5 ms·
NFTs were about transparency in provenance, using public, tamper-proof records, that replace jurisdictions/authorities with the type of math that enabled cross
by riazrizvi 1y ago
NFTs were about transparency in provenance, using public, tamper-proof records, that replace jurisdictions/authorities with the type of math that enabled cross-border digital payments. Sure there was a spin-off scam industry but there remains a kernel of legitimacy in the concept.
- chii 1y ago> that replace jurisdictions/authorities without any enforcement with sanctioned violence, this is merely symbolic. It's why so much scam happens with the NFT space.
- stevage 1y agoMore like 99% scam with a tiny kernel of legitimacy lost in the margins.
- criddell 1y agoNFTs? They didn’t really solve a problem other than providing something else to gamble with. Nobody bought a low-res pixelated ape image because it stirred something deep in their soul.
- kingkawn 1y agoNot the image, the spreadsheet cell next to the image has their name in it
- melagonster 1y agoPeople pay money to join fan clubs for K-pop. If there were some electricity sheet will record their name forever, I'm sure someone would pay their money.
- noman-land 1y agoNon-fungible tokens are not about payment, they are about cryptographic ownership of uniqueness.
- mikrl 1y ago>they are about cryptographic ownership of uniqueness My web browser has a novel and advanced attack on the cryptosystem built into it I have dubbed the right-click-copy-image attack. I’ve even managed to replicate it on my phone.
- noman-land 1y agoNon-fungible tokens are not about images.
- dreamcompiler 1y agoNon-fungible tokens are about ownership in the same way those $40 certificates that say a star is named for you are about ownership. Nobody cares about your precious little certificate, but if it makes you happy, buy it.
- fluoridation 1y agoNah, man. I work in the space and I was there. NFTs were the second attempt on an earlier idea that had already been discarded as pointless: supply chain management. The problem with NFTs was the same as with supply chains; there's no link between the blockchain and IRL, so the blockchain doesn't really add anything, just makes things more complicated. NFTs were therefore a tool to part fools from their money right from the start, because they couldn't be anything else.
- UltraSane 1y agoNFTs make more sense as digital signatures.
- SchemaLoad 1y agoThey don't even make sense there. Since you can digitally sign things without blockchains or NFTs.
- UltraSane 1y agoThe blockchain acts like timestamp proving the digital data existed prior to when the block with the hash was mined.
- SchemaLoad 1y agoSure, it does do that. But I can't think of many scenarios where proving something was signed at least at a certain date is particularly useful. Usually when you are signing something you have two parties involved so you can just write the date on the document and if you lie the other party will call it out. NFTs seem like a solution to a non existent problem. Or a problem you have to search really really hard to find.
- ted_dunning 1y agoDigital signatures make a lot more sense as digital signatures. And you can counter-sign the time if you need to prove that.