3 ms·

You've got to ask marketing to who though? For example supporting BAYC only nets you 10,000 people at the very most after all. Which is less than 1/5 of the pea

You've got to ask marketing to who though? For example supporting BAYC only nets you 10,000 people at the very most after all. Which is less than 1/5 of the peak concurrent users on Second Life. Also looking at where NFTs are supported Twitter Blue takes an expansive view. As long as you've minted on a platform they support you get the PFP. That means people can easily clone others paid for pictures which has already caused friction. So owners of expensive NFTs don't really get the exclusivity they might feel entitled too. And ultimately even if the holder does get a broad IP license they still need to actively defend it for it to mean anything.

cableshaft 5y ago
> You've got to ask marketing to who though? For example supporting BAYC only nets you 10,000 people at the very most after all. Which is less than 1/5 of the peak concurrent users on Second Life. That's just that one collection, and the BAYC community already spills out into at least one more collection, MAYC, which has 11k owners and people buying in to that for a cheaper price than a BAYC (although I wouldn't be surprised if at least 60% of MAYC holders also hold a BAYC). I'm sure they'll create another collection (or two, or three) in the future as well, adding new users to the community with each one. Regardless, there's no inherent limit to how restricted an NFT collection has to be. Sandbox has 137k items for example (only 19k owners though, but that could go up in time as more items are created and sold to new people). Town Star has the highest number of owners on OpenSea right now with 38k owners. That's almost 80% of your peak concurrent users on Second Life in your first point. Still might not be high enough yet (or the right project), but something else could come along in the next few years that does get enough owners. There's multiple new projects being released every week right now, by then there will almost certainly be hundreds more projects out there, one of which might break into the mainstream (or nearly so). > ...So owners of expensive NFTs don't really get the exclusivity they might feel entitled too. If I'm understanding you correctly, you're referring to the thing with Twitter Blue that people can mint a copy of a picture from a different NFT collection cheaply, and Twitter Blue will still show it as a verified NFT because it doesn't distinguish between official collections or not, just that "it's an NFT that was minted". People can click the PFP and see that it belongs to a fake collection. Or Twitter Blue can be changed so it will display a checkmark for official collections or something over the icon, just like OpenSea does it. There's fake shit all over the internet. Hell I get emails every day of people pretending to be legit services I use, trying to get me to click their fake links and steal my identity, that looks legit except for the link. It's just something you need to be aware of. And if people aren't? Well that sucks, but what can you really do than educate people. I've had to sit through phishing education online classes every year at every corporation I've worked at. > And ultimately even if the holder does get a broad IP license they still need to actively defend it for it to mean anything. But they don't have to actively get permission to make derivative works, which was the main point. And a lot of these being CC0 means they're pretty much effectively public domain anyway, so yeah, there's no copyright to defend. Copyright doesn't stop people from copying your shit. I say this as someone who has a video game I released, where I kept the copyrights, and have over the years discovered several people clone that video game (including the name half the time) and put it up on various app stores. Even C&D's don't stop people sometimes. Hell, it's even been used in A.I. classes at least a couple of times, and included in an Adobe Press book without credit. I actually thought those were kind of cool (although it would have been nice to be credited), but they didn't ask for permission ahead of time, I found out after the fact (for the classes I actually had students hunting me down to ask me for help with their assignments). For another example, just look at the hundreds of Wordle clones and derivatives out there already (many posted to this very site). Copyright is a luxury for corporations and people with lawyers in this day and age.
- meheleventyone 5y ago
  > That's almost 80% of your peak concurrent users on Second Life in your first point. Which is still miniscule if you think of the number of users you need to have that many people online at once (it's a lot more). And Second Life is hardly massively popular. Like you say the effort -> reward is way off. > If I'm understanding you correctly, you're referring to the thing with Twitter Blue that people can mint a copy of a picture from a different NFT collection cheaply, and Twitter Blue will still show it as a verified NFT because it doesn't distinguish between official collections or not, just that "it's an NFT that was minted". People can click the PFP and see that it belongs to a fake collection. Or Twitter Blue can be changed so it will display a checkmark for official collections or something over the icon, just like OpenSea does it. Right so poor UX and centralized authorities again. > But they don't have to actively get permission to make derivative works, which was the main point. And a lot of these being CC0 means they're pretty much effectively public domain anyway, so yeah, there's no copyright to defend. Well not if you own a BAYC image or anything not CC0. And the point about your game is exactly what I mean the effort to actually enforce the license you bought is not trivial and really only available to companies. So why buy the thing in the first place?
  - cableshaft 5y ago
    > Which is still miniscule if you think of the number of users you need to have that many people online at once (it's a lot more). And Second Life is hardly massively popular. Like you say the effort -> reward is way off. Yeah, it's not there yet. I've said as much. It might in the future. It could even be those same communities you've said if they grow their communities and add NFTs to match. You couldn't buy bitcoin at an ATM or buy it from an exchange or to DeFi applications or have smart contract support (which required a different coin, Ethereum, but still that wouldn't have existed without bitcoin) or use it to pay your taxes or as legal tender in some countries or all sorts of shit when it first was created. The financial incentive wasn't there until the community and ecosystem grew to the point that it became desirable to do so. Some of the people buying these things today believe (possibly incorrectly) that it's equivalent to buying a bitcoin before it could do these things, and positioning themselves to benefit once those things exist (I've literally seen a tweet that building for the metaverse is the equivalent of buying a $1 bitcoin). There are builders and coders actively working to try to make that a reality as much as possible. Will it succeed to the extent these NFT buyers are predicting? Most likely not. But will there be a much bigger community and ecosystem in five years than there is today, I'm relatively certain there will be. > Right so poor UX and centralized authorities again. I don't think most people care about decentralization or good UX as you think. Yes that's a selling point a lot of people make about Web 3, but it doesn't seem to matter that much. And I don't think we're ever getting to the point where everything is on the blockchain, because it just requires too much data and resources. So people are going to have to accept some form of centralization. Less centralization than Web 2 perhaps, but some centralization nonetheless. I can see benefits to some decentralization without having to go whole hog and make everything decentralized. > Well not if you own a BAYC image or anything not CC0. What's your point? Yeah some people don't have the copyrights to their NFTs and those people can't legally make new things with them and/or games will need to get permission to include them in their games, just like the rest of the world works for everything right now. I've said from the beginning not every NFT will be integrated into every application (at least not legally). > And the point about your game is exactly what I mean the effort to actually enforce the license you bought is not trivial and really only available to companies. So why buy the thing in the first place? On integration with a game or app they can check that an NFT belongs to a specific collection and not the fake collection. Or not, depending on how they do it. It's just data and code, how do we keep track of real or fake digital items for anything else? I can right-click save a picture of a digital video game cover also, but without a verification code it won't unlock a downloadable copy in my Nintendo Switch.

cableshaft 5y ago

> You've got to ask marketing to who though? For example supporting BAYC only nets you 10,000 people at the very most after all. Which is less than 1/5 of the peak concurrent users on Second Life. That's just that one collection, and the BAYC community already spills out into at least one more collection, MAYC, which has 11k owners and people buying in to that for a cheaper price than a BAYC (although I wouldn't be surprised if at least 60% of MAYC holders also hold a BAYC). I'm sure they'll create another collection (or two, or three) in the future as well, adding new users to the community with each one. Regardless, there's no inherent limit to how restricted an NFT collection has to be. Sandbox has 137k items for example (only 19k owners though, but that could go up in time as more items are created and sold to new people). Town Star has the highest number of owners on OpenSea right now with 38k owners. That's almost 80% of your peak concurrent users on Second Life in your first point. Still might not be high enough yet (or the right project), but something else could come along in the next few years that does get enough owners. There's multiple new projects being released every week right now, by then there will almost certainly be hundreds more projects out there, one of which might break into the mainstream (or nearly so). > ...So owners of expensive NFTs don't really get the exclusivity they might feel entitled too. If I'm understanding you correctly, you're referring to the thing with Twitter Blue that people can mint a copy of a picture from a different NFT collection cheaply, and Twitter Blue will still show it as a verified NFT because it doesn't distinguish between official collections or not, just that "it's an NFT that was minted". People can click the PFP and see that it belongs to a fake collection. Or Twitter Blue can be changed so it will display a checkmark for official collections or something over the icon, just like OpenSea does it. There's fake shit all over the internet. Hell I get emails every day of people pretending to be legit services I use, trying to get me to click their fake links and steal my identity, that looks legit except for the link. It's just something you need to be aware of. And if people aren't? Well that sucks, but what can you really do than educate people. I've had to sit through phishing education online classes every year at every corporation I've worked at. > And ultimately even if the holder does get a broad IP license they still need to actively defend it for it to mean anything. But they don't have to actively get permission to make derivative works, which was the main point. And a lot of these being CC0 means they're pretty much effectively public domain anyway, so yeah, there's no copyright to defend. Copyright doesn't stop people from copying your shit. I say this as someone who has a video game I released, where I kept the copyrights, and have over the years discovered several people clone that video game (including the name half the time) and put it up on various app stores. Even C&D's don't stop people sometimes. Hell, it's even been used in A.I. classes at least a couple of times, and included in an Adobe Press book without credit. I actually thought those were kind of cool (although it would have been nice to be credited), but they didn't ask for permission ahead of time, I found out after the fact (for the classes I actually had students hunting me down to ask me for help with their assignments). For another example, just look at the hundreds of Wordle clones and derivatives out there already (many posted to this very site). Copyright is a luxury for corporations and people with lawyers in this day and age.

meheleventyone 5y ago
> That's almost 80% of your peak concurrent users on Second Life in your first point. Which is still miniscule if you think of the number of users you need to have that many people online at once (it's a lot more). And Second Life is hardly massively popular. Like you say the effort -> reward is way off. > If I'm understanding you correctly, you're referring to the thing with Twitter Blue that people can mint a copy of a picture from a different NFT collection cheaply, and Twitter Blue will still show it as a verified NFT because it doesn't distinguish between official collections or not, just that "it's an NFT that was minted". People can click the PFP and see that it belongs to a fake collection. Or Twitter Blue can be changed so it will display a checkmark for official collections or something over the icon, just like OpenSea does it. Right so poor UX and centralized authorities again. > But they don't have to actively get permission to make derivative works, which was the main point. And a lot of these being CC0 means they're pretty much effectively public domain anyway, so yeah, there's no copyright to defend. Well not if you own a BAYC image or anything not CC0. And the point about your game is exactly what I mean the effort to actually enforce the license you bought is not trivial and really only available to companies. So why buy the thing in the first place?
- cableshaft 5y ago
  > Which is still miniscule if you think of the number of users you need to have that many people online at once (it's a lot more). And Second Life is hardly massively popular. Like you say the effort -> reward is way off. Yeah, it's not there yet. I've said as much. It might in the future. It could even be those same communities you've said if they grow their communities and add NFTs to match. You couldn't buy bitcoin at an ATM or buy it from an exchange or to DeFi applications or have smart contract support (which required a different coin, Ethereum, but still that wouldn't have existed without bitcoin) or use it to pay your taxes or as legal tender in some countries or all sorts of shit when it first was created. The financial incentive wasn't there until the community and ecosystem grew to the point that it became desirable to do so. Some of the people buying these things today believe (possibly incorrectly) that it's equivalent to buying a bitcoin before it could do these things, and positioning themselves to benefit once those things exist (I've literally seen a tweet that building for the metaverse is the equivalent of buying a $1 bitcoin). There are builders and coders actively working to try to make that a reality as much as possible. Will it succeed to the extent these NFT buyers are predicting? Most likely not. But will there be a much bigger community and ecosystem in five years than there is today, I'm relatively certain there will be. > Right so poor UX and centralized authorities again. I don't think most people care about decentralization or good UX as you think. Yes that's a selling point a lot of people make about Web 3, but it doesn't seem to matter that much. And I don't think we're ever getting to the point where everything is on the blockchain, because it just requires too much data and resources. So people are going to have to accept some form of centralization. Less centralization than Web 2 perhaps, but some centralization nonetheless. I can see benefits to some decentralization without having to go whole hog and make everything decentralized. > Well not if you own a BAYC image or anything not CC0. What's your point? Yeah some people don't have the copyrights to their NFTs and those people can't legally make new things with them and/or games will need to get permission to include them in their games, just like the rest of the world works for everything right now. I've said from the beginning not every NFT will be integrated into every application (at least not legally). > And the point about your game is exactly what I mean the effort to actually enforce the license you bought is not trivial and really only available to companies. So why buy the thing in the first place? On integration with a game or app they can check that an NFT belongs to a specific collection and not the fake collection. Or not, depending on how they do it. It's just data and code, how do we keep track of real or fake digital items for anything else? I can right-click save a picture of a digital video game cover also, but without a verification code it won't unlock a downloadable copy in my Nintendo Switch.