5 ms·

Honest question - why couldn’t someone just creat a new NFT that points to the same picture? I mean, why did they have to copy the picture - they already have t

by MR4D 5y ago

Honest question - why couldn’t someone just creat a new NFT that points to the same picture? I mean, why did they have to copy the picture - they already have the URL to it. This is one of those things I still don’t fully understand.

mmastrac 5y ago
They literally can. One just has a different blockchain provenance than the "original" but they are otherwise identical. The only thing giving NFTs value are people's belief in the value, making these a hilariously ironic fiat system.
- berberous 5y ago
  Fiat money has no intrinsic value but has value because the government, by fiat/decree, says it does. While commodity money has “intrinsic” value because it is useful, that doesn’t mean that much of its value is not due to people’s belief in the value. The value of gold exceeds any true value from its usefulness, but it is value stemming from people’s shared belief in the value. So I don’t think it’s at all accurate to call this a ‘fiat’ system.
  - BobbyJo 5y ago
    Your comment makes me believe it is accurate to call it a fiat system. I didn't quite catch which bucket you were claiming NFTs/Crypto fall into? Crypto/NFTs have no intrinsic value. They actually have intrinsic liabilities in terms of resource usage to move it around and keep it alive. It only has value because the buyers/sellers/miners claim/believe it does, which is fiat no?
    - berberous 5y ago
      My argument is purely a semantics one. The defining aspect of a “fiat” system is that it has value only by decree (“fiat”), from men with guns. Both crypto and gold, conversely, have value primarily because humans say they do (because they have certain other features, such as are scarce). While gold has certain value as jewelry or in industrial uses, that is not why it has value as money; its value far exceeds that of its practical uses and is based on a shared belief that it is valuable. I also disagree that crypto and NFTs have no intrinsic value, but that’s not the point here. Even if you believe they have no intrinsic value, I think jumping to therefore call it a “fiat” system is a semantic mistake that misunderstands the distinctions being fiat and other monetary systems.
      - BobbyJo 5y ago
        Ahhhhh, I that makes sense. I wasn't picking up which lines you were drawing earlier, so thank you. I agree on all fronts in that case. When I said crypto and NFTs had no intrinsic value I was referring to the use case, not Blockchain itself, or at least that's what I actually believe thinking about things after this comment.
- tshaddox 5y ago
  Making it the exact same thing as all collectibles.
BoorishBears 5y ago
What you're missing is that NFTs are centralized. There's only a few marketplaces big enough to make big money on, so those marketplaces will ban your NFT on copyright grounds. Copyright laws and banned seller accounts, sounds very "web3" right?
- cma 5y ago
  All the big "decentralized" games have centralized ban systems etc. as well.
Traster 5y ago
That's quite an interesting question, and I think there's an answer within the world of NFTs and an answer outside of it. Disclaimer: I'm new to this, I could be wrong. Outside of the world of NFTs, you're just submitting a url to be hashed into a token, that's fine you can totally do that, it's technically possible and it'd be fine. Obviously people would know that yours isn't the original because the other is on the block chain too. However, within the world of NFTs they contend that the NFT confers some kind of ownership over the underlying work, so since you don't own the work at the URL you don't have the "right" to mint an NFT of it and the copyright owner ?could? pursue you (I'm not sure if they really could successfully, not a lawyer but this is currently being tested by Tarantino[0]), and (much more likely) you'd be breaking the terms that OpenSea enforce (a centralized authority that determines whether you're allowed to functionally participate in the market) and ban your tokens from being bought or sold through their site. Since OpenSea and a few other exchanges account for almost all the trading volume, their (self-serving) enforcement of this interpretation of NFT ownership means you wouldn't make any money from minting these duplicate NFTs. So what happens in this case is the people copy the NFT, literally mirror the image left to right thereby "transforming" it, and contend that they now have a new, unique, transformed peice of work which is their intellectual property and function as a parody of the original. This means they can then sell them on the market place. But oh no! The original owners of the images (copyright holders) go to OpenSea and go "They're infringing on our rights, take it down" and OpenSea, as the trusted central authority in this decentralized trustless system, delists the rip-off NFTs. [0]https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/digital/tarantino-miramax-pulp-fiction-nft-1235052378/ https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/digital/tarantino...
angio 5y ago
Why would they do that? If you like the picture you can just download it, if you want to access gatekeeped communities having the same picture with a different contract won't work, it will also have a value of 0$ so you won't sell it.
- BobbyJo 5y ago
  Why do people think dogecoin is the future? It's funny. We didn't get in on the ground floor of bitcoin? Well, we will make a new ground floor, with hookers and cocaine. This is a cycle that will repeat until the joke is played out and boring. Then it'll have to wait for a new generation that hasn't played the game yet to come along and revive things. Meanwhile the old people will laugh, and some of the children will laugh back, because, well, look at all the money they are making.

by MR4D 5y ago

mmastrac 5y ago

They literally can. One just has a different blockchain provenance than the "original" but they are otherwise identical. The only thing giving NFTs value are people's belief in the value, making these a hilariously ironic fiat system.

berberous 5y ago
Fiat money has no intrinsic value but has value because the government, by fiat/decree, says it does. While commodity money has “intrinsic” value because it is useful, that doesn’t mean that much of its value is not due to people’s belief in the value. The value of gold exceeds any true value from its usefulness, but it is value stemming from people’s shared belief in the value. So I don’t think it’s at all accurate to call this a ‘fiat’ system.
- BobbyJo 5y ago
  Your comment makes me believe it is accurate to call it a fiat system. I didn't quite catch which bucket you were claiming NFTs/Crypto fall into? Crypto/NFTs have no intrinsic value. They actually have intrinsic liabilities in terms of resource usage to move it around and keep it alive. It only has value because the buyers/sellers/miners claim/believe it does, which is fiat no?
  - berberous 5y ago
    My argument is purely a semantics one. The defining aspect of a “fiat” system is that it has value only by decree (“fiat”), from men with guns. Both crypto and gold, conversely, have value primarily because humans say they do (because they have certain other features, such as are scarce). While gold has certain value as jewelry or in industrial uses, that is not why it has value as money; its value far exceeds that of its practical uses and is based on a shared belief that it is valuable. I also disagree that crypto and NFTs have no intrinsic value, but that’s not the point here. Even if you believe they have no intrinsic value, I think jumping to therefore call it a “fiat” system is a semantic mistake that misunderstands the distinctions being fiat and other monetary systems.
    - BobbyJo 5y ago
      Ahhhhh, I that makes sense. I wasn't picking up which lines you were drawing earlier, so thank you. I agree on all fronts in that case. When I said crypto and NFTs had no intrinsic value I was referring to the use case, not Blockchain itself, or at least that's what I actually believe thinking about things after this comment.
tshaddox 5y ago
Making it the exact same thing as all collectibles.

BoorishBears 5y ago

What you're missing is that NFTs are centralized. There's only a few marketplaces big enough to make big money on, so those marketplaces will ban your NFT on copyright grounds. Copyright laws and banned seller accounts, sounds very "web3" right?

cma 5y ago
All the big "decentralized" games have centralized ban systems etc. as well.

Traster 5y ago

That's quite an interesting question, and I think there's an answer within the world of NFTs and an answer outside of it. Disclaimer: I'm new to this, I could be wrong. Outside of the world of NFTs, you're just submitting a url to be hashed into a token, that's fine you can totally do that, it's technically possible and it'd be fine. Obviously people would know that yours isn't the original because the other is on the block chain too. However, within the world of NFTs they contend that the NFT confers some kind of ownership over the underlying work, so since you don't own the work at the URL you don't have the "right" to mint an NFT of it and the copyright owner ?could? pursue you (I'm not sure if they really could successfully, not a lawyer but this is currently being tested by Tarantino[0]), and (much more likely) you'd be breaking the terms that OpenSea enforce (a centralized authority that determines whether you're allowed to functionally participate in the market) and ban your tokens from being bought or sold through their site. Since OpenSea and a few other exchanges account for almost all the trading volume, their (self-serving) enforcement of this interpretation of NFT ownership means you wouldn't make any money from minting these duplicate NFTs. So what happens in this case is the people copy the NFT, literally mirror the image left to right thereby "transforming" it, and contend that they now have a new, unique, transformed peice of work which is their intellectual property and function as a parody of the original. This means they can then sell them on the market place. But oh no! The original owners of the images (copyright holders) go to OpenSea and go "They're infringing on our rights, take it down" and OpenSea, as the trusted central authority in this decentralized trustless system, delists the rip-off NFTs. [0]https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/digital/tarantino-miramax-pulp-fiction-nft-1235052378/ https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/digital/tarantino...

angio 5y ago

Why would they do that? If you like the picture you can just download it, if you want to access gatekeeped communities having the same picture with a different contract won't work, it will also have a value of 0$ so you won't sell it.

BobbyJo 5y ago
Why do people think dogecoin is the future? It's funny. We didn't get in on the ground floor of bitcoin? Well, we will make a new ground floor, with hookers and cocaine. This is a cycle that will repeat until the joke is played out and boring. Then it'll have to wait for a new generation that hasn't played the game yet to come along and revive things. Meanwhile the old people will laugh, and some of the children will laugh back, because, well, look at all the money they are making.