1175
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] echo64@lemmy.world 58 points 1 year ago

I've never heard of a way that NFTs are actually useful, I've only heard of people saying things we can do today, but with blockchain (and much less efficiently), or as a way to form a speculators market (ie: a con)

[-] hglman@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 year ago

I am a big proponet of blckchains, but speculative nfts have no purpose. Using a blockchain to establish who authored tome work, thats a an actual use.

[-] echo64@lemmy.world 27 points 1 year ago

we already have that feature in our society, without nfts or blockchain. it's worked for hundreds of years

[-] Spiracle@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago

Blockchains are public ledgers of information. It’s neat. It can be a practical way to keep a ledger. Apparently some banks use a blockchain to validate transactions now.

It’s the whole hype about how it would change the world, and the incredible amounts of grifting that poison Blockchain for the public. For far too many people, it’s just another get-rich-quick scheme.

[-] drdabbles@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Block chains do not need to be, and most real applications are not, public. Signing signed work has existed for decades, and almost every single use of it is in a private application.

[-] hglman@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago

Copyright isn't the same, but moreover, it's not that it didn't exist. It's that blockchains remove a class of failures that exist in centralized beauracracy.

[-] echo64@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

and replace those well-known, well-understood, workable failures accounted for by decades/centuries of law, with a brand new class of failures! and hurt the environment as a fun side effect

[-] hglman@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 year ago

Yes, never change, never do new stuff. Also, human bureaucracy uses more energy than proof of stake systems.

[-] echo64@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

An important part of changing and doing new stuff is recognizing how the change impacts the wider space. Just changing and disrupting things for the sake of change is likely ignoring all the details that went into the original system. Often, those details aren't even understood or known at the time, but someone 70 years ago encountered a situation, put a system in place, and it worked ever since.

The past 15 years of big tech disruption of existing systems is a good example of this. We changed so much about so many institutions, and so so much of it turned out to be for the worse.

[-] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago

During the pandemic I had a few friends that endured severe mental health problems due to the fact their GPU's died in the middle of the height of bitcoin bullshit. One couldn't do their job, and neither could socialize through the games we typically loved to play together. They became further isolated during a time of physical isolation.

Ever since then I've been completely against bitcoin. I understand they allegedly made the process less GPU heavy now, but I won't forget that human suffering took place for literally no good reason other than a pyramid scheme preying upon ignorant and stupid people.

So yeah, fuck crypto. People need to find another way to do that shit.

[-] drdabbles@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I'm not a block chain defender in any sense, but you don't have to do the idiotic proof of work crap to make block chains actually usable. You and I can sign something with a key, for instance. And the signing of signed data creates the "chain". No worthless CPU usage, no idiotic "proof of...". You know it's my key, I know it's your key, we know the order of signing. Done.

All the hype nonsense was just grifters trying to steal money. And crypto currency has absolutely no purpose whatsoever.

[-] gloog@kbin.social 24 points 1 year ago

How does it establish who authored a work? The only thing the blockchain can be guaranteed to prove is who first registered it on said chain, which absolutely doesn't necessarily mean the author. Immutability doesn't do anything to solve the garbage in garbage out problem.

It might be useful for artists to register all their work so grabby AI companies can't just use it as training data because it has digital ownership.

[-] natanael@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Digital timestamping existed before blockchains

[-] Hitchie_Rawtin@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

They're pretty good for getting rid of ticket tours but the company doing that is based in the Netherlands and it's slow to spread elsewhere. The protocol's rules mean you can't resell for more than face value and they've sold over 4m tickets that way.

[-] theneverfox@pawb.social 2 points 1 year ago

It's fantastic for things like game characters and cosmetics - it would be awesome if, say, clearing or 100%-ing a game let you use assets from that game in compatible games... like an open protocol for gamertags.

Imagine how much more people would be into events if you got to use the unlocks in other games. It could provide a safe and easy copyright framework for developers using such assets in other games (since only the owner could issue an nft), and encourage compatibility which would drastically increase the ability to reuse character models

There would even be room for monetization later on - if this system grew to any size, artists could sell assets, and could even make money by charging in coin for transfers (like it happens now)

Instead, they over monetized it from the start. Integration never became popular for developers (because why would it? Without good libraries, free default assets, and a copyright framework, it's just a niche feature that might make it in as an afterthought).

What they needed was basically anyone to champion this kind of system in exchange for a payoff down the line. Any publisher could have released some libraries and given away old assets, and they could have become an exchange for assets...a few groups independently did this, but they focused on making money immediately without offering anything for developer adoption

Instead, it started to be used for money laundering, artists and collectors saw dollar signs, and it exploded without anyone building the foundation

[-] echo64@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

All the things you describe either do not need nfts or blockchsin, or are just speculator marketplaces and thus of no actual use to anyone but con artists.

[-] cassetti@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

I imagined it used for trading rare items. Imagine games like the classic Diablo2 where you can fight random characters and collect rare items. If each were an NFT, the ownership could be traded to other gamers for real money. In that aspect I see real value.

But that's not how it's been implemented.

Also for reference, Kodak actually patented a blockchain technology to provide IP rights to photographs taken on special cameras which actually could be extremely beneficial if properly implemented.

this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2023
1175 points (100.0% liked)

Fuck NFTs!

246 readers
2 users here now

Fuck NFTs!

NFTs. Fuck 'em expensive images.

Rules:

Icon from Untitled Collection #202729794 by NFTJ2

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS