DarkRange55
I am Skynet
- Oct 15, 2023
- 1,836
NFT's are effectively receipts you buy to prove your ownership of a digital asset on the blockchain.
Handmade goods are like non-fungible tokens – the supply is limited enough that the "value" is higher. Other than that, only a true artisan still makes things better than a machine can, although some machines are made to produce shoddy products cheaper.
Things have value because they are recognized as having value by collective social consciousness. NFT's only have value because people are willing to buy them.
www.forbes.com.au
Utility has not existed for these NFT's and given the trajectory they never will. If anything, NFT's served one purpose. For scammers to scam their audiences. Its just sitting accumulating speculative value like crypto.
Do you think NFT's could be used for membership or license plate applications? What uses do you see?
Could? yes. Should? WHY?
Any thoughts/opinions on NFT's or their future?
Vaguely useful, grossly over-hyped. Good for digital watermarking, overkill for tickets, reasonable for land titles.
I do not give much thought to NFTs or blockchain – they currently have too high a hype-to-reality ratio for my taste.
With utility (or at least adding utility? i.e., WVRPS which is the first A generated music NFT project - Claims to guarantee a limit on one particular set of one particular type of item.
The value of that is in the mind of the beholder.
NFT's as a market is pretty dead. It's not just my opinion. Data shows clearly that new NFT's mints keep decreasing every month. Meaning more and more people leave the space everyday. Why? Because as a trading asset, NFT's have lost the charm. No more exit liquidity, the small profits are not worth the hustle. It's biggest high point was at a time when money was free and abundant. Wealthy people started loading into crypto and NFTs as a place to park extra money. When the fed raised rates, the money wasn't free. They sold their crypto and NFTs and haven't been buying any more since.
But if you are a legit artist, who knows how to market yourself, I think there's still a small pie that you can take pieces out of. Data shows about $1 million is spent everyday on new nft mints, in the recent momths. So why not? But are you gonna make massive gains? Probably not.
A cryptopunk zombie just sold for almost $1 mil a few months ago. So certainly famous and grail NFTs with real history and cultural impact are still selling for large sums. There was also The Goose ringer art blocks NFT that sold for $7 mil a few months ago.
I can't trust any big sales since I learned how easy it is to just buy your own at a super high price to set a floor price that is way high.
The entire art world does this. It's basic commodities trading on the public market.
I know someone who trades NFTs every single day and has multimillion dollar art based portfolio (based on today's prices), as well as invests in infrastructure and does lending and borrowing for NFTs. Also sold a lot during the bull and subsequent initial part of the downtrend and moved money to stables.
When you buying assets and tangible properties, you're buying them with the express purpose of their value. Their value comes from actual scarcity. Digital assets, while you can create scarcity to them, they also have to have some applicable use to them. Digital assets can always be minted. New land does not get minted. If you buy a house $30 million house, you're buying it because everything around it is rare, thats a prime piece of property, that is something you own. You can live on that land and it has utility. Same thing if you buy a business or a vehicle. What utility does an NFT have? Not that much. An old proverb is, a fool's parts with his money.
You could prove you own a house - we already have deeds. Imagine living in a world where you could literally get doxed from the blockchain. People know what your address is, what your wallets are, they could look up the deed NFT and prove what your address is. It's a world without privacy.
There is generally a trade-off between ease of transfer and ease of fraud or ease of loss.
I don't necessarily want my house to be easy to transfer – it is not something that I do every day...
I have heard of people losing vast amounts of bitcoin wealth by losing a hard drive containing their key.
Do I lose my house if the computer with the token on it is destroyed in a fire?
What about the skins you buy in Call of Duty? What if you could bring those into Rainbow Six Siege? Well with 3D game engines and assets, just because you make one skin in Modern Warfare, doesn't mean that because of blockchain technology doesn't mean its going to rig effectively on the game engine that powers Rainbow Six Siege. If it was that easy, companies would be doing this. Activision is not okay with you owning your skins in War Zone and then bringing it into War Zone 2. If they can make you buy the exact same skin again, why wouldn't they? Thats the whole point of their company. Expecting companies to give you value to work with each other is laughable. The utility isn't there.
The only use case I ever thought might be interesting for NFTs would be something like software ownership.
Basically, instead of tying everything to an account/ email/whatever it's iust tied to an NFT which would let you sell it and open up a used market for software... Why would any company ever implement or go near that idea after they spent so long trying to destroy the used market to begin with. So basically, the only use case I could think of that would actually be beneficial to consumers will never exist. In addition, companies could just implement that functionality without NFTs by letting you more software licenses between accounts, which they also would never do since they want you to just buy a new license.
Could you imagine Digital Games ownership being a NFT, better yet, as a cross-store option. It would help with digital stores closing and you NOT losing your games, or it you would be banned from a store and not losing access to these games. Not to mention the digital second hand market. But this will never happen. The very idea of course, puts the fear of God into publishers and distributors.
Trouble is, NFTs and crypto in general is really bad at hosting actual software. The storage capacity of an NFT isn't even enough for an actual image file never mind a whole software.
Not to mention, the fact you couldn't ever update the software. You make a point tho that the companies wouldn't ever go to this system even if it did work. If they won't even do permanent software licenses anymore, they're sure as shit not gonna be sanctifying your ownership on the blockchain.
Since NFTs are largely identified by very specific hashes that will change wildly at the slightest alteration there would have to be some way to dynamically update a public database every time a change was made. Or I suppose that the core program would stay the same but every add-on and update would have to be loaded completely separate from the core program with some kind of plugin system but I'd image that would make software devs want to stick their head in a woodchipper. Or worse, companies would just paywall updates. I imagine they would work more as software keys. But yeah, I can't imagine that any software company would actually do that. Especially when they can make more money just by forcing people to just buy it from them directly. I think they could make a lot of money in it. They should do it. As now they could take a percent fee every time something is resold.
Not even corporations that push NFTs understand what NFTs are.
My question: Buying *real* art and the COA is an NFT, Buying a House, the Deed is an NFT, Tickets, Car Titles, etc... anything can be tokenized and made verifiable on the blockchain. Ownership titles as a NFT would be much easier to transfer and the state/mortgage company or other business could have the smart contract built in to automatically charge the applicable taxes/fees when ownership is changed. The Emirates (UAE) are already issuing ownership deeds as NFTs.
It can work as an extra layer for a deed, and add redundancy. But it can't replace a deed, because it can't really authenticate it without a centralized database. The centralized database of a title company is what authenticates a deed, not the NFT. So the NFT is pointless, and would only work to add redundancy. You might as well contact the title company directly and save the extra pointless steps?
The government has a record of who owns property already.
Handmade goods are like non-fungible tokens – the supply is limited enough that the "value" is higher. Other than that, only a true artisan still makes things better than a machine can, although some machines are made to produce shoddy products cheaper.
Things have value because they are recognized as having value by collective social consciousness. NFT's only have value because people are willing to buy them.
95% of NFTs are dead. But why?
95% of NFTs are dead, according to a new study. But what has caused the crash and is it recoverable?
www.forbes.com.au
Utility has not existed for these NFT's and given the trajectory they never will. If anything, NFT's served one purpose. For scammers to scam their audiences. Its just sitting accumulating speculative value like crypto.
Do you think NFT's could be used for membership or license plate applications? What uses do you see?
Could? yes. Should? WHY?
Any thoughts/opinions on NFT's or their future?
Vaguely useful, grossly over-hyped. Good for digital watermarking, overkill for tickets, reasonable for land titles.
I do not give much thought to NFTs or blockchain – they currently have too high a hype-to-reality ratio for my taste.
With utility (or at least adding utility? i.e., WVRPS which is the first A generated music NFT project - Claims to guarantee a limit on one particular set of one particular type of item.
The value of that is in the mind of the beholder.
NFT's as a market is pretty dead. It's not just my opinion. Data shows clearly that new NFT's mints keep decreasing every month. Meaning more and more people leave the space everyday. Why? Because as a trading asset, NFT's have lost the charm. No more exit liquidity, the small profits are not worth the hustle. It's biggest high point was at a time when money was free and abundant. Wealthy people started loading into crypto and NFTs as a place to park extra money. When the fed raised rates, the money wasn't free. They sold their crypto and NFTs and haven't been buying any more since.
But if you are a legit artist, who knows how to market yourself, I think there's still a small pie that you can take pieces out of. Data shows about $1 million is spent everyday on new nft mints, in the recent momths. So why not? But are you gonna make massive gains? Probably not.
A cryptopunk zombie just sold for almost $1 mil a few months ago. So certainly famous and grail NFTs with real history and cultural impact are still selling for large sums. There was also The Goose ringer art blocks NFT that sold for $7 mil a few months ago.
I can't trust any big sales since I learned how easy it is to just buy your own at a super high price to set a floor price that is way high.
The entire art world does this. It's basic commodities trading on the public market.
I know someone who trades NFTs every single day and has multimillion dollar art based portfolio (based on today's prices), as well as invests in infrastructure and does lending and borrowing for NFTs. Also sold a lot during the bull and subsequent initial part of the downtrend and moved money to stables.
When you buying assets and tangible properties, you're buying them with the express purpose of their value. Their value comes from actual scarcity. Digital assets, while you can create scarcity to them, they also have to have some applicable use to them. Digital assets can always be minted. New land does not get minted. If you buy a house $30 million house, you're buying it because everything around it is rare, thats a prime piece of property, that is something you own. You can live on that land and it has utility. Same thing if you buy a business or a vehicle. What utility does an NFT have? Not that much. An old proverb is, a fool's parts with his money.
You could prove you own a house - we already have deeds. Imagine living in a world where you could literally get doxed from the blockchain. People know what your address is, what your wallets are, they could look up the deed NFT and prove what your address is. It's a world without privacy.
There is generally a trade-off between ease of transfer and ease of fraud or ease of loss.
I don't necessarily want my house to be easy to transfer – it is not something that I do every day...
I have heard of people losing vast amounts of bitcoin wealth by losing a hard drive containing their key.
Do I lose my house if the computer with the token on it is destroyed in a fire?
What about the skins you buy in Call of Duty? What if you could bring those into Rainbow Six Siege? Well with 3D game engines and assets, just because you make one skin in Modern Warfare, doesn't mean that because of blockchain technology doesn't mean its going to rig effectively on the game engine that powers Rainbow Six Siege. If it was that easy, companies would be doing this. Activision is not okay with you owning your skins in War Zone and then bringing it into War Zone 2. If they can make you buy the exact same skin again, why wouldn't they? Thats the whole point of their company. Expecting companies to give you value to work with each other is laughable. The utility isn't there.
The only use case I ever thought might be interesting for NFTs would be something like software ownership.
Basically, instead of tying everything to an account/ email/whatever it's iust tied to an NFT which would let you sell it and open up a used market for software... Why would any company ever implement or go near that idea after they spent so long trying to destroy the used market to begin with. So basically, the only use case I could think of that would actually be beneficial to consumers will never exist. In addition, companies could just implement that functionality without NFTs by letting you more software licenses between accounts, which they also would never do since they want you to just buy a new license.
Could you imagine Digital Games ownership being a NFT, better yet, as a cross-store option. It would help with digital stores closing and you NOT losing your games, or it you would be banned from a store and not losing access to these games. Not to mention the digital second hand market. But this will never happen. The very idea of course, puts the fear of God into publishers and distributors.
Trouble is, NFTs and crypto in general is really bad at hosting actual software. The storage capacity of an NFT isn't even enough for an actual image file never mind a whole software.
Not to mention, the fact you couldn't ever update the software. You make a point tho that the companies wouldn't ever go to this system even if it did work. If they won't even do permanent software licenses anymore, they're sure as shit not gonna be sanctifying your ownership on the blockchain.
Since NFTs are largely identified by very specific hashes that will change wildly at the slightest alteration there would have to be some way to dynamically update a public database every time a change was made. Or I suppose that the core program would stay the same but every add-on and update would have to be loaded completely separate from the core program with some kind of plugin system but I'd image that would make software devs want to stick their head in a woodchipper. Or worse, companies would just paywall updates. I imagine they would work more as software keys. But yeah, I can't imagine that any software company would actually do that. Especially when they can make more money just by forcing people to just buy it from them directly. I think they could make a lot of money in it. They should do it. As now they could take a percent fee every time something is resold.
Not even corporations that push NFTs understand what NFTs are.
My question: Buying *real* art and the COA is an NFT, Buying a House, the Deed is an NFT, Tickets, Car Titles, etc... anything can be tokenized and made verifiable on the blockchain. Ownership titles as a NFT would be much easier to transfer and the state/mortgage company or other business could have the smart contract built in to automatically charge the applicable taxes/fees when ownership is changed. The Emirates (UAE) are already issuing ownership deeds as NFTs.
It can work as an extra layer for a deed, and add redundancy. But it can't replace a deed, because it can't really authenticate it without a centralized database. The centralized database of a title company is what authenticates a deed, not the NFT. So the NFT is pointless, and would only work to add redundancy. You might as well contact the title company directly and save the extra pointless steps?
The government has a record of who owns property already.
