One example of using NFTs I like is event tickets. Event tickets are already prone to “just copying” because they’re already basically a PDF. So the fact that you have to protect subjects attached to NFTs from counterfeiting is not an issue in case of event tickets, because you have to do that anyway.
BUT using NFTs for event tickets can solve the problem of scalpers, because they use “smart contracts”. So you can create a smart contract for each ticket that forbids reselling or allows reselling only at original price, or that each resell provides a markup for the original issuer (eg. the artist).
So NFTs don’t solve all of the problems, and nothing really solves all problems. But they can solve some problems, and that’s what we want. I’m not a fan of Blockchain myself, because it has many problems. But I can see it’s potential when the infancy problems are solved.
I don’t really get it. I have 10 tickets and I gave an ad that im selling them at 3x price. You can pay me via paypal and get it, or give me money in person in front of a venue. After that I will transfer you tickets. I just fail to see that additional layer of protection. I’m talking about reselling.
If you block reselling again I fail to see how will that be different than using standard database to collect all the data and check the documents at the entrance?
Correct, all of that can be done with a normal database. And with a normal centralized service you can just tie a ticket to someone’s ID instead of their wallet address.
And in fact, with the wallet address ownership you could just make a new wallet per ticket purchase and then sell the whole wallet via paypal. Circumventing the whole smart contract thing.
Imo the only advantage to NFTs is that the DB can’t ever go down or be altered. But if you trust amazon you could instead just use an append-only hosted database like QLDB.
You are right. BUT as long companies are legally liable for their contracts you can have all of this with regular web2 too. And in case something goes wrong (error in the smart contract for example) you can in realife work sth. out.
So you can create a smart contract for each ticket that forbids reselling or allows reselling only at original price, or that each resell provides a markup for the original issuer (eg. the artist).
Ok. So what happens instead is that the wallet that holds the ticket is sold at marked up prices rather than the ticket itself.
Unless the ticket is also tied to a name at sale time, and you have to show ID at the door (which is common for regular tickets where I live). Then the only way to change the name associated with the ticket is to sell it through the blockchain rather than selling the wallet
People reselling the tickets for a higher price and/or performers not receiving a royalty for resold tickets, is the only thing that making them NFTs would aim to change.
US I assume? Some countries solve this fairly well by slight government regulations… Inefficient append-only DB like block chain is not a solution for political issues…
Canadian. And I don’t think it’s actually a good use-case for NFTs, there are much more efficient ways to handle it, it’s just a more reasonable idea than the NFT ape drawings crypto bros love
The only thing I could come up with would be that every change has to be agreed on by over 50% of all computers in the system. And that everything is tracked, saved and archived. Oh, and everyone can see that you paid $6.90 for something from “mighty midget madman”
Its the exact same answer as ‘what are the advantages of the fediverse over reddit’. Lemmy world is down right now but its not affecting me and no one can effectively DDOS the entire fediverse. Theres no spez to ruin everyones work.
Its about ownership. If banks use centralized databases, they can cheat the data and no one knows.
If you have a decentralized data, no one can cheat. No one can make changes without everyone’s permission.
You need something to create the ledger of transactions. So far in humanity we have used humans with the authority. The problem with authority is that is corruptible, and also self-interested above all else.
A blockchain is neither.
I don’t know of other alternatives besides humans or blockchain for maintaining a database of transactions. What are you suggesting instead?
The thing is, that even if the Blockchain in theory is not corruptible there were several occasions where the old Blockchain was abandoned and a new fork was the official one suddenly. Securing the rich’s money.
So a Blockchain is less secure in my opinion. If the people with the most money go to another one the old one is suddenly nothing worth anymore.
I think of blockchain lile a write-only database that everyone can view. It has its uses, especially when combined with smart contracts. Has anyone made a PL/SQL interface yet?
You are correct, and honestly the idea of an NFT originally pointed to what you described in your comment below this one. It’s just that the shills decided to make it a money laundering racket instead to get the soyboy cucks to try and “go to the moon!”.
I honestly have less problem with the money laundering aspect than I do the NFT Art aspect, that’s how much I hate NFT “Art”. Dudes gotta make money somehow, and if the way they have to get their money back is by ripping off rich retards, then by all means have at it!
The tech behind NFTs is still fascinating and should be used in the future.
Blockchain has more uses than just digital currency, too.
Serious question:
What are the advantages over a centralized database?
One example of using NFTs I like is event tickets. Event tickets are already prone to “just copying” because they’re already basically a PDF. So the fact that you have to protect subjects attached to NFTs from counterfeiting is not an issue in case of event tickets, because you have to do that anyway.
BUT using NFTs for event tickets can solve the problem of scalpers, because they use “smart contracts”. So you can create a smart contract for each ticket that forbids reselling or allows reselling only at original price, or that each resell provides a markup for the original issuer (eg. the artist).
So NFTs don’t solve all of the problems, and nothing really solves all problems. But they can solve some problems, and that’s what we want. I’m not a fan of Blockchain myself, because it has many problems. But I can see it’s potential when the infancy problems are solved.
How is this better than a centralized database? You can just go to the event organizer’s website and check the original price for the ticket.
I don’t really get it. I have 10 tickets and I gave an ad that im selling them at 3x price. You can pay me via paypal and get it, or give me money in person in front of a venue. After that I will transfer you tickets. I just fail to see that additional layer of protection. I’m talking about reselling.
If you block reselling again I fail to see how will that be different than using standard database to collect all the data and check the documents at the entrance?
Correct, all of that can be done with a normal database. And with a normal centralized service you can just tie a ticket to someone’s ID instead of their wallet address.
And in fact, with the wallet address ownership you could just make a new wallet per ticket purchase and then sell the whole wallet via paypal. Circumventing the whole smart contract thing.
Imo the only advantage to NFTs is that the DB can’t ever go down or be altered. But if you trust amazon you could instead just use an append-only hosted database like QLDB.
You are right. BUT as long companies are legally liable for their contracts you can have all of this with regular web2 too. And in case something goes wrong (error in the smart contract for example) you can in realife work sth. out.
Ok. So what happens instead is that the wallet that holds the ticket is sold at marked up prices rather than the ticket itself.
Unless the ticket is also tied to a name at sale time, and you have to show ID at the door (which is common for regular tickets where I live). Then the only way to change the name associated with the ticket is to sell it through the blockchain rather than selling the wallet
If you have to show an ID to use the ticket, what problem is being solved by using the block chain?
People reselling the tickets for a higher price and/or performers not receiving a royalty for resold tickets, is the only thing that making them NFTs would aim to change.
US I assume? Some countries solve this fairly well by slight government regulations… Inefficient append-only DB like block chain is not a solution for political issues…
Canadian. And I don’t think it’s actually a good use-case for NFTs, there are much more efficient ways to handle it, it’s just a more reasonable idea than the NFT ape drawings crypto bros love
Huh, that sounds an awful lot like the current process except now you’ve got to add The Blockchain™ onto it.
People can still resell tickets for more than retail price, just like I can buy a car from my neighbor for $5,000 but only tell the BMV I paid $1.
The only thing I could come up with would be that every change has to be agreed on by over 50% of all computers in the system. And that everything is tracked, saved and archived. Oh, and everyone can see that you paid $6.90 for something from “mighty midget madman”
Ok and what prohibits a non-profit to do the same? An open readable database, maybe even dezentralized?
Why would you want that?
I mean, transparency about income is excellent, but everyone knowing who you’re giving money to? Heck no.
So a centralized database where you can control what to make public is better then.
And I realize only now that you have been sarcastic.
Its the exact same answer as ‘what are the advantages of the fediverse over reddit’. Lemmy world is down right now but its not affecting me and no one can effectively DDOS the entire fediverse. Theres no spez to ruin everyones work.
Its about ownership. If banks use centralized databases, they can cheat the data and no one knows.
If you have a decentralized data, no one can cheat. No one can make changes without everyone’s permission.
Its got strengths and weaknesses.
Ok so decentralization is an advantage. And the trancparency you say.
Those two do not need a Blockchain.
You need something to create the ledger of transactions. So far in humanity we have used humans with the authority. The problem with authority is that is corruptible, and also self-interested above all else.
A blockchain is neither.
I don’t know of other alternatives besides humans or blockchain for maintaining a database of transactions. What are you suggesting instead?
The thing is, that even if the Blockchain in theory is not corruptible there were several occasions where the old Blockchain was abandoned and a new fork was the official one suddenly. Securing the rich’s money.
So a Blockchain is less secure in my opinion. If the people with the most money go to another one the old one is suddenly nothing worth anymore.
Notably bitcoin did fend this off already in the case of bitcoin cash
I think of blockchain lile a write-only database that everyone can view. It has its uses, especially when combined with smart contracts. Has anyone made a PL/SQL interface yet?
Ask any partner at the Big Four accounting firms and they’ll jerk themselves off about how they’re going to “move to the blockchain”
You are correct, and honestly the idea of an NFT originally pointed to what you described in your comment below this one. It’s just that the shills decided to make it a money laundering racket instead to get the soyboy cucks to try and “go to the moon!”.
I honestly have less problem with the money laundering aspect than I do the NFT Art aspect, that’s how much I hate NFT “Art”. Dudes gotta make money somehow, and if the way they have to get their money back is by ripping off rich retards, then by all means have at it!