Every time I post art to my art instagram account I immediately get offers to buy my art by NFT collectors. It’s all a big scam. They are so lazy at this point that they just all copy and paste the same message and as soon as a post is tagged with #art they throw it in. As a result they prey on new artists.
The thing is that blockchain technology is actually pretty impressive and has potential to change society. Prove-able digital ownership is massive, but what it is currently used for is literally just a scam. Crypto is too volitile to use as a currency, NFTs are AI generated slop (even though the term NFT should be used in a wider context) and blockchain apps and the general environment are in its infancy, being generous. Until more developments it is either a scam, or a lottery.
Agreed on all points. Thanks for speaking reasonably. I too think the technology is INCREDIBLY promising but also acknowledge that it is in its infancy…and will continue to be because of the hivemind.
I think crypto technologies could work toward making a better democracy and other applications of a public ledger.
I think it is currently the best solution to a decentralized, open source way to add incentive to the act of running public infrastucture. It’s actually my hope that perhaps it can be used to incentivize the act of running a lemmy/kbin instance (for instance).
I absolutely despise the moonboi bullshit and am honestly only in it for the technology and its relevance to the realization of a truly borderless, open source, anarcho-syndicalist, cypherpunk way of life. I want to own my property and I want to help use technology to make corruption impossible…and NFT’s, as a technology, are currently a key part to one of the best solutions to many of these issues. They, like crypto, are misunderstood.
To analogize my sentiment: it feels like the hivemind is espousing the benefits of for-profit healthcare that kills 70k people/year in the US while Single Payer stares them straight in the face around the world.
I want to own my property and I want to help use technology to make corruption impossible…and NFT’s, as a technology, are currently a key part to one of the best solutions to many of these issues.
are they, though?
They, like crypto, are misunderstood.
are they, though? one would imagine that if that was true, they would have demonstrated some capacity for something other than speculating and scamming in the 15-odd years crypto has existed. single payer is a bad analogy because there’s actual hard evidence for it being a better system than what we’re currently doing.
On every single thread about crypto on the Internet, someone has to make this claim. At some point, someone somewhere has to actually have a real world example of this technology being used in a useful and novel way that isn’t easier and cheaper with other technology. It isn’t happening, it’s been over 10 years, when can we stop using the “in its infancy” argument?
Digital proof of ownership. I dont think you realise how important that could be. Right now NFTs are AI generated PNGs, but if it has its chance it could be fully functional digital paperwork. It doesnt matter if someone can right click save the deed to a house if we know which ones the “real” one. Only one example. And sure the tech has been around for ~10 years but we both know its REALLY been around for ~4. Maybe its going to stay as one big ball of “potential” forever, which seems more and more likely by the day. In a few years time if nothing comes of blockchain tech except more headlines of idiots losing money ill be ready to sign the whole thing off.
Imagine people having the deed to their house on the blockchain and then a scammer transferring ownership through a scam. Imagine a real estate agent writing into the smart contract of your house purchase that they get to also take a percentage of when you sell the house later even if they’re not otherwise involved in that sale. The possibilities are endless! Of course you can avoid these things if you’re technically-knowledgeable and can understand the underlying code, but most people aren’t. Heck, even technically-inclined people have some degree of blind trust. Do you read the source code of all the open source software you run?
Thinking these would only be blockchain issues is naive or dishonest. People sign weird contracts all the time (have you ever read a EULA that you’ve agreed to? Those things are wild), people are falling for nigerian prince schemes RIGHT NOW in the year of our lord 2023, and modern day identity theft is stealing homes without the blockchain. Having an immutable ledger would help rewind things when they go wrong if anything.
People sign weird contracts but those contracts are written in a human language. What do you think is more likely? The average person being able to read a contract in their native language or the average person being able to read a contract written in whatever the scripting language is provided by some random smart contracts system?
Yes, people do fall for scams all the time, which was my point. With our existing systems, there are at least ways to undo those transactions. With blockchain you’re out of luck, unless they build in mechanisms to reverse transactions, but then you have the problem of figuring out what transactions are allowed to be reversed and who can reverse them and eventually you end up with a trust-based system.
It’s very depressing. Cryptocurrencies especially, the idea is very interesting and it raises multiple points concerning anonimity, circumventing banks, money ownership etc, but for pretty much everyone around me thinks about it simply as: “I buy bitcoin, I wait, I sell bitcoin, I get money haha hehe xd bitcoin!!”. Congratulations, you made absolutely no effect on society, and you received money for it, very commendable.
I’d like to know some situations where a decentralized proof of ownership is desired for digital stuff. While game items are often touted, not a single company actually wants that to be decentralized, they want to control their games’ economies.
Every re-sale of an NFT can have (usually has) a percentage go back to the creator. Companies can still control which items they accept or not, while letting people trade items and make the company money with every transaction… without having to lift a finger, without even having to maintain a trading platform.
Friendly reminder that the contract might have badly written code and/or be written in a way to act as malware. Being forced to follow a contract like that makes no sense. See the numerous exploits possible thanks to that kind of feature
Can you give an example of a company that doesn’t want to control that kind of data? The data of what their players can and can’t do in their game?
are you sure it’s in your best interest as a consumer to be against decentralization and FOR corporatism?
One thing has nothing to do with the other. At no point in my previous comments I argued for centralized corporatism. I merely stated the obvious: game companies, even smaller ones, want to control their data in a centralized manner, because they have literally nothing to gain from decentralizing it. You trying to frame it as me defending corporate centralization makes no sense.
Please, do quote the part where -I- defended corporate centralization, where I said anything that could be interpreted as “corporate centralization of data is good and I like it”. Stating a fact (companies don’t want to decentralize their data) is not the same as defending it.
Also waiting on this
Can you give an example of a company that doesn’t want to control that kind of data?
Most cryptobros are just in it for get rich quick schemes. Decentralization has its place, but virtually every crypto project I’ve seen has been a solution looking for a problem or an outright scam.
Ah, the classic “do your own research” response that I’ve heard countless times from cryptobros. If you can’t even provide an example then you should realize how that speaks volumes. As a matter of fact, I did do my own research and that is how I came to the conclusion that I did. After your lack of any examples, you then went on to list how to spot a scam because like others involved in crypto you’re speaking to the only use that blockchain has found: speculation.
I’ll call you a cryptobro if you’re acting like one and so far you are. Cryptobros are always like “crypto is the wave of the future!” and then when asked for practical use cases they say “do your own research” because they don’t have an example or they don’t even understand the technology beyond how it could make them some money. Unless you have a better example, the only use cases I can think of are speculation and people sending money to avoid bank fees/regulations.
deleted by creator
The NFT and bitcoin space is so riddled with scams that it made the centralists point for them.
Every time I post art to my art instagram account I immediately get offers to buy my art by NFT collectors. It’s all a big scam. They are so lazy at this point that they just all copy and paste the same message and as soon as a post is tagged with #art they throw it in. As a result they prey on new artists.
The thing is that blockchain technology is actually pretty impressive and has potential to change society. Prove-able digital ownership is massive, but what it is currently used for is literally just a scam. Crypto is too volitile to use as a currency, NFTs are AI generated slop (even though the term NFT should be used in a wider context) and blockchain apps and the general environment are in its infancy, being generous. Until more developments it is either a scam, or a lottery.
Agreed on all points. Thanks for speaking reasonably. I too think the technology is INCREDIBLY promising but also acknowledge that it is in its infancy…and will continue to be because of the hivemind.
I think crypto technologies could work toward making a better democracy and other applications of a public ledger. I think it is currently the best solution to a decentralized, open source way to add incentive to the act of running public infrastucture. It’s actually my hope that perhaps it can be used to incentivize the act of running a lemmy/kbin instance (for instance).
I absolutely despise the moonboi bullshit and am honestly only in it for the technology and its relevance to the realization of a truly borderless, open source, anarcho-syndicalist, cypherpunk way of life. I want to own my property and I want to help use technology to make corruption impossible…and NFT’s, as a technology, are currently a key part to one of the best solutions to many of these issues. They, like crypto, are misunderstood.
To analogize my sentiment: it feels like the hivemind is espousing the benefits of for-profit healthcare that kills 70k people/year in the US while Single Payer stares them straight in the face around the world.
Good comment and I’d just like to say, I see what you did there.
deleted by creator
are they, though?
are they, though? one would imagine that if that was true, they would have demonstrated some capacity for something other than speculating and scamming in the 15-odd years crypto has existed. single payer is a bad analogy because there’s actual hard evidence for it being a better system than what we’re currently doing.
deleted by creator
Hasn’t this space been going in some capacity for almost a decade, if not a little more, now?
Yup. This point was also articulated really well by Dan Olson in I think it was the one about “the Metaverse.”
The “legal ownership, contracts, and money” space has been going on for a few thousand years.
deleted by creator
On every single thread about crypto on the Internet, someone has to make this claim. At some point, someone somewhere has to actually have a real world example of this technology being used in a useful and novel way that isn’t easier and cheaper with other technology. It isn’t happening, it’s been over 10 years, when can we stop using the “in its infancy” argument?
Digital proof of ownership. I dont think you realise how important that could be. Right now NFTs are AI generated PNGs, but if it has its chance it could be fully functional digital paperwork. It doesnt matter if someone can right click save the deed to a house if we know which ones the “real” one. Only one example. And sure the tech has been around for ~10 years but we both know its REALLY been around for ~4. Maybe its going to stay as one big ball of “potential” forever, which seems more and more likely by the day. In a few years time if nothing comes of blockchain tech except more headlines of idiots losing money ill be ready to sign the whole thing off.
Imagine people having the deed to their house on the blockchain and then a scammer transferring ownership through a scam. Imagine a real estate agent writing into the smart contract of your house purchase that they get to also take a percentage of when you sell the house later even if they’re not otherwise involved in that sale. The possibilities are endless! Of course you can avoid these things if you’re technically-knowledgeable and can understand the underlying code, but most people aren’t. Heck, even technically-inclined people have some degree of blind trust. Do you read the source code of all the open source software you run?
Thinking these would only be blockchain issues is naive or dishonest. People sign weird contracts all the time (have you ever read a EULA that you’ve agreed to? Those things are wild), people are falling for nigerian prince schemes RIGHT NOW in the year of our lord 2023, and modern day identity theft is stealing homes without the blockchain. Having an immutable ledger would help rewind things when they go wrong if anything.
People sign weird contracts but those contracts are written in a human language. What do you think is more likely? The average person being able to read a contract in their native language or the average person being able to read a contract written in whatever the scripting language is provided by some random smart contracts system?
Yes, people do fall for scams all the time, which was my point. With our existing systems, there are at least ways to undo those transactions. With blockchain you’re out of luck, unless they build in mechanisms to reverse transactions, but then you have the problem of figuring out what transactions are allowed to be reversed and who can reverse them and eventually you end up with a trust-based system.
It’s very depressing. Cryptocurrencies especially, the idea is very interesting and it raises multiple points concerning anonimity, circumventing banks, money ownership etc, but for pretty much everyone around me thinks about it simply as: “I buy bitcoin, I wait, I sell bitcoin, I get money haha hehe xd bitcoin!!”. Congratulations, you made absolutely no effect on society, and you received money for it, very commendable.
I’d like to know some situations where a decentralized proof of ownership is desired for digital stuff. While game items are often touted, not a single company actually wants that to be decentralized, they want to control their games’ economies.
Every re-sale of an NFT can have (usually has) a percentage go back to the creator. Companies can still control which items they accept or not, while letting people trade items and make the company money with every transaction… without having to lift a finger, without even having to maintain a trading platform.
And why is that a case for decentralized proof of ownership of a digital good? As long as it is decentralized, it’s trivial to bypass the residual pay
Yeah… nope.
The whole reason of why Ethereum has any value at all, is that it can be decentralized and still force you to follow the rules of the contract.
Friendly reminder that the contract might have badly written code and/or be written in a way to act as malware. Being forced to follow a contract like that makes no sense. See the numerous exploits possible thanks to that kind of feature
Thanks for the reminder. Now go use that to “trivially bypass the residual pay” like you said.
Can’t charge residuals if i’m just moving nfts across wallets instead of selling.
deleted by creator
Can you give an example of a company that doesn’t want to control that kind of data? The data of what their players can and can’t do in their game?
One thing has nothing to do with the other. At no point in my previous comments I argued for centralized corporatism. I merely stated the obvious: game companies, even smaller ones, want to control their data in a centralized manner, because they have literally nothing to gain from decentralizing it. You trying to frame it as me defending corporate centralization makes no sense.
deleted by creator
Please, do quote the part where -I- defended corporate centralization, where I said anything that could be interpreted as “corporate centralization of data is good and I like it”. Stating a fact (companies don’t want to decentralize their data) is not the same as defending it.
Also waiting on this
What’s ITT stand for?
I’m a total Bob here
In this thread
Most cryptobros are just in it for get rich quick schemes. Decentralization has its place, but virtually every crypto project I’ve seen has been a solution looking for a problem or an outright scam.
deleted by creator
Do you have any examples?
deleted by creator
Ah, the classic “do your own research” response that I’ve heard countless times from cryptobros. If you can’t even provide an example then you should realize how that speaks volumes. As a matter of fact, I did do my own research and that is how I came to the conclusion that I did. After your lack of any examples, you then went on to list how to spot a scam because like others involved in crypto you’re speaking to the only use that blockchain has found: speculation.
deleted by creator
I’ll call you a cryptobro if you’re acting like one and so far you are. Cryptobros are always like “crypto is the wave of the future!” and then when asked for practical use cases they say “do your own research” because they don’t have an example or they don’t even understand the technology beyond how it could make them some money. Unless you have a better example, the only use cases I can think of are speculation and people sending money to avoid bank fees/regulations.
deleted by creator