Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

It's just easy money. That's the whole chimmy changa, no need for all those :marseylongpost:

People pay for uniqueness, NFT's guarantee that (if they outlaw rightclick & save as in theory)

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

People pay for uniqueness, NFT's guarantee that (if they outlaw rightclick & save as in theory)

The original artist can pump out as many copies as they like. It guarantees ownership of a long hexadecimal string on the blockchain. Any further guarantees come from the legal system alone, which has much cheaper ways to navigate ownership of intellectual property.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The original artist can pump out as many copies as they like

Sure, they can sign as many copies as they like, just as a painter could paint as many copies of a painting as they like. each individual coin is still unique. I am not sure most people understand this, but "a bitcoin" is not a single thing. It is a list of signed transactions/amounts from one owner to another, which makes up a subset of the list of all transactions. An NFT is basicially when someone signs some "junk" data next to a transaction that can be interpreted however the recipient likes. You can make an OP_RETURN as it's called, and just put some random 80-byte message on the ledger that does nothing (of course you will still be paying fees).

the IP doesn't matter, what matters is whether or not people will use programs that respect the metadata attached to the coin. That's left completely up to implementations to decide what to do with, if they want to ignore it, they can. If they want to make a fork and sign coins with similar metadata themselves, they can do that.

If the value of the coin depends on some centralized service interpreting the metadata in a certain way, then why not just use a centralized system to manage the coins?

The value of an NFT is like the value of an autograph, except that it can't be forged if you know the signer's keypair is attached to well-accepted public identity. The value of art depends on cultural relevance. The more people complain about NFTs, the more cultural relevance it has, like piss christ. That's why you should just ignore them.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

If the value of the coin depends on some centralized service interpreting the metadata in a certain way, then why not just use a centralized system to manage the coins?

This is the thing that drives me insane. Why tf would you complicate your product when you already have a single source of truth. If you’re not trading these digital assets it’s completely fricking pointless and just shows how much of a transparent grift it is.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Lmao

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Hey, monero can't even facilitate NFTs, scripting, or even OP_RETURNs and that's for a darn good reason. It's literally just useless over-complicated crap designed to cause drama.

P.S. There is literally nothing stopping anyone from publishing a "ISIS beheading NFT" or "child porn NFT" on bitcoin or etherium. Good for dramacoin I guess but it's a waste of useful bandwidth.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

:#marseylaugh:

That's it I'm funging your tokens

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

each individual coin is still unique.

that's what I said. The hash is unique, the image isn't.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Because other than selling their data, you can push to terminal twitheads that, for 70$, their profile picture is TRULY THEIRS.

it's a gimmick these platforms won't lose out much trying.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

:#marseypathetic:

Snapshots:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.