4 ms·

IPFS only weakly matters here. If the party hosting the NFT image goes away, chances are high they were the only ones 'pinning' (hosting) it. Unless the interne

IPFS only weakly matters here. If the party hosting the NFT image goes away, chances are high they were the only ones 'pinning' (hosting) it. Unless the internet archive / archive team gets in on this, that content, save for the most popular (most viewed) is just as likely to disappear.

stavros 5y ago
Or you can pin the NFT you bought yourself. You don't expect to buy a painting and then leave it wherever and have it always exist.
- have_faith 5y ago
  I think part of the sell of NFT's is precisely that you shouldn't have to manage the asset yourself. It would be quite odd that there would be an expectation that every holder of an NFT had to arrange preservation of it themselves, it seems a bit self defeating from what it's being sold as.
  - stavros 5y ago
    That's not what I know NFTs to be. I know them to be receipts/provenance logs, not art storage.
- meheleventyone 5y ago
  People literally do buy art this way, it's in storage and bought and remains in the same storage. Of course buying it comes with the expectation of paying rent. But in this case of NFTs this is actually a hidden implementation detail rather than something addressed up front.
- betwixthewires 5y ago
  This is an important point that demonstrates two things. First, that if you really care about what you're buying, you'll make sure what it references points to a content hash and not a URL, and you'll pin it yourself. And second, that if you have to store the image yourself that you paid for a pointer to, you've wasted your money. I'm a fan of cryptocurrency, cryptography underlying the internet, even the concept of a one of a kind, non fungible token is interesting and I see how it could be useful. But all this web3 stuff and in particular the hype with which the NFT concept is being marketed to sell useless shit are things I'm not a fan of.

stavros 5y ago

Or you can pin the NFT you bought yourself. You don't expect to buy a painting and then leave it wherever and have it always exist.

have_faith 5y ago
I think part of the sell of NFT's is precisely that you shouldn't have to manage the asset yourself. It would be quite odd that there would be an expectation that every holder of an NFT had to arrange preservation of it themselves, it seems a bit self defeating from what it's being sold as.
- stavros 5y ago
  That's not what I know NFTs to be. I know them to be receipts/provenance logs, not art storage.
meheleventyone 5y ago
People literally do buy art this way, it's in storage and bought and remains in the same storage. Of course buying it comes with the expectation of paying rent. But in this case of NFTs this is actually a hidden implementation detail rather than something addressed up front.
betwixthewires 5y ago
This is an important point that demonstrates two things. First, that if you really care about what you're buying, you'll make sure what it references points to a content hash and not a URL, and you'll pin it yourself. And second, that if you have to store the image yourself that you paid for a pointer to, you've wasted your money. I'm a fan of cryptocurrency, cryptography underlying the internet, even the concept of a one of a kind, non fungible token is interesting and I see how it could be useful. But all this web3 stuff and in particular the hype with which the NFT concept is being marketed to sell useless shit are things I'm not a fan of.