|
|
Post by ANuclearError on Jan 23, 2022 6:10:53 GMT -5
Would it be something like owning the master tape of a album, say Metallica's master of puppets. Like anyone else can own a copy of the album either LP, cd, tape digital Which is exactly the same as you have but only you have the original master tape, which is unique? Strictly speaking, you'd only own the address that houses the tape, rather than the tape itself. Plus, as the tape would be digital in this example, it's trivial to copy. A physical object can't be cloned the same way. |
|
|
|
Post by This Player Hating Mothman on Jan 23, 2022 6:43:06 GMT -5
Would it be something like owning the master tape of a album, say Metallica's master of puppets. Like anyone else can own a copy of the album either LP, cd, tape digital Which is exactly the same as you have but only you have the original master tape, which is unique? The master recording is physically unique and genuinely scarce because there exists only one copy. An NFT of Master of Puppets's master tapes would be a digital replica of it that they could theoretically make like 500 of, and sell to 500 people. This would grant those people a little mark in a book that says they own the link to that. It doesn't stop anyone else from following the link which has the songs on them, it doesn't grant you any physical ownership over the songs or any rights. But on some websites somewhere is a note that you are the person who is standing in line beside that copy of the Master of Puppets masters. That's it. So for those who remember a few years ago when Martin Shkreli bought an exclusive Wu Tang Clan song nobody else had heard before but it was on a physical record there existed only one of? That's not this at all. That was called an actual, tangible investment, whereas this is a greedy cash grab trying to create artificial scarcity in the boundless capacity of the digital world. |
|
|
|
Post by dirtyoldman on Jan 23, 2022 8:16:44 GMT -5
Cheers everyone. I feel a little wiser regarding NFTs.
Still sounds f***ing stupid for fools with too much money.
|
|
|
|
Post by BorneAgain on Jan 23, 2022 8:30:19 GMT -5
It's rather telling that the average person (and I include myself in this) initially assumes there's some hidden value/purpose to NFTs because the natural inclination is that no rational person would actually spend money on things that fundamentally worthless and impractical.
But no, they really are that ridiculous.
|
|
|
|
Post by EvenBaldobombHasAJob on Jan 23, 2022 9:06:24 GMT -5
Ian Rotten is leaving money on the table by not selling pizza oven NFTs
|
|
|
|
Post by KAMALARAMBO: BOOMSHAKALAKA!!! on Jan 23, 2022 10:01:36 GMT -5
Would it be something like owning the master tape of a album, say Metallica's master of puppets. Like anyone else can own a copy of the album either LP, cd, tape digital Which is exactly the same as you have but only you have the original master tape, which is unique? The master recording is physically unique and genuinely scarce because there exists only one copy. An NFT of Master of Puppets's master tapes would be a digital replica of it that they could theoretically make like 500 of, and sell to 500 people. This would grant those people a little mark in a book that says they own the link to that. It doesn't stop anyone else from following the link which has the songs on them, it doesn't grant you any physical ownership over the songs or any rights. But on some websites somewhere is a note that you are the person who is standing in line beside that copy of the Master of Puppets masters. That's it. So for those who remember a few years ago when Martin Shkreli bought an exclusive Wu Tang Clan song nobody else had heard before but it was on a physical record there existed only one of? That's not this at all. That was called an actual, tangible investment, whereas this is a greedy cash grab trying to create artificial scarcity in the boundless capacity of the digital world. Great explanation, but I have to deduct some points for putting Pharma Bro in a favorable light. |
|
|
|
Post by This Player Hating Mothman on Jan 23, 2022 10:40:37 GMT -5
The master recording is physically unique and genuinely scarce because there exists only one copy. An NFT of Master of Puppets's master tapes would be a digital replica of it that they could theoretically make like 500 of, and sell to 500 people. This would grant those people a little mark in a book that says they own the link to that. It doesn't stop anyone else from following the link which has the songs on them, it doesn't grant you any physical ownership over the songs or any rights. But on some websites somewhere is a note that you are the person who is standing in line beside that copy of the Master of Puppets masters. That's it. So for those who remember a few years ago when Martin Shkreli bought an exclusive Wu Tang Clan song nobody else had heard before but it was on a physical record there existed only one of? That's not this at all. That was called an actual, tangible investment, whereas this is a greedy cash grab trying to create artificial scarcity in the boundless capacity of the digital world. Great explanation, but I have to deduct some points for putting Pharma Bro in a favorable light. Oh I'm not putting him in a good light at all, he was trash. I'm just heading off a similar sort of something that occured in music recently to contrast the difference between NFTs and actual special collectibles, because music NFTs are a thing and they sure as hell aren't that. |
|
|
|
Post by The Dark Order Inferno on Jan 23, 2022 16:20:17 GMT -5
This whole thing is built on a cycle of scams, negligent press coverage and FOMO. People in the crypto space invent a new grift and start tradinbg thousands of dollars between accounts they own, trading something worthless like a link to a procedurally generated monkey, doing little nto cover their tracks. People bring it to the attention of people in the press and it gets covered at face value, without consulting people who know the crypto space and could tell them in 5 seconds why they shouldn't believe the numbers bandied around, nevermind any kind of investigation on their own. People read these stories as they're covered in mainstream outlets and throw real money into the space, believing that they're getting in on the ground floor of the next bitcoin when in reality they're left holding a worthless URL to one of tens of thousands ugly monkey drawings.
|
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on Jan 23, 2022 16:34:50 GMT -5
Cheers everyone. I feel a little wiser regarding NFTs. Still sounds f***ing stupid for fools with too much money. They are... that's pretty much every sensible persons response to finding out what an NFT is... as I said on the other page... they are pump and dump, and money laundering schemes ( a lot of NFT's are being sold to the same person for inflated prices... either to boost the cost of the nft or move a ton of money through the blockchain) and people not in that scheme either never learned anything from things like the speculator craze of the 90s with beanie babies and comics (and even then you literally have something) and are likely trying to cash in on the Greater fool theory. |
|
|
|
Post by One-Armed Drummer of Defrebel on Jan 23, 2022 16:35:39 GMT -5
NFTeez nuts
|
|
|
|
Post by doinkmark on Jan 25, 2022 2:12:52 GMT -5
Question for those who know what they're talking about with these NFTs. I've seen a few Hollywood movies try to sell as NFTs. If I were to buy a movie NFT, a wrestling show NFT, etc, because of how NFTs are setup, is the only way to theoretically make money by re-selling it to one person for more than I paid for it? I always wondered if I could sell the same thing to multiple people at a lower rate. Like virtual movie tickets to a digital movie.
|
|
Xxcjb01xX [PIECE OF: SH-]
FANatic
Writer, Lover of all things Wrestling. Analytical, Critical, Lovable (hopefully). Lets all have fun!
Posts: 235,049
|
Post by Xxcjb01xX [PIECE OF: SH-] on Jan 25, 2022 2:26:55 GMT -5
Cheers everyone. I feel a little wiser regarding NFTs. Still sounds f***ing stupid for fools with too much money. Which is why you see a bunch of NBA and NFL players with dumb Monkey profile pics on Twitter currently. |
|
Bad Moon
Unicron
for reasons known only to the goblins that live in my brain
Posts: 3,091 
|
Post by Bad Moon on Jan 25, 2022 3:04:56 GMT -5
Question for those who know what they're talking about with these NFTs. I've seen a few Hollywood movies try to sell as NFTs. If I were to buy a movie NFT, a wrestling show NFT, etc, because of how NFTs are setup, is the only way to theoretically make money by re-selling it to one person for more than I paid for it? I always wondered if I could sell the same thing to multiple people at a lower rate. Like virtual movie tickets to a digital movie. You technically can, but it involves cheating the system. I'm not a software guy so all of this is my understanding based on second-hand information:
If you set up two or more different transactions at exactly the same time, there's a chance that the part of the blockchain will confirm your NFT moving to one buyer's account before it confirms it leaving your account. And since there's no central regulation on the blockchain checking to see if the numbers add up, different parts of the blockchain will "fork" into contradicting states of reality where you'll have sold your NFT to one buyer, or another, or not at all. Like duplicating items in an online game only because of how the technology works there can be no rollback enforced and no admin can just log in and correct this.
The good news is, BECAUSE there is no centralized system, no oversight on anyone's accounts other than the blockchain and no bills of sale, all of this is perfectly legal.
|
|
|
|
Post by dirtyoldman on Jan 25, 2022 4:50:38 GMT -5
I see John Lennon's son is selling Beatles memobila as NFTs but keeping the physical items.
Although I do believe its for charity so can't knock him.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Dark Order Inferno on Jan 25, 2022 6:27:41 GMT -5
I see John Lennon's son is selling Beatles memobila as NFTs but keeping the physical items. Although I do believe its for charity so can't knock him. He's boosting something environmentally horrible for his environmental charity. It's like pouring brake fluid down a drain because the makers donate to a clean rivers fund. |
|
|
|
Post by dirtyoldman on Jan 25, 2022 8:41:37 GMT -5
Oh yes, there's something about creating the NfTs that's energy consuming isn't there?
|
|
|
|
Post by Super Nintenjoe KBD on Jan 25, 2022 9:09:30 GMT -5
I listened to a podcast on NFTs in football (soccer) last year and was quite drunk at the time and didn't really understand it, so this thread has been enlightening! And glad literally everybody here is on the same page regarding them, confirming my suspicions and cathartic to read. The fact that Steph was one of the first people in wrestling to jump on board is hilariously apt.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Dark Order Inferno on Jan 25, 2022 9:11:45 GMT -5
Oh yes, there's something about creating the NfTs that's energy consuming isn't there? It's massive. Each transaction is incredibly expensive and energy inefficient, and that's without factoring in the energy used to keep the system going, mining coins and whatever, and an NFT will keep on burning more energy each time it's traded. www.wired.com/story/nfts-hot-effect-earth-climate/The whole thing is like dropping a new layer of coal onto an already burning coal mine so you can loot the nearby towns while people flee the smoke. You then turn around to trick aspiring property speculators into buying the houses, telling them a fire that will burn for decades will probably go out soon. 'Lightning network is right around the corner.' 'Of course we're going to move to s less energy consuming system, we'll use Etherium2 when that happens!' |
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on Jan 25, 2022 15:05:21 GMT -5
Oh yes, there's something about creating the NfTs that's energy consuming isn't there? It's massive. Each transaction is incredibly expensive and energy inefficient, and that's without factoring in the energy used to keep the system going, mining coins and whatever, and an NFT will keep on burning more energy each time it's traded. www.wired.com/story/nfts-hot-effect-earth-climate/The whole thing is like dropping a new layer of coal onto an already burning coal mine so you can loot the nearby towns while people flee the smoke. You then turn around to trick aspiring property speculators into buying the houses, telling them a fire that will burn for decades will probably go out soon. 'Lightning network is right around the corner.' 'Of course we're going to move to s less energy consuming system, we'll use Etherium2 when that happens!' Yeah, it takes something like the average home users energy usage for an entire year or something to mine one. |
|
Dub H
Crow T. Robot
Captain Pixel: the Game Master
I ❤ Aniki
Posts: 47,833
Member is Online
|
Post by Dub H on Jan 25, 2022 15:41:53 GMT -5
I also would be careful of some people like Bret getting into the bandwagon.
I doubt Bret even knows what it is, someone probably just contacted his agent with a big money deal and that was it.
|
|
![Xxcjb01xX [PIECE OF: SH-] Avatar](http://storage.proboards.com/3411247/avatar/SAmefOpXbCxSOR0DUtvP.jpg)
