![Someone downloaded all the NFTs on Ethereum and Solana Network and uploaded it on torrent. Size 19 TB. [1374x1594 - 345KB]](https://poal.co/static/images/o51TMz.jpg){kind=link}
I can somewhat understand the concept of NFTs for recording ownership of physical assets (e.g. "Bob Jones owned the house at 123 Main Street, Kenosha Wisconsin") , or virtual assets ("Bob Jones owns a +3 Flaming Sword of Homoeroticism on World of Warcraft"), but I haven't been able to wrap my head around NFTs for digital art and other things where the NFT is just a hyperlink to a file stored on cloud storage somewhere. What's the point? Anyone can browse to the same URL and copy the contents therein.
What’s the point? Money laundering, plain and simple.
Exactly. But ultimately money laundering isn’t a bad thing unless you’re a criminal. It allows us to hide from the IRS which is a really good thing.
My kinda cleaning
Actually, yes. Money laundering is and always has been one of the main focal points of anything art. The difference is this is a brief development period where people slowly learn that NFTs have significantly wider uses than just "hey look at this picture I own." Right now, all they're doing is proving ownership of images. It's not like people can't just screens hot them... NFTs are an inevitable Legal tool.
After giving it some more though, and I could be wrong, but it seems NFT can function as a way to reconcile ownership of digital goods. Slowly, a lot of the things we have bought online we have lost ownership of to the point where when you buy a game, for example, you never buy the game, just the license to use it. My understanding with NFTs is that anything you buy is actually yours to do as you please.
A place where this would work well would be in gaming which has already started, the idea is that digital goods you encounter or buy are yours much like any physical good. It may give you more ownership of it to the point where you can buy and sell it. While something like this already exists in many services, the small print dictate that it is never your item to begin with, so it can be taken away from you without notice.
While its current application is limited, the potential to establish some kind of ownership over digital goods would be a nice switt kick in the ass of many companies that dwelve in digital goods.
Yep you get it. It's the use case of linking to an image that's bullshit, not the technology of NFTs itself.
World of Warcraft use to be huge. People would sell thier leveled up characters on the down low. Now maybe the same thing could happen but in a open market.
Why hold any USD when we can print our own? My understanding is people that are into it treat it as an asset and trade among others who view it the same, enough people value it to the point where it has a price attached to it.
So, basically the same as tulipmania. The greater fool theory works until it doesn't.
Print your own? Who are you? George Floyd?
You can't even buy fruit with funny money. That's bananas.
That was funny I couldn't breathe
This is an obvious problem people aren't realizing quickly enough. The idea of NFTs being about fucking jpegs is laughable. Instead the idea is tokenized proof of ownership. You'll see things like car or house deeds, concert tickets or in-game cosmetic ownership emerge as NFT use cases. Just don't tell anyone yet. Let them slowly figure it out so we can make money while they lag behind like the foolish faggots they are.
IOT. A SSN now becomes an NFT, traceable on “the block-chain”.
that part is just money laundering and marketing. the end point of NFTs is to try to end piracy which is why companies are taking it seriously. everything on the blockchain or 'web3.0' is/will be tracked and recorded. The NFT is the authorisation licence. so for example Amazon will be given the NFT rights to sell a book. if you try to do the same on your random site, it can be checked to see if you're an authorised seller or not and track where it came from to fine and charge you.
(post is archived)