3 ms·

No, you do prove that you own a digital asset. Now whether that asset is blessed by some third party, and whether that blessing is considered valuable, is large

No, you do prove that you own a digital asset. Now whether that asset is blessed by some third party, and whether that blessing is considered valuable, is largely unrelated. I never said that you own an image or anything the NFT references. I said you own a digital asset, which in this case is the ability to trade the NFT. You can certainly have someone sign an NFT, or issue a certificate, and that may be valuable to someone. But whether or not this occurs, if you own a digital asset, then you can easily prove it. That's the novel invention.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
root_axis 5y ago
> Now whether that asset is blessed by some third party, and whether that blessing is considered valuable, is largely unrelated It seems pretty directly related, in fact, it seems to be the only distinguishing factor between one NFT and another, without the blessing of the central authority the NFT is fundamentally interchangeable with any other ublessed NFT... making it quite fungible.
- robcohen 5y ago
  So I think we're talking past each other. For NFTs, there is the minter and the current owner. You can have third parties sign NFTs or validate their provenance, but ultimately the NFT's value is determine by the market (offers from buyers). Typically these buyers will value an NFT due to the rarity of the NFT. An NFT cannot exist without a minter. If this is the authority that you are referencing, then they only have authority at the moment of the minting. Past that point, more NFTs of the same type cannot be created. Even if the exact same parameters were used to create a new set by the same minter, it would be a different set of NFTs. No central authority is needed after the minting.
  - BoorishBears 5y ago
    So you're trying to imply: > Typically these buyers will value an NFT due to the rarity of the NFT This is burying the lede, rarity of the NFT matters once the 3rd party is tying something to it. Think about this for a second, what is an NFT allowing? Allowing you to prove you own the NFT. When do you prove you own the NFT? ... when someone 3rd party that asks to check it. And why do they ask to check it? Because they've added some sort of meaning to it by tying it to a non-NFT asset. If a 3rd party does not assign some value to it... who's going to check you own the NFT? To what end will they check you own the NFT? An NFT with no 3rd party value is essentially a non-fungible cryptocurrency, and what good is a non-fungible currency? > this is the authority that you are referencing You know it's not. You're replying to an article about how the centralized agency that maps NFTs to non-NFT assets held by 3rd parties is now valued at 13 billion dollars.
  - root_axis 5y ago
    Without the provenance of the minter assured, the NFT is worthless. If the central authority states "those NFTs were actually minted by an imposter" they would rapidly trend towards a value of 0 (minus gas fees of course).
    - robcohen 5y ago
      Obviously. It’s just not a 3rd party. It’s the 1st party.
BoorishBears 5y ago
"I said you own a digital asset, which in this case is the ability to trade the NFT." ... you realize you just repeated their statement right? > Now whether that asset is blessed by some third party, and whether that blessing is considered valuable, is largely unrelated. No it is related when people are talking about if it solves an actual problem. And without that blessing you're spending money to own a token with no meaning, so there's no problem being solved. It's literally buying a receipt with no purchases written on it and then claiming "well the receipt is a purchase!" NFTs rely on centralized systems to actually do anything. If you own a Bored Ape and get invited to a party, the people at the party don't have to let you in just because you showed them proof you own some NFT: https://www.theverge.com/22824387/bored-ape-yacht-club-nft-party-new-york https://www.theverge.com/22824387/bored-ape-yacht-club-nft-p... If you use an NFT to show ownership of a video game, the publisher doesn't have to respect your ownership, if they revoke access tied to your NFT token, what difference does it make vs the pre-NFT world where you could have proven ownership with a paper receipt? In any situation an NFT is literally a token. A widget that you can prove you own without relying on a specific 3rd party. A widget that has no value until said specific 3rd party agrees to tie your widget to some asset. But once you rely on the 3rd party to make your widget actually do something, you've essentially recreated a digital copy of your receipt with extra steps and killed all usefulness of the decentralized aspect.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

root_axis 5y ago

> Now whether that asset is blessed by some third party, and whether that blessing is considered valuable, is largely unrelated It seems pretty directly related, in fact, it seems to be the only distinguishing factor between one NFT and another, without the blessing of the central authority the NFT is fundamentally interchangeable with any other ublessed NFT... making it quite fungible.

robcohen 5y ago
So I think we're talking past each other. For NFTs, there is the minter and the current owner. You can have third parties sign NFTs or validate their provenance, but ultimately the NFT's value is determine by the market (offers from buyers). Typically these buyers will value an NFT due to the rarity of the NFT. An NFT cannot exist without a minter. If this is the authority that you are referencing, then they only have authority at the moment of the minting. Past that point, more NFTs of the same type cannot be created. Even if the exact same parameters were used to create a new set by the same minter, it would be a different set of NFTs. No central authority is needed after the minting.
- BoorishBears 5y ago
  So you're trying to imply: > Typically these buyers will value an NFT due to the rarity of the NFT This is burying the lede, rarity of the NFT matters once the 3rd party is tying something to it. Think about this for a second, what is an NFT allowing? Allowing you to prove you own the NFT. When do you prove you own the NFT? ... when someone 3rd party that asks to check it. And why do they ask to check it? Because they've added some sort of meaning to it by tying it to a non-NFT asset. If a 3rd party does not assign some value to it... who's going to check you own the NFT? To what end will they check you own the NFT? An NFT with no 3rd party value is essentially a non-fungible cryptocurrency, and what good is a non-fungible currency? > this is the authority that you are referencing You know it's not. You're replying to an article about how the centralized agency that maps NFTs to non-NFT assets held by 3rd parties is now valued at 13 billion dollars.
- root_axis 5y ago
  Without the provenance of the minter assured, the NFT is worthless. If the central authority states "those NFTs were actually minted by an imposter" they would rapidly trend towards a value of 0 (minus gas fees of course).
  - robcohen 5y ago
    Obviously. It’s just not a 3rd party. It’s the 1st party.

BoorishBears 5y ago

"I said you own a digital asset, which in this case is the ability to trade the NFT." ... you realize you just repeated their statement right? > Now whether that asset is blessed by some third party, and whether that blessing is considered valuable, is largely unrelated. No it is related when people are talking about if it solves an actual problem. And without that blessing you're spending money to own a token with no meaning, so there's no problem being solved. It's literally buying a receipt with no purchases written on it and then claiming "well the receipt is a purchase!" NFTs rely on centralized systems to actually do anything. If you own a Bored Ape and get invited to a party, the people at the party don't have to let you in just because you showed them proof you own some NFT: https://www.theverge.com/22824387/bored-ape-yacht-club-nft-party-new-york https://www.theverge.com/22824387/bored-ape-yacht-club-nft-p... If you use an NFT to show ownership of a video game, the publisher doesn't have to respect your ownership, if they revoke access tied to your NFT token, what difference does it make vs the pre-NFT world where you could have proven ownership with a paper receipt? In any situation an NFT is literally a token. A widget that you can prove you own without relying on a specific 3rd party. A widget that has no value until said specific 3rd party agrees to tie your widget to some asset. But once you rely on the 3rd party to make your widget actually do something, you've essentially recreated a digital copy of your receipt with extra steps and killed all usefulness of the decentralized aspect.