7 ms·

People do understand. Please stop telling us how hypothetically, possibly, sometime in the future things may one day be somehow better and more amazing than it

by boh 4y ago

People do understand. Please stop telling us how hypothetically, possibly, sometime in the future things may one day be somehow better and more amazing than it is today for some yet to be understood reason. You must not be paying attention to say something like "The blockchain development environment is fundamentally less terrible than the centralised database world" given the perpetual controversy in the developer communities of every major cryptocurrency.

kranke155 4y ago
NFTs work and they allow artists to - make money off digital art in a global permissionless market (didn’t exist before) - easily charge royalties in perpetuity for resale of their art Some aspects of DeFi - the ones that were properly audited and whose function is not a ponzi derivative - work absolutely fine. Compound, AAVE, Uniswap, Curve Finance.
- foepys 4y ago
  > - easily charge royalties in perpetuity for resale of their art Can they really? The art itself is not recorded on any blockchain. Just the link and/or hash can be stored there because of costs. Both can change without noticeably modifying the art. Thus a working legal system is still required and blockchain does not provide any meaningful benefit over a standard contract.
  - kranke155 4y ago
    Those two things don’t cancel each other out. The art being recorded on a blockchain or not doesn’t matter - what you’re selling in an NFT is a signature not the art. An NFT is a decoupling of the art and the signature, because digital art is infinitely reproducible. The NFT introduces scarcity - but only for an authentic signature (which can’t be faked) not the digital art itself. And want you’re saying is not necessarily true - my understanding is that some markets do place the art on IPFS, but I’d have to look into it’s exact working to know for sure. But I believe for the old Hic et Nunc that was the case. In this particular case - it is better than a standard contract because the previous method of authenticating work is hugely expensive for the artist and has immense gatekeeping. Minting an NFT takes 30 seconds. Getting you work into an art gallery takes months if not years of battling and requires other people to make the decision whether they want your art in their sales space or not. In crypto you can just do it yourself and figure out your own personal authentication method (usually twitter).
    - te_chris 4y ago
      Decoupling of the art and the signature??? Do you read what you write before you write it? There’s a reason NFTs are easy and gallery placements are hard: one has value
      - kranke155 4y ago
        people are making millions of dollars from NFTs, but sure. You're the determiner for what has value in the world.
        dale_glass 4y ago
        The NFT market has been briefly popular and since then has cratered. Also there's a huge amount of wash trading, so most of that activity isn't even real.
        kranke155 4y ago
        Throwing the baby with the bath water. The baby is small and there is a lot of water, but the baby is there.
        dale_glass 4y ago
        I'm not sure how this comment answers what I said
        kranke155 4y ago
        There are real artists making real art and selling them on NFT marketplaces.
    - Kbelicius 4y ago
      > In this particular case - it is better than a standard contract because the previous method of authenticating work is hugely expensive for the artist and has immense gatekeeping. Minting an NFT takes 30 seconds. As you said NFT is just a signature so how do the NFTs solve the problems of authenticating art?
- rcthompson 4y ago
  Of all the artists I follow, not a single one has had anything good to say about NFTs. Their only interaction with NFTs has been dozens of scammers fraudulently minting NFTs of all their work, followed by exchanges putting the burden of proof on the artist to show that each individual NFT is fraudulent. Maybe there's some legitimate business happening in the art NFT space, but if so, it's a drop in an ocean of fraud.
  - kranke155 4y ago
    There's huge amounts of legitimate business happening in NFTs. I would find it hard to imagine an argument that Beeple's huge sale was somehow not legitimate. I'm hoping a technical solution appears soon for fraud. NFT fraud is no different from a person on the street doing a high quality print of someone else's artwork, and unlike that situation, a technical solution for NFT fraud is conceivable.
    - zimpenfish 4y ago
      > I would find it hard to imagine an argument that Beeple's huge sale was somehow not legitimate. An argument that Beeple's huge sale was somehow not legitimate: https://amycastor.com/2021/03/14/metakovan-the-mystery-beeple-art-buyer-and-his-nft-defi-scheme/ https://amycastor.com/2021/03/14/metakovan-the-mystery-beepl...
- jjulius 4y ago
  >... easily charge royalties in perpetuity for resale of their art... Hi. Artist here. I have yet to actually see any example of this occurring with a piece of NFT art. Do you have an example of an NFT that is actively collecting royalties for the artist via resale?
  - seibelj 4y ago
    https://opensea.io/collection/nickelodeon-rugrats-heyarnold-eth https://opensea.io/collection/nickelodeon-rugrats-heyarnold-... My company is one of the largest NFT companies. This is one of our projects. Millions of dollars in secondaries on OpenSea and our hosted marketplace at https://Nickelodeon.xyz/ https://Nickelodeon.xyz/ We collect all royalties and remit payment to the rights holders which include all artists and creators with residuals on Rugrats, of which there are many. They get their check quarterly along with all the other payments (movies, tshirts, video games, etc.) This isn’t exactly rocket science
    - polygamous_bat 4y ago
      So, are you saying that you run a centralized third party that is charged with collecting the royalties and passing it on to the artists? Because nowhere in the ERC-721 standard is there a way to differentiate between a "sale" and a "transfer between wallets". So tell me, please, exactly how "blockchain" is bringing "decentralization" to the art field. I am all ears.
      - seibelj 4y ago
        A sale happens in a marketplace. Marketplaces collect royalties and forward them to the address specified. We are indeed a centralized player, just as all NFT creators are centralized entities (i.e. people) but the assets trade on decentralized networks. I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how all of this works and have a sneering, dismissive affect because this is something you don’t understand embraced by people who don’t care what you think.
        4y ago
kranke155 4y ago
Im not sure what you mean by perpetual controversy either. What I mean by “less terrible” is socially, not technically. Centralised datacenter based development leads to digital feudalism, where the owners of the datacenters take control of the “digital land” and build moats around them (often fake, imaginary - see how text messaging has no interoperability anymore when 10 years ago it did) In blokchain / decentralised databases development this is not possible - people can always access the data that’s on chain, and they can extend your code, see it, change it (depending on the license even copy it and just make a slightly different product, a la Uniswap V2 and Sushi Swap). This leads to a real free market for applications, instead of the digital feudalism that naturally results from centralised data centers.
- klez 4y ago
  > people can always access the data that’s on chain Doesn't that have heavy privacy implications? Or is this a solved problem the solution to which doesn't get much publicized?
  - kranke155 4y ago
    That’s a good point I don’t have a rebuttal to. The potential dystopia is that crypto can lead to something like a digital society that’s completely naked to the nation state and everyone knows what everyone else has done, forever, always. Every transaction, movement and digital app usage would be in a transparent public ledger with everyone’s IDs attached to it. It’s not a good scenario and which is why I feel like any idea that CBDCs are a good idea seem delusional.
- ctxc 4y ago
  - Who pays for the low latency high capacity data storage costs? - The ad-model subsidizes almost all costs for the end user. I couldn't even DREAM of storing an arbitrary amount of photos and videos and text spanning years, highly available all the time, ability to search and communicate with anybody etc for free without this. There are huge costs involved with this that the "data moat" subsidizes. Note that I'm not referring to the "morals" of doing this, my question is pragmatic. - Why will say, a Facebook do this with "decentralized data"? - How do they pay their bills, what monetization structure do you envision? - Will people pay for something they have always had for free? It won't be a nominal amount since they have to bear the costs of running the service, there's no subsidization.

by boh 4y ago

kranke155 4y ago

NFTs work and they allow artists to - make money off digital art in a global permissionless market (didn’t exist before) - easily charge royalties in perpetuity for resale of their art Some aspects of DeFi - the ones that were properly audited and whose function is not a ponzi derivative - work absolutely fine. Compound, AAVE, Uniswap, Curve Finance.

foepys 4y ago
> - easily charge royalties in perpetuity for resale of their art Can they really? The art itself is not recorded on any blockchain. Just the link and/or hash can be stored there because of costs. Both can change without noticeably modifying the art. Thus a working legal system is still required and blockchain does not provide any meaningful benefit over a standard contract.
- kranke155 4y ago
  Those two things don’t cancel each other out. The art being recorded on a blockchain or not doesn’t matter - what you’re selling in an NFT is a signature not the art. An NFT is a decoupling of the art and the signature, because digital art is infinitely reproducible. The NFT introduces scarcity - but only for an authentic signature (which can’t be faked) not the digital art itself. And want you’re saying is not necessarily true - my understanding is that some markets do place the art on IPFS, but I’d have to look into it’s exact working to know for sure. But I believe for the old Hic et Nunc that was the case. In this particular case - it is better than a standard contract because the previous method of authenticating work is hugely expensive for the artist and has immense gatekeeping. Minting an NFT takes 30 seconds. Getting you work into an art gallery takes months if not years of battling and requires other people to make the decision whether they want your art in their sales space or not. In crypto you can just do it yourself and figure out your own personal authentication method (usually twitter).
  - te_chris 4y ago
    Decoupling of the art and the signature??? Do you read what you write before you write it? There’s a reason NFTs are easy and gallery placements are hard: one has value
    - kranke155 4y ago
      people are making millions of dollars from NFTs, but sure. You're the determiner for what has value in the world.
      - dale_glass 4y ago
        The NFT market has been briefly popular and since then has cratered. Also there's a huge amount of wash trading, so most of that activity isn't even real.
        kranke155 4y ago
        Throwing the baby with the bath water. The baby is small and there is a lot of water, but the baby is there.
        dale_glass 4y ago
        I'm not sure how this comment answers what I said
        kranke155 4y ago
        There are real artists making real art and selling them on NFT marketplaces.
  - Kbelicius 4y ago
    > In this particular case - it is better than a standard contract because the previous method of authenticating work is hugely expensive for the artist and has immense gatekeeping. Minting an NFT takes 30 seconds. As you said NFT is just a signature so how do the NFTs solve the problems of authenticating art?
rcthompson 4y ago
Of all the artists I follow, not a single one has had anything good to say about NFTs. Their only interaction with NFTs has been dozens of scammers fraudulently minting NFTs of all their work, followed by exchanges putting the burden of proof on the artist to show that each individual NFT is fraudulent. Maybe there's some legitimate business happening in the art NFT space, but if so, it's a drop in an ocean of fraud.
- kranke155 4y ago
  There's huge amounts of legitimate business happening in NFTs. I would find it hard to imagine an argument that Beeple's huge sale was somehow not legitimate. I'm hoping a technical solution appears soon for fraud. NFT fraud is no different from a person on the street doing a high quality print of someone else's artwork, and unlike that situation, a technical solution for NFT fraud is conceivable.
  - zimpenfish 4y ago
    > I would find it hard to imagine an argument that Beeple's huge sale was somehow not legitimate. An argument that Beeple's huge sale was somehow not legitimate: https://amycastor.com/2021/03/14/metakovan-the-mystery-beeple-art-buyer-and-his-nft-defi-scheme/ https://amycastor.com/2021/03/14/metakovan-the-mystery-beepl...
jjulius 4y ago
>... easily charge royalties in perpetuity for resale of their art... Hi. Artist here. I have yet to actually see any example of this occurring with a piece of NFT art. Do you have an example of an NFT that is actively collecting royalties for the artist via resale?
- seibelj 4y ago
  https://opensea.io/collection/nickelodeon-rugrats-heyarnold-eth https://opensea.io/collection/nickelodeon-rugrats-heyarnold-... My company is one of the largest NFT companies. This is one of our projects. Millions of dollars in secondaries on OpenSea and our hosted marketplace at https://Nickelodeon.xyz/ https://Nickelodeon.xyz/ We collect all royalties and remit payment to the rights holders which include all artists and creators with residuals on Rugrats, of which there are many. They get their check quarterly along with all the other payments (movies, tshirts, video games, etc.) This isn’t exactly rocket science
  - polygamous_bat 4y ago
    So, are you saying that you run a centralized third party that is charged with collecting the royalties and passing it on to the artists? Because nowhere in the ERC-721 standard is there a way to differentiate between a "sale" and a "transfer between wallets". So tell me, please, exactly how "blockchain" is bringing "decentralization" to the art field. I am all ears.
    - seibelj 4y ago
      A sale happens in a marketplace. Marketplaces collect royalties and forward them to the address specified. We are indeed a centralized player, just as all NFT creators are centralized entities (i.e. people) but the assets trade on decentralized networks. I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of how all of this works and have a sneering, dismissive affect because this is something you don’t understand embraced by people who don’t care what you think.
      - 4y ago

kranke155 4y ago

Im not sure what you mean by perpetual controversy either. What I mean by “less terrible” is socially, not technically. Centralised datacenter based development leads to digital feudalism, where the owners of the datacenters take control of the “digital land” and build moats around them (often fake, imaginary - see how text messaging has no interoperability anymore when 10 years ago it did) In blokchain / decentralised databases development this is not possible - people can always access the data that’s on chain, and they can extend your code, see it, change it (depending on the license even copy it and just make a slightly different product, a la Uniswap V2 and Sushi Swap). This leads to a real free market for applications, instead of the digital feudalism that naturally results from centralised data centers.

klez 4y ago
> people can always access the data that’s on chain Doesn't that have heavy privacy implications? Or is this a solved problem the solution to which doesn't get much publicized?
- kranke155 4y ago
  That’s a good point I don’t have a rebuttal to. The potential dystopia is that crypto can lead to something like a digital society that’s completely naked to the nation state and everyone knows what everyone else has done, forever, always. Every transaction, movement and digital app usage would be in a transparent public ledger with everyone’s IDs attached to it. It’s not a good scenario and which is why I feel like any idea that CBDCs are a good idea seem delusional.
ctxc 4y ago
- Who pays for the low latency high capacity data storage costs? - The ad-model subsidizes almost all costs for the end user. I couldn't even DREAM of storing an arbitrary amount of photos and videos and text spanning years, highly available all the time, ability to search and communicate with anybody etc for free without this. There are huge costs involved with this that the "data moat" subsidizes. Note that I'm not referring to the "morals" of doing this, my question is pragmatic. - Why will say, a Facebook do this with "decentralized data"? - How do they pay their bills, what monetization structure do you envision? - Will people pay for something they have always had for free? It won't be a nominal amount since they have to bear the costs of running the service, there's no subsidization.