5 ms·

But the NFT was actually stolen, she was phished for her seed phrase, and the criminal moved ownership of the nft to their wallet, and then sold that to the per

But the NFT was actually stolen, she was phished for her seed phrase, and the criminal moved ownership of the nft to their wallet, and then sold that to the person who was interviewed on the podcast. It’s no different to a thief stealing your bike then selling it to someone else on a street corner. Just because that person is the current owner and thinks they legitimately purchased it doesn’t make it rightfully theirs. In fact it’s even worse because it’s trivial to identify who the rightful owner is in this case, and if you buy an NFT you can look back at exactly who has owned it previously. Now imagine if this was the deeds to your house on the blockchain.

Dylan16807 4y ago
An NFT exists purely in the realm of thought, and the owner is whoever knows the password. Therefore phishing the seed phrase is not "actually stealing" it within the rules of NFT. And outside the rules of NFT it's just a receipt; it's worthless. It's taking a picture of a picture of a bike, not stealing it.
- DangitBobby 4y ago
  That doesn't make sense. An NFT exists purely in the realm of reality. It has a real (non-fungible!) representation as 1s and 0s and it's etched into "the blockchain". That's just as "real" as the atoms that makeup a bicycle. Arguably, much less valuable, but still real. At the end of the day, the NFT is represented by atoms as well. If you steal my bike, that's theft. If you steal my DVD collection, that's theft. If you steal my steam account, that's theft. If you steal my NFT, that's theft.
  - Dylan16807 4y ago
    The actual bits are public information though. You can't steal those like you can steal atoms.
- albertgoeswoof 4y ago
  That makes no sense- surely the same applies the money in your bank account? Or IP rights? Etc etc.
  - Dylan16807 4y ago
    Neither of those build up a system where immutable transactions are the absolute arbiter of ownership. If they did, then the same would apply.
    - albertgoeswoof 4y ago
      Ok so if I hacked into your computer and stole your private keys, I get to keep all your Bitcoin? Even if you know it was me and have irrefutable evidence? Even if I admit to it? You wouldn’t consider asking the courts to use real force to get it back?
      - Dylan16807 4y ago
        Bitcoins aren't specifically designed the way I described. It's reasonable to invoke normal contracts and courts with bitcoin. This is a situation specific to NFTs and people that are going super hard on smart contracts. And even if I was a true believer in NFTs, yeah I'd probably ask the courts to do that, but doing so would be a betrayal of my beliefs and evidence that the foundation of NFTs is very shaky. The idea that I would do something hypocritical in such a hypothetical situation doesn't change the argument I made in my previous post.
    - criddell 4y ago
      Ownership is a legal concept and the blockchain says nothing about that. It merely records transactions and says nothing about the right to do those things. For example, if the court orders you to turn over your Bitcoin holdings to creditors in a bankruptcy proceeding and instead you transfer them elsewhere, you are probably going to jail. When you transferred them, the coins were in your possession, but you weren't the rightful owner.

Dylan16807 4y ago

An NFT exists purely in the realm of thought, and the owner is whoever knows the password. Therefore phishing the seed phrase is not "actually stealing" it within the rules of NFT. And outside the rules of NFT it's just a receipt; it's worthless. It's taking a picture of a picture of a bike, not stealing it.

DangitBobby 4y ago
That doesn't make sense. An NFT exists purely in the realm of reality. It has a real (non-fungible!) representation as 1s and 0s and it's etched into "the blockchain". That's just as "real" as the atoms that makeup a bicycle. Arguably, much less valuable, but still real. At the end of the day, the NFT is represented by atoms as well. If you steal my bike, that's theft. If you steal my DVD collection, that's theft. If you steal my steam account, that's theft. If you steal my NFT, that's theft.
- Dylan16807 4y ago
  The actual bits are public information though. You can't steal those like you can steal atoms.
albertgoeswoof 4y ago
That makes no sense- surely the same applies the money in your bank account? Or IP rights? Etc etc.
- Dylan16807 4y ago
  Neither of those build up a system where immutable transactions are the absolute arbiter of ownership. If they did, then the same would apply.
  - albertgoeswoof 4y ago
    Ok so if I hacked into your computer and stole your private keys, I get to keep all your Bitcoin? Even if you know it was me and have irrefutable evidence? Even if I admit to it? You wouldn’t consider asking the courts to use real force to get it back?
    - Dylan16807 4y ago
      Bitcoins aren't specifically designed the way I described. It's reasonable to invoke normal contracts and courts with bitcoin. This is a situation specific to NFTs and people that are going super hard on smart contracts. And even if I was a true believer in NFTs, yeah I'd probably ask the courts to do that, but doing so would be a betrayal of my beliefs and evidence that the foundation of NFTs is very shaky. The idea that I would do something hypocritical in such a hypothetical situation doesn't change the argument I made in my previous post.
  - criddell 4y ago
    Ownership is a legal concept and the blockchain says nothing about that. It merely records transactions and says nothing about the right to do those things. For example, if the court orders you to turn over your Bitcoin holdings to creditors in a bankruptcy proceeding and instead you transfer them elsewhere, you are probably going to jail. When you transferred them, the coins were in your possession, but you weren't the rightful owner.