mattdesl

34 ms·

451.
by mattdesl 5y ago
Probably worth noting: many of the recent “metaverse/web3” (not Metaverse) developments, for example ERC721, are also RFCs and open protocols. Yet unlike typical web RFCs we’ve seen in the last decade, they are generally not only decid
452.
by mattdesl 5y ago
I'm literally commenting on a post that states: > NFTs have absolutely nothing to do with artists or art. Suggesting that such a remark is ignorant—i.e. lacking knowledge—is not ad hominem. The arguments in favour of this usage of t
453.
by mattdesl 5y ago
Not sure how this is gaslighting, arrogant, or disingenuous. You may not agree with this use of the technology, but it does not mean the behaviour is primarily criminal. It can be likened to a traditional art market, where artists attempt t
454.
by mattdesl 5y ago
> NFTs have absolutely nothing to do with artists or art. That's an incredibly ignorant remark. Art has been one of the more prominent uses of NFTs that emerged this year. Despite the relative immaturity of the technology, it has al
455.
by mattdesl 5y ago
Typically artists receive royalties on each re-sale of their tokens (one of the benefits of this space compared to traditional art markets).
456.
by mattdesl 5y ago
The vision already exists. Assets on ArtBlocks for example are hosted on the chain itself, and several sites exist to display, facilitate, organize, etc the tokens. Similar things are happening off-chain (see Hicetnunc) with ipfs. Ownership
457.
by mattdesl 5y ago
NFT isn’t attempting to solve DRM or copyright. Likewise, when an artist sells you a signed print, they are not giving you any copyright over the art - nor should they. Not sure what you are arguing about hosting. IPFS is already working we
458.
by mattdesl 5y ago
There is a ton of useless hype and noise in crypto/blockchain/web3, and this is what the average person is probably exposed to. There are also some new and interesting paradigms however, that enable different systems and possibili
459.
by mattdesl 5y ago
Web3 isn’t about to replace text messaging tech, at least not yet. A more apt example that exists already is a digital art marketplace[1]. The burden of maintenance for the media lies on the users (those publishing & collecting the asse
460.
by mattdesl 5y ago
Anybody can own and share the media file (one of the great things about crypto art is that we can all access and view it), but only one wallet owns the token that links back to the original creator’s signature. To use a print analogue: a pr
461.
by mattdesl 5y ago
I'm not sure how my language is ambiguous. It's very clear to those participating that buying an NFT does not give you ownership over the intellectual property of the artwork, or even ownership over the image itself, hence the man
462.
by mattdesl 5y ago
A token could be boiled down to a secured record in a distributed ledger ("X wallet owns Y token"). Most artists & collectors in the space understand this; but the mainstream media often mischaracterizes it as "buying JPG
463.
by mattdesl 5y ago
It sounds like you have decided what you think the future will look like based on your own narrow experience of technology, and are not open to alternative viewpoints. And to answer your question: museums and institutions have been collecti
464.
by mattdesl 5y ago
The connection at a technical level depends on the art project and token. For example ArtBlocks tokens are tied to a unique pseudorandom hash that is generated at the time of purchase, and that hash is used as input to the JavaScript softwa
465.
by mattdesl 5y ago
> But according to the rest of the world the answer is 'Yes' It depends who you ask, and when you ask it. The understanding of 'digital ownership' may be shifting, as we can see in real-time with the OP thread, where
466.
by mattdesl 5y ago
It comes through a combination of the artist's intent ("I am distributing this artwork in the form of a limited series of tokens") and social consensus ("We recognize that the artefact is an artwork, created by the artis
467.
by mattdesl 5y ago
Some NFTs are distributed as 1/1 (like a single-edition print of a photographic negative), while others are distributed as an edition of 50 or 1000. In the case of platforms like ArtBlocks[1], each edition is itself unique and tied to
468.
by mattdesl 5y ago
Many artists would disagree. The token is conceptually tied to the artwork. This is especially true with digital & software-driven work embedded within the blockchain, such as Deafbeef's tokens[1]. These issues are not new to crypt
469.
by mattdesl 5y ago
With canvas-sketch[1] you hit a keystroke when you see a generation you like, and it runs git commit, captures a print resolution output, and exports it as a file tagged with git hash and optional PRNG seed suffix. This way you can reproduc
470.
by mattdesl 5y ago
I answered in other threads here, e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27770605 Largely this question comes back to decentralization, trust, and a novel paradigm of digital ownership that is enabled by elliptic curve c
471.
by mattdesl 5y ago
I don't know much about PKI but it seems to rely on certification authorities (i.e. single source of trust) and there does not seem to be a clear mechanism for artists to sign, trade, and 'own' them. But, if you were to creat
472.
by mattdesl 5y ago
The distributed ledger adds security, longevity, ownership, and provenance: eg. a token is purchased from an artist, and it can be held and traded (ie. "owned") for as many years as the blockchain continues to survive. Unlike the
473.
by mattdesl 5y ago
I am an artist running a Shopify store (prints), and also have been selling via NFTs on Tezos and Ethereum for the last few months. If NFT continues to be profitable in the long term (even a fraction of what it is currently), there will be
474.
by mattdesl 5y ago
The premise of this space is that the tokens hold value because of who distributed the tokens (the artist), and what they conceptually represent (the artwork), and this value can exist beyond the scope of the website or platform that origin
475.
by mattdesl 5y ago
Similar but not equal. Part of the enthusiasm around these platforms is in the idea of decentralization of art assets (which cannot be achieved with a central database). See the latter part of the post you replied to.
476.
by mattdesl 5y ago
I think you may be viewing this through the lens of high priced NFTs that are in the millions, and are mostly speculative assets for a crypto trader’s portfolio. When I buy a digital art token worth 1 XTZ (around 2-3 USD), it is closer to s
477.
by mattdesl 5y ago
That’s an interesting argument. What defines “value” in your mind? The platform brings value to artists (financial freedom to create more art), value to collectors (digital ownership over a scarce conceptual artwork), and value to the art w
478.
by mattdesl 5y ago
I would largely agree that the use cases are niche at the moment. For example, enabling ownership of a domain name without requiring the trust of a central party. It may be worth noting, Ethereum has only been around for 6 years, and prior
479.
by mattdesl 5y ago
I would point to Hicetnunc as one example[1], which provides real value for many artists on the platform. I’m sure it’s possible to build a similar platform with a central database handling transactions and Stripe payouts, but I’m not sure
480.
by mattdesl 5y ago
The same could be said for many problems in computer science and on the web: these were not problems humans were trying to solve before computers. Blockchains give us new paradigms (such as ownerless & distributed program execution) tha

More ›