” NFTs. As I already stated, this is not true. Nobody can stop an author from minting two different blockchain NFTs pointing to the same content, there's no difference between that and "double spending" a digital signature NFT. At the end of the day, the only thing the NFT does is prove "the author authorized this verbal statement of ownership", a digitally signed text file does exactly the same thing.
- jboy55 5y agoI think what you are missing is that for NFT adherents, they don't care about the original content, just the NFT. btw, I own an NFT that represents all natural numbers, therefore all possible NFTs.