5 ms·

Please list me a few good things that can only be done with NFTs

by dmbche 3y ago

nailer 3y ago
Paying digital artists.
- aflag 3y ago
  People have been doing so on fiverr way before nfts
  - throwaway675309 3y ago
    Agreed. Also Patreon, subscribestar, and on and on and on. NFTs are solving for a non-existent problem.
    - rkho 3y ago
      I agree. We've had physical cash and the postal service for centuries now. Platforms like Patreon, Subscribestar, etc. are also solving nonexistent problems. We can already pay artists by mailing them cash or a check, there's no reason for any of these technologies to exist.
    - nailer 3y ago
      None of those platforms solve the scarcity issue, so none of them result in artists getting paid reasonably.
      - aflag 3y ago
        Not sure it does. The NFT itself is scarce, but not the art. That's different from the real world where the art itself is scarce.
  - anony23 3y ago
    Fiver is a nice way to finance some tacos, meanwhile NFTs have enabled artists to make life changing money.
    - nailer 3y ago
      That this factual statement is moderated down to being nearly transparent says more about Hacker News (which I have been a member of since it was Startup News) than it does the topic.
      - anony23 3y ago
        Indeed. I also like the "no one wants this" comments where people like me comment along the lines of: "I'm an example of someone who wants this." And get moderated down to oblivion.
  - nailer 3y ago
    How do you think the profit on Fiverr compares to say, a Beeple?
  - iamwil 3y ago
    nailer isn't wrong. But he means specifically that the ownership of the digital work (not the work itself) can be transferred between parties via NFTs in exchange for currency. He's not really talking about the currency part of the transaction. NFTs have gained a foothold in the art world. Sotheby's is still auctioning off NFTs, despite the Silicon Valley hype dying down. If it were actually useless, I don't think they'd still hold active auctions today. I don't know who Vera Molnár is, but if you want to bid on her art, you can do so now. https://metaverse.sothebys.com/gen-art-vera-molnar https://metaverse.sothebys.com/gen-art-vera-molnar Most of us don't buy fine art, so I don't think the problem NFTs solve for that use case presents itself to most of us (myself included). But looking into this, my understanding is that before NFTs, the only way you can tell you're getting an authentic painting is a piece of paper that comes with the purchase. And paintings are relatively easy to fake, so all the value is actually with that paper of authenticity, rather than with the work. Instead of a piece of paper that needs to be physically transferred now, it has all the affordances of digital objects--instant transfer, always available, transaction history transparent, and tradeable on existing web3 markets. When the iPad first came out, lots of people thought it would fail. It didn't seem obvious why you'd want a phone that doesn't fit in your hand. But it turns out that it's a very good form factor for very specific industries. Point of Sales systems and navigation for pilots are two industries where it's made strong inroads, rather than just a nice to have for people that want to watch some movies. So I'd say, just watch the fine art world for a few more years to see if NFTs grow or shrink. I personally think NFTs will have more uses than that, but it remains to be seen whether it will fundamentally change large swaths of the economy, or if it'll just be confined to very specific ones, like fine art.
    - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
      > Instead of a piece of paper that needs to be physically transferred now, it has all the affordances of digital objects They're separate markets. NFTs offer no solution to the mainstream fine art market. I've never seen art sold at gallery or auction attached to an NFT for verification where the point wasn't marketing that it was NFT linked. The paper is always verified with third parties. The NFT would have to be as well, to confirm the NFT presented is the valid one for the physical art piece it's purportedly attached to. Instead, there are people who made money in crypto who did not buy fine art, wanted to buy art, and found artistic value in NFTs. They were willing to pay and others willing to sell.
- ClassyJacket 3y ago
  That is absolutely not true, you can pay digital artists with any payment method.
  - mattdesl 3y ago
    Like using PayPal, Patreon or Bandcamp, which take up to 10-15% cut? Why would any artist opt for crypto’s 0-3% fees when we have such attractive payment systems already in place! /s [1] https://twitter.com/mattdesl/status/1671138742172631040?s=20 https://twitter.com/mattdesl/status/1671138742172631040?s=20
    - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
      > like using PayPal, Patreon or Bandcamp, which take up to 10-15% cut Have you bought art? I paid via wire, which was free on my end and less than a basis point for the receiver. If you're paying 10+ percent, you're paying for an auctioneer to juice the price, you're small fry or you're an idiot. The only potent expansion there are the small fry, because many of those feed a whale. Here, again, I'm challenged to understand why payment in exchange for a song download or merchandise offer is inferior to a glorified sticker. There is simply no need to bundle these problems: small payments and artist compensation. Particularly with a solution that's rotten at each on its own. The Million Dollar Homepage [1] looks rational next to NFTs. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Million_Dollar_Homepage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Million_Dollar_Homepage
      - mattdesl 3y ago
        Yes; I’m an artist, selling print and digital work for many years now. I also have bought and acquired art through galleries, auction houses, online platforms, artist websites, and now NFTs. I’m not sure why you have a hard time with the concept of tokenization; but artists typically lose a significant portion of revenue to more traditional systems. A trad gallery’s 30-50% fees, or Bandcamp and Patreon’s 10-15% fees are significant compared to crypto art’s 0-2.5% fees.
        3y ago
- wepple 3y ago
  Ah superb, now the ML models can make real pretend internet money from their side hustle!
- cobertos 3y ago
  I prefer to pay my digital artists directly in whatever platform takes the least amount of money. Or straight up ACH if possible
  - nailer 3y ago
    Modern crypto is a flat rate of 0.0025 USDC. Most other platforms wouldn’t be considered ‘directly’. Even if you did want to donate 3% to visa you’d still be buying an NFT for providence of a digital work.

Please list me a few good things that can only be done with NFTs

by dmbche 3y ago

Please list me a few good things that can only be done with NFTs

nailer 3y ago

Paying digital artists.

aflag 3y ago
People have been doing so on fiverr way before nfts
- throwaway675309 3y ago
  Agreed. Also Patreon, subscribestar, and on and on and on. NFTs are solving for a non-existent problem.
  - rkho 3y ago
    I agree. We've had physical cash and the postal service for centuries now. Platforms like Patreon, Subscribestar, etc. are also solving nonexistent problems. We can already pay artists by mailing them cash or a check, there's no reason for any of these technologies to exist.
  - nailer 3y ago
    None of those platforms solve the scarcity issue, so none of them result in artists getting paid reasonably.
    - aflag 3y ago
      Not sure it does. The NFT itself is scarce, but not the art. That's different from the real world where the art itself is scarce.
- anony23 3y ago
  Fiver is a nice way to finance some tacos, meanwhile NFTs have enabled artists to make life changing money.
  - nailer 3y ago
    That this factual statement is moderated down to being nearly transparent says more about Hacker News (which I have been a member of since it was Startup News) than it does the topic.
    - anony23 3y ago
      Indeed. I also like the "no one wants this" comments where people like me comment along the lines of: "I'm an example of someone who wants this." And get moderated down to oblivion.
- nailer 3y ago
  How do you think the profit on Fiverr compares to say, a Beeple?
- iamwil 3y ago
  nailer isn't wrong. But he means specifically that the ownership of the digital work (not the work itself) can be transferred between parties via NFTs in exchange for currency. He's not really talking about the currency part of the transaction. NFTs have gained a foothold in the art world. Sotheby's is still auctioning off NFTs, despite the Silicon Valley hype dying down. If it were actually useless, I don't think they'd still hold active auctions today. I don't know who Vera Molnár is, but if you want to bid on her art, you can do so now. https://metaverse.sothebys.com/gen-art-vera-molnar https://metaverse.sothebys.com/gen-art-vera-molnar Most of us don't buy fine art, so I don't think the problem NFTs solve for that use case presents itself to most of us (myself included). But looking into this, my understanding is that before NFTs, the only way you can tell you're getting an authentic painting is a piece of paper that comes with the purchase. And paintings are relatively easy to fake, so all the value is actually with that paper of authenticity, rather than with the work. Instead of a piece of paper that needs to be physically transferred now, it has all the affordances of digital objects--instant transfer, always available, transaction history transparent, and tradeable on existing web3 markets. When the iPad first came out, lots of people thought it would fail. It didn't seem obvious why you'd want a phone that doesn't fit in your hand. But it turns out that it's a very good form factor for very specific industries. Point of Sales systems and navigation for pilots are two industries where it's made strong inroads, rather than just a nice to have for people that want to watch some movies. So I'd say, just watch the fine art world for a few more years to see if NFTs grow or shrink. I personally think NFTs will have more uses than that, but it remains to be seen whether it will fundamentally change large swaths of the economy, or if it'll just be confined to very specific ones, like fine art.
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > Instead of a piece of paper that needs to be physically transferred now, it has all the affordances of digital objects They're separate markets. NFTs offer no solution to the mainstream fine art market. I've never seen art sold at gallery or auction attached to an NFT for verification where the point wasn't marketing that it was NFT linked. The paper is always verified with third parties. The NFT would have to be as well, to confirm the NFT presented is the valid one for the physical art piece it's purportedly attached to. Instead, there are people who made money in crypto who did not buy fine art, wanted to buy art, and found artistic value in NFTs. They were willing to pay and others willing to sell.
ClassyJacket 3y ago
That is absolutely not true, you can pay digital artists with any payment method.
- mattdesl 3y ago
  Like using PayPal, Patreon or Bandcamp, which take up to 10-15% cut? Why would any artist opt for crypto’s 0-3% fees when we have such attractive payment systems already in place! /s [1] https://twitter.com/mattdesl/status/1671138742172631040?s=20 https://twitter.com/mattdesl/status/1671138742172631040?s=20
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > like using PayPal, Patreon or Bandcamp, which take up to 10-15% cut Have you bought art? I paid via wire, which was free on my end and less than a basis point for the receiver. If you're paying 10+ percent, you're paying for an auctioneer to juice the price, you're small fry or you're an idiot. The only potent expansion there are the small fry, because many of those feed a whale. Here, again, I'm challenged to understand why payment in exchange for a song download or merchandise offer is inferior to a glorified sticker. There is simply no need to bundle these problems: small payments and artist compensation. Particularly with a solution that's rotten at each on its own. The Million Dollar Homepage [1] looks rational next to NFTs. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Million_Dollar_Homepage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Million_Dollar_Homepage
    - mattdesl 3y ago
      Yes; I’m an artist, selling print and digital work for many years now. I also have bought and acquired art through galleries, auction houses, online platforms, artist websites, and now NFTs. I’m not sure why you have a hard time with the concept of tokenization; but artists typically lose a significant portion of revenue to more traditional systems. A trad gallery’s 30-50% fees, or Bandcamp and Patreon’s 10-15% fees are significant compared to crypto art’s 0-2.5% fees.
      - 3y ago
wepple 3y ago
Ah superb, now the ML models can make real pretend internet money from their side hustle!
cobertos 3y ago
I prefer to pay my digital artists directly in whatever platform takes the least amount of money. Or straight up ACH if possible
- nailer 3y ago
  Modern crypto is a flat rate of 0.0025 USDC. Most other platforms wouldn’t be considered ‘directly’. Even if you did want to donate 3% to visa you’d still be buying an NFT for providence of a digital work.