4 ms·

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

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

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.