3 ms·
I sometimes wonder if they get that there's no "THE blockchain". I mean, an NFT would tend to exist on a particular blockchain. If that blockchain forks (e.g.
by _Nat_ 4y ago
I sometimes wonder if they get that there's no "THE blockchain".
I mean, an NFT would tend to exist on a particular blockchain. If that blockchain forks (e.g., [as Bitcoin's done a number of times](https://www.investopedia.com/tech/history-bitcoin-hard-forks/ https://www.investopedia.com/tech/history-bitcoin-hard-forks... )), then it's not unique, but rather exists multiple times -- potentially with different copies being owned by different folks. Plus folks could create duplicate NFT's of the same (by simply minting new ones), presumably on the same blockchain or/and others. And then, if an NFT is reliant on external-resources (like links to a host-server), as I've heard that most are, then presumably those could break and even if someone continues to "own" an NFT on some particular blockchain, the NFT itself would seem decontextualized and essentially meaningless.
Then, durability isn't ensured even on a continuous blockchain, as blockchains can elect to remove stuff (e.g., through forks or filter-protocols). Presumably blockchains would ultimately want to truncate historical stuff; it'd seem strange to assume that an NFT would necessarily be carried through such a process.
Then there's the non-optimality of primitive blockchains. This is, when there're innovations, we'd presumably expect folks to create new blockchains that may displace older ones, retiring prior-NFT's in the process.
Then if we're talking long-term, historic value, then we'd probably consider stuff like advances in cryptography mooting the original signatures, and just generally how ancient blockchains would seem to be of little interest to those in the future. Plus, I'd imagine that advanced AI artists would render the concept of trivial art being in any way non-arbitrary obsolete.
Long rant short, it's just weird to hear non-technical folks seemingly believing that blockchains confer "uniqueness" outside of more limited, subjective contexts.
- kayamon 4y agoSatoshi proved that any blockchain that isn't currently the leader won't be mined and therefore will fall into disuse. Anyone who read the paper understands this, the principle of what's called Bitcoin maximalism. So if you want your money/NFTs/whatever to continue to be secure in future, there is ultimately only going to be one global blockchain, singular, so it's very much correct to use the term "THE blockchain".
- Jensson 4y agoThen why do we currently have many blockchains? Plenty of people preferred making their own new blockchain where they were in control instead of just working on the bitcoin blockchain.
- kayamon 4y agoWe have many blockchains because people are idiots. They will all fail in time. Tic tock next block.
- estomagordo 4y agoIs this prediction depending on people in some point in the future not being idiots?
- _Nat_ 4y agoSarcasm? Or do you believe that there's currently only one Bitcoin blockchain, and that all of the NFT's are on it?
- kayamon 4y agoThere's only one blockchain that'll still be functioning in 20 years.
- _Nat_ 4y agoIf this weren't HackerNews, where sarcasm is heavily discouraged, I'd assume that you were being very sarcastic. But since this is HackerNews, I'm confused. I mean, surely anyone who knows anything about blockchains would be aware that the long-term plans, even among traditionalists, would involve an ecosystem of interacting chains. And then presumably folks with some level of technical understanding realize that even a singular ecosystem's overly naive. I doubt few people actually believe in Bitcoin-maximalism, outside of memetic-humor. ...right? Sorry, I'm still confused about junk like flat-Earthers. I mean, I've known flat-Earthers who were straight-up committed trolls; they were committed to the bit and would actingly-angrily denounce the round-Earth conspiracy, but they most definitely didn't actually believe that Earth was flat. But.. other folks.. it was harder to tell; were they even more committed, or did they actually believe that Earth was flat? Anyway, a lot of blockchain-stuff's similar -- I get that a lot of folks are trolling, but are there really true-believers who're legitimately sincere?
- 411111111111111 4y agoUh, aren't basically all NFTs running on Ethereum? I'm not really well read on the topic, so I could be mistaken...
- burnished 4y agoHow would you simply mint a new copy of an nft? I thought the point was their uniqueness, hence the non fungible part of the name. By copy are you referring to having the same payload/url/whatever?