Comment on A key feature of NFTs has completely broken / Web3 was supposed to make sure the original artist always got paid. Not so much anymore.

• magic_lobster_party@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Digital certificates has already existed for half a century. There’s nothing new. A certificate doesn’t get any more legitimate just because it’s recorded on a blockchain.

  source

  • bjorney@bjorney.lol ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Yes but NFTs are held in trust by you, not a 3rd party business. If you want to sell your NFT to a friend you can do that without brokering the exchange through a middleman who can/will charge a cut

    source

    • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Don’t blockchain brokers charge a transaction fee?

      source
    • kitonthenet@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      This is still solved by certificates, I can make my own self signed certificate that says it me and sign whatever I want. The only thing that crypto “solves” is over the wire man in the middle attacks, which aren’t even really a problem in the modern internet

      source
    • magic_lobster_party@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      How you transact the ownership of NFTs is a different story. I’m reacting to the claim that NFT is “like a certificate of authenticity, but digital”, which is not unique to NFTs at all.

      This claim is also often misunderstood, since the NFT can only verify the authenticity of the certificate itself, not the art/asset it’s pointing to.

      I can easily create an NFT of Mona Lisa. The blockchain will see no problem with it at all. Heck, I can create 1000 NFTs of Mona Lisa if I want.

      source
    • orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      This sounds completely logical, until you realize it’s for selling JPGs and expecting them to only exist in that one buyer’s hands.

      source
• sab@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Are there any practical (non-theoretical) uses for NFTs that couldn’t be done otherwise though?

  source

  • orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    insert word jumble about unrealistic scenarios made up in my basement while stoned

    source
  • Maturin@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Basically anything that is currently traded on any digital or quasi-digital exchange but relies ultimately on a paper/manual backend.

    source

    • sab@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Can you give a real life example of that being applied?

      source

      • Maturin@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        There is a lot of talk, for example, in the sustainability space where things like emissions allowances, carbon offsets, etc. are traded the old fashioned way where a digital ledger using NFTs would be both instantaneous and transparent/easily auditable.

        But the most obvious example is security exchanges, e.g. stocks, bonds, etc. (which would be a massive threat to the existing financial institutions) because it could allow for instantaneous settlement and fully transparent markets.

        HUGE HOWEVER, not all NFT systems would be equally useful for that kind of thing. What we saw with FTX, for example, was a blockchain exchange for tokenized securities where the blockchain aspects served no real useful purpose - it was a centralized, controlled, opaque use case. The distributed ledger model (which I think casual observers of blockchain assume all blockchain systems are) can correct for those failures. I personally think part of what made the FTX story so big was a combination of moves by major financial market players to get out in front of tokenization of securities by created the existing system again but with a blockchain coat of paint on top that then failed under its own scam at lightning speed which then gave the ammo to a whole “blockchain a scam, NFT an even bigger scam” narrative. They are just software utilities that can be used effectively or not just like any others.

        Whenever I see someone identify a jpeg as an NFT, or put SBF’s face on a news story about it, I think about how successful the astroturfing of these narratives has been.

        source
  • Bjornir@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    www.hongkiat.com/blog/nft-use-cases/

    It is just a tool, it’s what you do with it that gives its worth. Monkey pictures… Well that’s not worth anything

    source
• conciselyverbose@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  NFTs have never once not been very blatant fraud.

  source

  • Bjornir@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    NFT aren’t monkey pictures.

    source

    • conciselyverbose@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I know what they are. They're a "solution" to a problem that doesn't exist and very probably never will exist.

      They have never once been used for anything even neutral. Every single case has been outright malicious.

      source
• JayK117@aussie.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  I reckon the meeting about the tokens went something like “okay, how can we monetise this?”, “Okay hear me out here… monkeys!.. digital monkeys!”

  source