![The place promised in our early days torrent tpb](https://kumkoniak.com/106.jpg)
![the place promised in our early days torrent tpb the place promised in our early days torrent tpb](https://storage.animetosho.org/sframes/000ae67d_1352900.png)
We just have to look off-chain to websites to tell us what these tokens are supposed to be thought of, ignoring the actual blockchain NFT contents and trusting the non-blockchain NFT sources. But the funny part is that discovering these frauds has zero impact on the blockchain because the NFT was already minted and owned and you can’t undo that. We’re already seeing scams where fraudulent NFTs are being produced that claim to be authorized by legal owners of the artwork but are actually just scammers selling NFTs of someone else’s artwork. The blockchain itself can’t even verify that the Louvre sold you the original Mona Lisa NFT, you have to rely on 3rd-party news articles and such to confirm the address was truly associated with the Louvre. You can technically go into the blockchain and confirm that your receipt was the first, but there’s nothing stopping anyone else from making another NFT of the Mona Lisa and selling it. They’re a fancy crypto receipt that says “I paid X amount to someone and we agreed that transaction had a link to this specific JPEG”. That’s the mismatch in NFT discussions: The believers have been convinced that the NFT is the artwork, but everyone else looks at the NFT and sees a link to a JPEG with no actual rights, possession, or ownership of the artwork. In your Mona Lisa example, an NFT would be more like a blockchain based ticket to the Louvre that has a link to a Mona Lisa JPEG. > The verifiable timestamp and record of account associated with a wallet address (public key) that is known to be associated with the artist that produced the work is the same as establishing physical provenance for a unique item.
![the place promised in our early days torrent tpb the place promised in our early days torrent tpb](http://ambersupernal.weebly.com/uploads/1/2/4/0/124009374/601157896.jpg)
Which isn't exactly nothing, but I still have a hard time justifying the prices many of these NFTs trade at. In the absence of these things, however, what you're mostly buying is the digital equivalent of the artist's autograph.
![the place promised in our early days torrent tpb the place promised in our early days torrent tpb](https://voperbeyond.weebly.com/uploads/1/2/5/4/125433863/911847110.jpg)
![the place promised in our early days torrent tpb the place promised in our early days torrent tpb](http://skieybear.weebly.com/uploads/1/2/3/9/123981563/694196893.jpg)
NFTs are pretty general, so one could associate them with licensing or something like a VIP / backstage pass or rewards club membership. I mostly agree regarding the limited practical value of most art NFTs, but then you could say the same about signed & numbered physical prints which are otherwise indistinguishable from their unsigned/unnumbered (but cheaper) equivalents-yet people pay a premium for those too. No matter what the seller does you'll still have your certificate. You just need to save the content yourself so it doesn't disappear if the original host shuts down. Or even without the hosting, as long as the NFT identifies the content in sufficient detail-a hash is best but a plain-English description can also work. That last point ("can set fire to it at any time") is wrong, at least for the many NFTs which use decentralized content-addressed hosting such as IPFS. Now I won't necessarily "be the original owner" of it or whatever but.I mean.I have the same image as the owner and I have $213 where the new "owner" simply has the image.Ĭan someone, if such a person exists, that believes in NFT's as having actual value please explain it? It just seems to me like a few thousand people have realized "Hey people will literally give me $200 just because I told them to" and are doing it at scale.Īnd according to that website, so far the author of those "NFT"s has made 13 million dollars.Is that true? If this person has made 13 million dollars because they drew a few monkeys.I'm pretty sure they will be President of the US one day. I won't have to pay the author $213 for it, I just take the image because I can. There is nothing at all to keep me from screenshotting or otherwise downloading that image. How is "NFT" not a gigantic scam? I'm looking at this image right now. I personally still think it's sort of a scam, but I'm happy for all of the people who used it to get rich.so, along those lines. I used to come onto HN and see crypto-coin news and I'd jump into the comments and ask something along the lines of "But isn't bitcoin and all the other things like it just a giant scam?" and someone who believed in Bitcoin to be a transformative technology would jump in and explain the real potential.
![The place promised in our early days torrent tpb](https://kumkoniak.com/106.jpg)