Genuinely asking: how? They seem, to me, to be a hype driven thing that doesn't make sense. If I buy an NFT of an art piece, what's stopping others from downloading the same file?
First: I'd like to hear feedback why my previous comment was heavily downvoted. Was it too condescending?
It's not about having access to content, but about owning the "thing". You might buy a painting and post high resolution scans of it: good enough for people to make very convincing copies. But it doesn't affect the ownership of the thing.
NFT is not so much the content, but a record of ownership on the blockchain. And for digital content, that "doesn't make sense" outside of digital realm, it's a very natural tool to produce ability to own something digital.
It's even more ridiculous for tweet. It's not even that after spending millions of dollar the buyer got any special right to that tweet. If I would buy a tweet, at minimum I would like an edit access over that tweet and contract that the "real" owner can't delete it.
Not disagreeing with you. Just saying that this is the exact purpose of the NFT - to show that you are the owner of the digital piece, i.e having the receipt/bragging right of it. It has nothing to do with the distribution. Anyone can have a copy.
It doesn't have to be something digital... We could move owning real life objects to NFT contracts. Like owning a car would be tracked on the blockchain and there is no paperwork needed about it.
FYI I'm not a huge crypto person, I don't know if the above is trustworthy, but it's an example of what you could do. God's knows if it works or collapses in a fire, but it's fun to watch.
> The NFT of a photo of the original Apple 1 computer will probably sell for $4million /face-palm
4 million Tether. Do these NFT valuations ever touch real dollars?
They do. I know many artists that are now materially rich.
To be fair, an NFT is significantly more liquid.
NFTs are a genuinely interesting concept. Cynicism can kill curiosity.
Edit: Photo NFT wouldn't sell for more. It's entirely different realm.
Genuinely asking: how? They seem, to me, to be a hype driven thing that doesn't make sense. If I buy an NFT of an art piece, what's stopping others from downloading the same file?
First: I'd like to hear feedback why my previous comment was heavily downvoted. Was it too condescending?
It's not about having access to content, but about owning the "thing". You might buy a painting and post high resolution scans of it: good enough for people to make very convincing copies. But it doesn't affect the ownership of the thing.
NFT is not so much the content, but a record of ownership on the blockchain. And for digital content, that "doesn't make sense" outside of digital realm, it's a very natural tool to produce ability to own something digital.
1 reply →
It's even more ridiculous for tweet. It's not even that after spending millions of dollar the buyer got any special right to that tweet. If I would buy a tweet, at minimum I would like an edit access over that tweet and contract that the "real" owner can't delete it.
1 reply →
Not disagreeing with you. Just saying that this is the exact purpose of the NFT - to show that you are the owner of the digital piece, i.e having the receipt/bragging right of it. It has nothing to do with the distribution. Anyone can have a copy.
4 replies →
It doesn't have to be something digital... We could move owning real life objects to NFT contracts. Like owning a car would be tracked on the blockchain and there is no paperwork needed about it.
There are applications beyond art. Art NFTs are a toy. Think bigger.
https://www.citydao.io/
FYI I'm not a huge crypto person, I don't know if the above is trustworthy, but it's an example of what you could do. God's knows if it works or collapses in a fire, but it's fun to watch.