The whole "web3" bs has always just been a shabby scam, and people fell for it
A key feature of NFTs has completely broken / Web3 was supposed to make sure the original artist always got paid. Not so much anymore.
Submitted 1 year ago by 2tone@lemmy.world to technology@lemmy.world
https://www.theverge.com/2023/8/17/23836440/nft-creator-royalty-fees-are-dead-opensea-optional
Comments
JungleGeorge@kbin.social 1 year ago
sab@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Did they though? It might be my filter bubble, but whenever I saw web3 being pushed I saw a small refraction of responses of people who also thought it was a great idea (typical salesbros - so a good idea for others to do, just not for themselves). But the vast majority of people reject it for being a scam.
So how many people fell for it, really?
GentlemanLoser@ttrpg.network 1 year ago
More than 0, which is all the comment said.
trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Did the average person/average internet user fall for it? No.
Did the people who fell for it get sucked into what was basically a cult that sucked the money out of a decent amount of people? Yeah.
The numbers for some of these scam projects were honestly insane.
comic_zalgo_sans@lemmy.world 1 year ago
People are always looking for get rich quick schemes, especially when interest rates were minimal. NFTs was another application of the tech behind cryptocurrency, which was relatively straightforward “buy GPUs and electricity, get money” for a while. It helped that it was useful for speculation, crime, taking advantage of people who wanted easy money, mixed in with the reputation art has for moving money around.
CarlsIII@kbin.social 1 year ago
Even the name “web3” is stupid. Isn’t it supposed to be the next step after “web 2.0?” Shouldn’t it then be “web 3.0?” They couldn’t even include a space been web and 3!
Jaysyn@kbin.social 1 year ago
Fortunately, nothing of actual value was lost. Just fools being parted from their money.
ultratiem@lemmy.ca 1 year ago
I am ok with this
conciselyverbose@kbin.social 1 year ago
A. I don't actually feel bad for anyone because if you're involved in NFTs in any way, you're begging to be scammed. There is no legitimate use for NFTs.
B. This seems like blatant illegal fraud. You can't just advertise "get this cut of all transactions forever" to get people to join, then say "just kidding" once they include their "art" in your shitty scam. They're entitled to their shitty cut of your shitty transaction, and you can't hand wave it away by pointing to fine print when you sold the product very clearly making that claim.
Bjornir@programming.dev 1 year ago
There are uses for NFT, but it is clearly not what they are famous for.
NFT aren’t pictures of monke, they are a way to authenticate something in a decentralised way, so no trust in another entity needed. The picture isn’t the NFT, and that is why you can just right click-copy it.
You can’t however just copy the NFT, the actual token. Having a token that’s verifiably owned by someone is useful for certain things. It’s like a certificate of authenticity, but digital.
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.
sab@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Are there any practical (non-theoretical) uses for NFTs that couldn’t be done otherwise though?
conciselyverbose@kbin.social 1 year ago
NFTs have never once not been very blatant fraud.
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!”
autotldr@lemmings.world [bot] 1 year ago
This is the best summary I could come up with:
One of the big promises of NFTs was that the artist who originally made them could get a cut every time their piece was resold.
Starting March 2024, those fees will essentially be tips — an optional percentage of a sale price that sellers can choose to give the original artist.
The marketplace will continue enforcing the fees on certain existing collections until March 2024, at which point they’ll become optional on all sales.
Critics say it will hurt small artists and undermines creators’ ability to control their relationship with the people who buy their work.
OpenSea CEO Devin Finzer criticized the fees’ “ineffective, unilateral enforcement” and said that creators will find other ways to monetize their work.
“Our role in this ecosystem is to empower innovation beyond a single use case or business model,” he writes in the blog post announcing that OpenSea will no longer support the ecosystem’s primary business model.
I’m a bot and I’m open source!
pruwybn@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year ago
I thought the whole point of NFTs and the blockchain is that it’s decentralized, and you can use “smart contracts” for things like this. How is one company able to decide to change it?
PopularUsername@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Apparently, smart contracts are not contracts at all… they are friendly suggestions. Unsurprisingly a contract needs a mechanism to enforce it, which makes decentralized contracts redundant at best (as you still need institutions outside of the blockchain to monitor and enforce the contracts), and or worse, completely useless if there is no legal way to enforce them.
viking@infosec.pub 1 year ago
As long as I can take a screenshot of any random NFT and integrate a picture into my website, there’s no fucking way those things are worth anything.
2tone@lemmy.world 1 year ago
They’re worth a lot if you’re laundering money
viking@infosec.pub 1 year ago
I’d rather launder money through physical art, at least I can put that on my wall in the interim and don’t have to first find means to convert my illegally acquired cash into a digital currency.
magic_lobster_party@kbin.social 1 year ago
The purchase is legitimate! My left hand really bought the NFT from my right hand!
xavier666@lemm.ee 1 year ago
You think it’s funny to take screenshots of people’s NFTS, huh? Property theft is a joke to you? l’ll have you know that the blockchain doesn’t lie. I own it. Even if you save it, it’s my property. You are mad that you don’t own the art that I own. Delete that screenshot.
Franzia@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 year ago
This is now a recurring feature of tech vaporware. Claiming something that is clearly shit is okay because it does some good, or something that is uselesslt frivolous and speculative will have and important function and use-case in the future.
My condolences to those that have been made fools by this - we all need to keep an eye out for these patterns going forward.
Stinkywinks@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Ik the technology is useful, but selling shit I can screen shot is fucking pointless. If you want to buy shit from the artist, just buy their shit.
HeartyBeast@kbin.social 1 year ago
Obligatory rather funny If NFTs Were Honest | Honest Ads https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sG_v4bb2e4k which sets this out, a year ago
Gnubeutel@feddit.de 1 year ago
I know i’m really late to the party, but this video gave me an idea how blockchains could actually be useful for art. Not to sign a digital image to your name, that’s bullshit. But to link an actual piece of art to you as a certificate of ownership. So in case it gets stolen, you can prove you’re the real owner. This requires first time entries to be verified by certified experts, but after that you’re good to go. You would need to solve a bunch of problems, like what happens when someone dies and the objects are inherited, or what if you buy it, but the owner doesn’t update the chain or makes a mistake, etc. You would probably need a group of mods/experts who can amend the entries. But then you could more easily contact the owner, manage reproduction rights and in general make art theft less attractive, because all art dealers can easily check the current state.
PopularUsername@lemmy.world 1 year ago
This was actually the original idea of non-fungible tokens, but because you need special legislation to tie an object to this digital receipt (there is nothing legally tying one thing to the other), they just skipped over it completely and said the NFT itself was the commodity, which is why they could only do it for digital art with the a web link.
In fact, many NFTs don’t even contain any language about copyright or licensing, they don’t even attempt to pretend that the NFT holder owns the copyright. The owner of the NFT in these cases only owns the NFT, and not the copyright. Of course, you have to transfer the copyright separately from transferring the NFT, which makes this whole thing redundant, but they could have at least tried to pretend they could.
PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks [bot] 1 year ago
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): piped.video/watch?v=sG
piped.video/watch?v=sG_v4bb2e4k
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source, check me out at GitHub.
stormesp@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Except people has been stealing art to do NFTs without paying the artists from day 1?
Excrubulent@slrpnk.net 1 year ago
Yeah, I don’t know why people think this is somehow a new problem.
ChrislyBear@lemmy.world 1 year ago
It’s not the art that you buy, it’s the “original URL” that belongs to you. You buy a treasure map leading to a princess. It’s your princess, that’s what is says on the napkin, but everyone can fuck her.
Eranziel@lemmy.world 1 year ago
It’s broken now? I’d say that’s a bold assumption that it ever worked in the first place.
Nolegjoe@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I thought the royalty payments were enforced by the contract?
Fisk400@feddit.nu 1 year ago
Turns out that the smart contract is a post-it note stapled to the NFT and the marketplace can just ignore what the post-it note says because it’s not legally binding.
What they can’t do is trade with marketplaces that do enforce the contract. Originally it was enforced because if one marketplace stopped enforcing it the marketplace would be cut off from the Echo system but turns out that the 5 big marketplaces just need to agree to drop it and everything is fine.
Excrubulent@slrpnk.net 1 year ago
No see it’s a lot more sophisticated than that. The post-it note is immutable because of maths or something, so what that means is that it’s capital-P Property. And because Property is a magic spell that binds even the old ones, and this spell is unbreakable, I own all these apes.
magic_lobster_party@kbin.social 1 year ago
You’re thinking too rationally now. The thing with NFTs is that it’s not rational at all. Try again.
HeavyDogFeet@lemmy.world 1 year ago
A problem with a blockchain-related grift? I’m utterly shocked!!!
TheKarion@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Does anyone know a wallet that actively unsupports nfts?
magic_lobster_party@kbin.social 1 year ago
At this point I hope no one’s surprised about this.
Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 1 year ago
OpenSea is bad on purpose. Who remembers their insider trading scandal(s)?
kool_newt@lemm.ee 1 year ago
The confidence of people commenting here that have little idea what an NFT even is kinda funny if not sad. You’re on the anti-NFT bandwagon just as much as tech bros are on the pro-NFT bandwagon.
The fact is blockchain is a technology that can hold value, why would people think it’s somehow immune to being used by bad actors? Does the blockchain enable more fraud than the dollar?
betterdeadthanreddit@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Are they trying to say that NFTs are some kind of bullshit scam that should have dissolved into the ether like the crypto bro’s cocaine-fueled manic state that spawned them in the first place? How shocking and unpredictable.
2tone@lemmy.world 1 year ago
What do you mean? You didnt go out and spend all your money on reproducable jpegs? Whats wrong with you?
xavier666@lemm.ee 1 year ago
reproducable jpegs? Excuse me?
I live walking distance from my local police department. If another person uses my NFT without my consent I will report them immediately. This is MY PROPERTY. The transaction has be verified scientifically on the block chain. Anyone who violates my NFT rights will pay the price.
Buddy, you have no idea who you are messing with. I have made a ridiculous amount of money in crypto/NFTs and I have the best lawyers. If you don’t delete those stolen jpegs, you’re going to regret it. When you steal someone’s property you get punished. Watch out.
betterdeadthanreddit@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I mortgaged my house for a computer-generated ape that my son’s cousin’s uncle’s neighbor’s mailman said would one day finance my retirement.