Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Gizmodo)   The good news: You get to keep your NFTs. The bad news: You'll keep your NFTs   (gizmodo.com) divider line
    More: Fail, Names of large numbers, According to Jim, Computing platform, crypto analytics data, NFT trading platforms, Jason Falovitch, trading volume, Crypto-focused folks  
•       •       •

956 clicks; posted to STEM » on 28 Sep 2022 at 4:40 PM (9 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



33 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2022-09-28 2:16:23 PM  
The world is falling apart, the economy is still trying to recover from a pandemic.  So sure!  I'll dump cash into a URL that points to picture that I can say I own as long as the URL points to the picture I think it points to, and the only value of it is what someone might want to pay for it.

Hell it's not like it's an actual piece of art that I can hang on a wall and enjoy.
 
2022-09-28 3:06:48 PM  

BizarreMan: The world is falling apart, the economy is still trying to recover from a pandemic.  So sure!  I'll dump cash into a URL that points to picture that I can say I own as long as the URL points to the picture I think it points to, and the only value of it is what someone might want to pay for it.

Hell it's not like it's an actual piece of art that I can hang on a wall and enjoy.


You don't even own the picture.  The picture either still belongs to the original author, or in the case of algorithmic designs, like the bored apes, to no one.

You own a description of the picture.  And there's nothing preventing anyone from owning a different description of the same picture either.
 
2022-09-28 4:47:25 PM  

Flab: BizarreMan: The world is falling apart, the economy is still trying to recover from a pandemic.  So sure!  I'll dump cash into a URL that points to picture that I can say I own as long as the URL points to the picture I think it points to, and the only value of it is what someone might want to pay for it.

Hell it's not like it's an actual piece of art that I can hang on a wall and enjoy.

You don't even own the picture.  The picture either still belongs to the original author, or in the case of algorithmic designs, like the bored apes, to no one.

You own a description of the picture.  And there's nothing preventing anyone from owning a different description of the same picture either.


BAYC assigns usage rights to their NFT holders. This is not an automatic property of NFTs, but a copyright holder can choose to use an NFT contract as part of a licensing process.

https://boredapeyachtclub.com/#/terms (Fark doesn't like the URL so copy/paste it).
 
2022-09-28 5:07:57 PM  

Ivo Shandor: Flab: BizarreMan: The world is falling apart, the economy is still trying to recover from a pandemic.  So sure!  I'll dump cash into a URL that points to picture that I can say I own as long as the URL points to the picture I think it points to, and the only value of it is what someone might want to pay for it.

Hell it's not like it's an actual piece of art that I can hang on a wall and enjoy.

You don't even own the picture.  The picture either still belongs to the original author, or in the case of algorithmic designs, like the bored apes, to no one.

You own a description of the picture.  And there's nothing preventing anyone from owning a different description of the same picture either.

BAYC assigns usage rights to their NFT holders. This is not an automatic property of NFTs, but a copyright holder can choose to use an NFT contract as part of a licensing process.

https://boredapeyachtclub.com/#/terms (Fark doesn't like the URL so copy/paste it).


BAYC images are automagically generated by an AI.  An AI does not have rights.  So no one owns the rights to that image.

In the case of NFTs of traditional images, like the firestarter girl, the copyright belongs to the original photographer (her dad), unless he explicitely transfers it to the new owner BY NAME, as part of the smart contract that's attached to the NFT. This defeats the purpose of having NFTs as tradablecommodities because Charlie would simply be buying a token that says "Bob purchased the rights to a picture from Alice", which does not transfer the rights to Charles, since the smart contract of the NFT can not be altered.

Other than the possible novelty of owning a piece of internet memorabilia, Charles owns nothing.  Bob is still the legal owner of the rights to the picture. (And only if Bob happens to be in a jurisdiction that would recognize the smart contract of the NFT as legally binding).

Legal Eagle he more info on this:
NFTs Are Legally Problematic ft. Steve Mould & Coffeezilla
Youtube C6aeL83z_9Y
 
2022-09-28 5:38:56 PM  

BizarreMan: The world is falling apart, the economy is still trying to recover from a pandemic.  So sure!  I'll dump cash into a URL that points to picture that I can say I own as long as the URL points to the picture I think it points to, and the only value of it is what someone might want to pay for it.

Hell it's not like it's an actual piece of art that I can hang on a wall and enjoy.


Fark user imageView Full Size

About that...
 
2022-09-28 5:44:09 PM  

Flab: BizarreMan: The world is falling apart, the economy is still trying to recover from a pandemic.  So sure!  I'll dump cash into a URL that points to picture that I can say I own as long as the URL points to the picture I think it points to, and the only value of it is what someone might want to pay for it.

Hell it's not like it's an actual piece of art that I can hang on a wall and enjoy.

You don't even own the picture.  The picture either still belongs to the original author, or in the case of algorithmic designs, like the bored apes, to no one.

You own a description of the picture.  And there's nothing preventing anyone from owning a different description of the same picture either.


Okay, but you're missing the big picture here.

Imagine how much better the world would be if our global economy was based entirely on the value of rare mounts in World of Warcraft!
 
2022-09-28 5:44:55 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-09-28 5:48:40 PM  
If you thought digital art was unique in any way you are a f*cking moron.


About as useful as shooting your name into space on a satellite that will eventually crash back into the Earth. (if you got if through NASA for free that's cool. but don't pay for it!)
 
2022-09-28 5:50:32 PM  

BizarreMan: The world is falling apart, the economy is still trying to recover from a pandemic.  So sure!  I'll dump cash into a URL that points to picture that I can say I own as long as the URL points to the picture I think it points to, and the only value of it is what someone might want to pay for it.

Hell it's not like it's an actual piece of art that I can hang on a wall and enjoy.


My dude, let me tell you about a little company called Kinkos.
 
2022-09-28 5:51:41 PM  

King Something: [Fark user image image 850x637]


I gather from your profile pic that you are very anti-windmill for some reason.
 
2022-09-28 5:59:04 PM  
Sonic Sez: Nfts
Youtube PheO8yxVK0Y
 
2022-09-28 6:05:13 PM  

Flab: Ivo Shandor: Flab: BizarreMan: The world is falling apart, the economy is still trying to recover from a pandemic.  So sure!  I'll dump cash into a URL that points to picture that I can say I own as long as the URL points to the picture I think it points to, and the only value of it is what someone might want to pay for it.

Hell it's not like it's an actual piece of art that I can hang on a wall and enjoy.

You don't even own the picture.  The picture either still belongs to the original author, or in the case of algorithmic designs, like the bored apes, to no one.

You own a description of the picture.  And there's nothing preventing anyone from owning a different description of the same picture either.

BAYC assigns usage rights to their NFT holders. This is not an automatic property of NFTs, but a copyright holder can choose to use an NFT contract as part of a licensing process.

https://boredapeyachtclub.com/#/terms (Fark doesn't like the URL so copy/paste it).

BAYC images are automagically generated by an AI.  An AI does not have rights.  So no one owns the rights to that image.

In the case of NFTs of traditional images, like the firestarter girl, the copyright belongs to the original photographer (her dad), unless he explicitely transfers it to the new owner BY NAME, as part of the smart contract that's attached to the NFT. This defeats the purpose of having NFTs as tradablecommodities because Charlie would simply be buying a token that says "Bob purchased the rights to a picture from Alice", which does not transfer the rights to Charles, since the smart contract of the NFT can not be altered.

Other than the possible novelty of owning a piece of internet memorabilia, Charles owns nothing.  Bob is still the legal owner of the rights to the picture. (And only if Bob happens to be in a jurisdiction that would recognize the smart contract of the NFT as legally binding).

Legal Eagle he more info on this:
[YouTube video: NFTs Are Legally Problematic ft. Steve Mould & Coffeezilla]


A paintbrush doesn't have rights. A person who uses that tool to create an image does have rights to the resulting image. Same idea for the people who used computer tools (not an "AI") to mint the BAYC images.

You might get into uncertain territory if you were to look at ownership of the underlying assets ("hat #1", "shirt #5", etc) vs. the assembled composite images, but my understanding is that all of the BAYC stuff was work for hire under the same corporate entity.
 
2022-09-28 6:05:40 PM  

emtwo: King Something: [Fark user image image 850x637]

I gather from your profile pic that you are very anti-windmill for some reason.


Those windmills know what they did!
 
2022-09-28 6:10:15 PM  
NFTs are pointless wastes and Bored Apes are racist AF.
 
2022-09-28 6:14:41 PM  

Ivo Shandor: BAYC assigns usage rights to their NFT holders. This is not an automatic property of NFTs, but a copyright holder can choose to use an NFT contract as part of a licensing process.

https://boredapeyachtclub.com/#/terms (Fark doesn't like the URL so copy/paste it)


BAYC says they assign rights... but is that actually recognized by the legal system? If not, then what BAYC says means jack.

NFTs are basically this:

Crypto Bros: "We're going to make our own system of ownership that bypasses the government, and then expect the government to recognize it!"
Government: "Uh.... what? No."
 
2022-09-28 7:23:16 PM  

MrSplifferton: BizarreMan: The world is falling apart, the economy is still trying to recover from a pandemic.  So sure!  I'll dump cash into a URL that points to picture that I can say I own as long as the URL points to the picture I think it points to, and the only value of it is what someone might want to pay for it.

Hell it's not like it's an actual piece of art that I can hang on a wall and enjoy.

[Fark user image image 850x476]
About that...


Idk, that guy doesn't seem to be enjoying it
 
2022-09-28 7:29:28 PM  

Ivo Shandor: Flab: Ivo Shandor: Flab: BizarreMan: The world is falling apart, the economy is still trying to recover from a pandemic.  So sure!  I'll dump cash into a URL that points to picture that I can say I own as long as the URL points to the picture I think it points to, and the only value of it is what someone might want to pay for it.

Hell it's not like it's an actual piece of art that I can hang on a wall and enjoy.

You don't even own the picture.  The picture either still belongs to the original author, or in the case of algorithmic designs, like the bored apes, to no one.

You own a description of the picture.  And there's nothing preventing anyone from owning a different description of the same picture either.

BAYC assigns usage rights to their NFT holders. This is not an automatic property of NFTs, but a copyright holder can choose to use an NFT contract as part of a licensing process.

https://boredapeyachtclub.com/#/terms (Fark doesn't like the URL so copy/paste it).

BAYC images are automagically generated by an AI.  An AI does not have rights.  So no one owns the rights to that image.

In the case of NFTs of traditional images, like the firestarter girl, the copyright belongs to the original photographer (her dad), unless he explicitely transfers it to the new owner BY NAME, as part of the smart contract that's attached to the NFT. This defeats the purpose of having NFTs as tradablecommodities because Charlie would simply be buying a token that says "Bob purchased the rights to a picture from Alice", which does not transfer the rights to Charles, since the smart contract of the NFT can not be altered.

Other than the possible novelty of owning a piece of internet memorabilia, Charles owns nothing.  Bob is still the legal owner of the rights to the picture. (And only if Bob happens to be in a jurisdiction that would recognize the smart contract of the NFT as legally binding).

Legal Eagle he more info on this:
[YouTube video: NFTs Are Legally Problematic ft. Steve Mould & Coffeezilla]

A paintbrush doesn't have rights. A person who uses that tool to create an image does have rights to the resulting image. Same idea for the people who used computer tools (not an "AI") to mint the BAYC images.

You might get into uncertain territory if you were to look at ownership of the underlying assets ("hat #1", "shirt #5", etc) vs. the assembled composite images, but my understanding is that all of the BAYC stuff was work for hire under the same corporate entity.


An NFT is a text file that says: "woman with dark curly hair and enigmatic smile against a Toscan backdrop" along with a digital hash.  You don't own the Mona Lisa.  And you can't even sue someone else who also happens to have another NFT that has the same text description of the same image..

The bored apes are minted automatically by a computer from a random combination of assets (hats, shirts, color pattern, etc...) no one owns the rights to the final image.  Not you, nor the guys behind the Bored Ape Yacht Club, nor the artist who drew the outline of of the hat.
 
2022-09-28 7:30:53 PM  

trialpha: Ivo Shandor: BAYC assigns usage rights to their NFT holders. This is not an automatic property of NFTs, but a copyright holder can choose to use an NFT contract as part of a licensing process.

https://boredapeyachtclub.com/#/terms (Fark doesn't like the URL so copy/paste it)

BAYC says they assign rights... but is that actually recognized by the legal system? If not, then what BAYC says means jack.

NFTs are basically this:

Crypto Bros: "We're going to make our own system of ownership that bypasses the government, and then expect the government to recognize it!"
Government: "Uh.... what? No."


Also Crypto Bros: pay us gas every time you sell your NFT, and if we're lucky, every time you post on our forums.
 
2022-09-28 7:41:02 PM  
They have massive potential when it comes to customization, portability, and cascading commissions within the videogame world.

I worked with an early NFT (pre-COVID) that allowed you to take your unique sneaker with unique colorway and unique boosts into NBA2K, for instance. Luck out with an indemand colorway or boost combo and your NFT holds more value. Add residual commisions for each holder over history and it gets interesting once moved to a feeless model like IOTA's upcoming NTF thingy.

Extending the concept, your NFT becomes a levelled weapon of specific class but indeterminite era. Now your +2 Mace becomes a +2 Musket or a +1/+1 Facezapper or whatever

Past the investment hype, they have TRUE gaming potential
 
2022-09-28 7:59:31 PM  

Flab: BAYC images are automagically generated by an AI. An AI does not have rights. So no one owns the rights to that image.


Not accurate.

The individual or organization that hit the "execute" button owns it, as they used the "tool" (meaning the platform running the AI program) to generate it.  As has been explained elsewhere, an AI in the law is treated almost like a paint brush - the paint brush doesn't own the art, the person holding the paint brush does.  Take all of that with a grain of salt - I'm not a lawyer specializing in that particular branch of intellectual property - just someone who has had more than a few encounters with intellectual property lawyers.

And the automagically part isn't so automatic nor all that magical.  BAYC allows the tool to run under certain conditions.  That eliminates both the auto and the magical.  You are left with ly.

trialpha: BAYC says they assign rights... but is that actually recognized by the legal system? If not, then what BAYC says means jack.


The answer is "yes".  The legal system does not have a "standard form" of a contract.  Verbal contracts are in many situations entirely enforceable.  That there is an email trail at a minimum and published content to the effect that the rights have been assigned... probably quite easily determined by a court to be a valid contract resulting in the transfer of rights that the court can enforce.  Remember, most of the legal system is created with the enforcement of property rights and contracts in mind.  This crime and punishment component is an accumulation that resulting in everyone determining a mad monarch was the wrong guy to have in charge of that, and the legal system didn't say "NOT IT" fast enough.
 
2022-09-28 7:59:38 PM  

Flab: trialpha: Ivo Shandor: BAYC assigns usage rights to their NFT holders. This is not an automatic property of NFTs, but a copyright holder can choose to use an NFT contract as part of a licensing process.

https://boredapeyachtclub.com/#/terms (Fark doesn't like the URL so copy/paste it)

BAYC says they assign rights... but is that actually recognized by the legal system? If not, then what BAYC says means jack.

NFTs are basically this:

Crypto Bros: "We're going to make our own system of ownership that bypasses the government, and then expect the government to recognize it!"
Government: "Uh.... what? No."

Also Crypto Bros: pay us gas every time you sell your NFT, and if we're lucky, every time you post on our forums.


There's a vig? That's even funnier.
 
2022-09-28 8:04:21 PM  

E.S.Q.: They have massive potential when it comes to customization, portability, and cascading commissions within the videogame world.

I worked with an early NFT (pre-COVID) that allowed you to take your unique sneaker with unique colorway and unique boosts into NBA2K, for instance. Luck out with an indemand colorway or boost combo and your NFT holds more value. Add residual commisions for each holder over history and it gets interesting once moved to a feeless model like IOTA's upcoming NTF thingy.

Extending the concept, your NFT becomes a levelled weapon of specific class but indeterminite era. Now your +2 Mace becomes a +2 Musket or a +1/+1 Facezapper or whatever

Past the investment hype, they have TRUE gaming potential


Do they, though? All that stuff you described could be covered much more enjoyably by internal systems in the games. You've described worse horse armor DLC. Both the user experience and the revenue model are worse.

If it were effectively transferable to other games, well you already have Steam, Origin, uPlay, or PSN accounts to sync that stuff. You want a shared progression system between games? You've had a core for that for over a decade. No love for entrenched platforms and just want to spice up offline games with no micro transactions? Store all that stuff locally. Online game where you want to keep the cheaters in check? IT'S ALREADY ONLINE. You can have systems to poke items in accounts, and that account can be for multiple games.
 
2022-09-28 8:16:58 PM  

E.S.Q.: They have massive potential when it comes to customization, portability, and cascading commissions within the videogame world.

I worked with an early NFT (pre-COVID) that allowed you to take your unique sneaker with unique colorway and unique boosts into NBA2K, for instance. Luck out with an indemand colorway or boost combo and your NFT holds more value. Add residual commisions for each holder over history and it gets interesting once moved to a feeless model like IOTA's upcoming NTF thingy.

Extending the concept, your NFT becomes a levelled weapon of specific class but indeterminite era. Now your +2 Mace becomes a +2 Musket or a +1/+1 Facezapper or whatever

Past the investment hype, they have TRUE gaming potential


So, I have admittedly gotten a couple of hundred bucks from selling Steam collector cards and TF2 hats.

But whoever is paying for these is being an idiot. And Stream makes money every transaction.

No, I don't consider these an investment, I got the drops for free. And no, I don't think these are a viable economy.
 
2022-09-28 8:17:11 PM  

E.S.Q.: They have massive potential when it comes to customization, portability, and cascading commissions within the videogame world.

I worked with an early NFT (pre-COVID) that allowed you to take your unique sneaker with unique colorway and unique boosts into NBA2K, for instance. Luck out with an indemand colorway or boost combo and your NFT holds more value. Add residual commisions for each holder over history and it gets interesting once moved to a feeless model like IOTA's upcoming NTF thingy.

Extending the concept, your NFT becomes a levelled weapon of specific class but indeterminite era. Now your +2 Mace becomes a +2 Musket or a +1/+1 Facezapper or whatever

Past the investment hype, they have TRUE gaming potential


lol why would anyone want to give a digital wireframe and texture map even more encumbrances and inconveniences than a physical object?  What you described is like Amway meets a bank as far as people taking a cut as middle men or for work long since completed.
 
2022-09-28 8:37:06 PM  

emtwo: Flab: BizarreMan: The world is falling apart, the economy is still trying to recover from a pandemic.  So sure!  I'll dump cash into a URL that points to picture that I can say I own as long as the URL points to the picture I think it points to, and the only value of it is what someone might want to pay for it.

Hell it's not like it's an actual piece of art that I can hang on a wall and enjoy.

You don't even own the picture.  The picture either still belongs to the original author, or in the case of algorithmic designs, like the bored apes, to no one.

You own a description of the picture.  And there's nothing preventing anyone from owning a different description of the same picture either.

Okay, but you're missing the big picture here.

Imagine how much better the world would be if our global economy was based entirely on the value of rare mounts in World of Warcraft!


You are transporting me back to a time of Limp Biskitz. A time of Rawrs. A time where no one ever out pizza'd the Hut.

Back when TechTV was rebranded as G4, and a gnome on some server was a game first at claiming a Horde mount in World of Warcraft.
 
2022-09-28 8:54:14 PM  
Hey Apple, wanna buy an NFT?
Youtube _yTxRD965KI
 
2022-09-28 8:57:07 PM  

DreamyAltarBoy: Flab: trialpha: Ivo Shandor: BAYC assigns usage rights to their NFT holders. This is not an automatic property of NFTs, but a copyright holder can choose to use an NFT contract as part of a licensing process.

https://boredapeyachtclub.com/#/terms (Fark doesn't like the URL so copy/paste it)

BAYC says they assign rights... but is that actually recognized by the legal system? If not, then what BAYC says means jack.

NFTs are basically this:

Crypto Bros: "We're going to make our own system of ownership that bypasses the government, and then expect the government to recognize it!"
Government: "Uh.... what? No."

Also Crypto Bros: pay us gas every time you sell your NFT, and if we're lucky, every time you post on our forums.

There's a vig? That's even funnier.


A "vig" is optional. Some creators like the ability to claim a portion of any resale, and build that functionality into the contract. Others don't.

The "gas fee" is a transaction fee required to do anything on a blockchain. Fees from that are distributed across all of the people running mining (old) or validator (new) nodes, not to anybody associated with any particular NFT.

Transaction fees are not unique to cryptocurrency. Credit cards, Paypal, bank ATMs etc. all have a way to wet their beak.
 
2022-09-28 9:21:24 PM  

E.S.Q.: They have massive potential when it comes to customization, portability, and cascading commissions within the videogame world.

I worked with an early NFT (pre-COVID) that allowed you to take your unique sneaker with unique colorway and unique boosts into NBA2K, for instance. Luck out with an indemand colorway or boost combo and your NFT holds more value. Add residual commisions for each holder over history and it gets interesting once moved to a feeless model like IOTA's upcoming NTF thingy.

Extending the concept, your NFT becomes a levelled weapon of specific class but indeterminite era. Now your +2 Mace becomes a +2 Musket or a +1/+1 Facezapper or whatever

Past the investment hype, they have TRUE gaming potential


No they farking don't.  How in the hell are my sneakers supposed to farking help me in World of Warcraft?  Is my orc gonna run around in his Stan Smiths with a laser rifle from another game?  Piss off with that nonsense.
 
2022-09-28 9:23:08 PM  

Ivo Shandor: DreamyAltarBoy: Flab: trialpha: Ivo Shandor: BAYC assigns usage rights to their NFT holders. This is not an automatic property of NFTs, but a copyright holder can choose to use an NFT contract as part of a licensing process.

https://boredapeyachtclub.com/#/terms (Fark doesn't like the URL so copy/paste it)

BAYC says they assign rights... but is that actually recognized by the legal system? If not, then what BAYC says means jack.

NFTs are basically this:

Crypto Bros: "We're going to make our own system of ownership that bypasses the government, and then expect the government to recognize it!"
Government: "Uh.... what? No."

Also Crypto Bros: pay us gas every time you sell your NFT, and if we're lucky, every time you post on our forums.

There's a vig? That's even funnier.

A "vig" is optional. Some creators like the ability to claim a portion of any resale, and build that functionality into the contract. Others don't.

The "gas fee" is a transaction fee required to do anything on a blockchain. Fees from that are distributed across all of the people running mining (old) or validator (new) nodes, not to anybody associated with any particular NFT.

Transaction fees are not unique to cryptocurrency. Credit cards, Paypal, bank ATMs etc. all have a way to wet their beak.


Yeah sure but I can actually buy things that aren't illegal drugs or illicit pornography with a credit card or paypal.
 
2022-09-28 9:31:52 PM  

MrSplifferton: BizarreMan: The world is falling apart, the economy is still trying to recover from a pandemic.  So sure!  I'll dump cash into a URL that points to picture that I can say I own as long as the URL points to the picture I think it points to, and the only value of it is what someone might want to pay for it.

Hell it's not like it's an actual piece of art that I can hang on a wall and enjoy.

[Fark user image 850x476]
About that...


There is no way to enjoy that hideous thing.
 
2022-09-28 10:02:37 PM  

Nintenfreak: Ivo Shandor: DreamyAltarBoy: Flab: trialpha: Ivo Shandor: BAYC assigns usage rights to their NFT holders. This is not an automatic property of NFTs, but a copyright holder can choose to use an NFT contract as part of a licensing process.

https://boredapeyachtclub.com/#/terms (Fark doesn't like the URL so copy/paste it)

BAYC says they assign rights... but is that actually recognized by the legal system? If not, then what BAYC says means jack.

NFTs are basically this:

Crypto Bros: "We're going to make our own system of ownership that bypasses the government, and then expect the government to recognize it!"
Government: "Uh.... what? No."

Also Crypto Bros: pay us gas every time you sell your NFT, and if we're lucky, every time you post on our forums.

There's a vig? That's even funnier.

A "vig" is optional. Some creators like the ability to claim a portion of any resale, and build that functionality into the contract. Others don't.

The "gas fee" is a transaction fee required to do anything on a blockchain. Fees from that are distributed across all of the people running mining (old) or validator (new) nodes, not to anybody associated with any particular NFT.

Transaction fees are not unique to cryptocurrency. Credit cards, Paypal, bank ATMs etc. all have a way to wet their beak.

Yeah sure but I can actually buy things that aren't illegal drugs or illicit pornography with a credit card or paypal.


As stupid as NFTs are, they are not and have never pretended to be currency.

Now cryptocurrency certainly has, which has been demonstrably untrue. No investment vehicle can reasonably be used as a currency. The two usecases are diametrically opposed.

Even some governors (Thanks Polis) mandated their state accept crypto as a payment source within all agencies. What a great use of our taxpayer dollars to implement that.
 
2022-09-29 7:19:21 AM  

Quantumbunny: Nintenfreak: Ivo Shandor: DreamyAltarBoy: Flab: trialpha: Ivo Shandor: BAYC assigns usage rights to their NFT holders. This is not an automatic property of NFTs, but a copyright holder can choose to use an NFT contract as part of a licensing process.

https://boredapeyachtclub.com/#/terms (Fark doesn't like the URL so copy/paste it)

BAYC says they assign rights... but is that actually recognized by the legal system? If not, then what BAYC says means jack.

NFTs are basically this:

Crypto Bros: "We're going to make our own system of ownership that bypasses the government, and then expect the government to recognize it!"
Government: "Uh.... what? No."

Also Crypto Bros: pay us gas every time you sell your NFT, and if we're lucky, every time you post on our forums.

There's a vig? That's even funnier.

A "vig" is optional. Some creators like the ability to claim a portion of any resale, and build that functionality into the contract. Others don't.

The "gas fee" is a transaction fee required to do anything on a blockchain. Fees from that are distributed across all of the people running mining (old) or validator (new) nodes, not to anybody associated with any particular NFT.

Transaction fees are not unique to cryptocurrency. Credit cards, Paypal, bank ATMs etc. all have a way to wet their beak.

Yeah sure but I can actually buy things that aren't illegal drugs or illicit pornography with a credit card or paypal.

As stupid as NFTs are, they are not and have never pretended to be currency.

Now cryptocurrency certainly has, which has been demonstrably untrue. No investment vehicle can reasonably be used as a currency. The two usecases are diametrically opposed.

Even some governors (Thanks Polis) mandated their state accept crypto as a payment source within all agencies. What a great use of our taxpayer dollars to implement that.


Cowrie shells, pelts, cattle, gold, and silver would like to disagree. Not that fiat currency isn't better in pretty much every way, but specie currency still exists in some backwards-ass economies, and idiots in the US who don't understand how putting a currency's value in the hands of mining companies is a bad idea still want the gold standard.

/See also JP Morgan, both past and present, cornering the silver market.
 
2022-09-29 5:11:15 PM  

luidprand: Quantumbunny: Nintenfreak: Ivo Shandor: DreamyAltarBoy: Flab: trialpha: Ivo Shandor: BAYC assigns usage rights to their NFT holders. This is not an automatic property of NFTs, but a copyright holder can choose to use an NFT contract as part of a licensing process.

https://boredapeyachtclub.com/#/terms (Fark doesn't like the URL so copy/paste it)

BAYC says they assign rights... but is that actually recognized by the legal system? If not, then what BAYC says means jack.

NFTs are basically this:

Crypto Bros: "We're going to make our own system of ownership that bypasses the government, and then expect the government to recognize it!"
Government: "Uh.... what? No."

Also Crypto Bros: pay us gas every time you sell your NFT, and if we're lucky, every time you post on our forums.

There's a vig? That's even funnier.

A "vig" is optional. Some creators like the ability to claim a portion of any resale, and build that functionality into the contract. Others don't.

The "gas fee" is a transaction fee required to do anything on a blockchain. Fees from that are distributed across all of the people running mining (old) or validator (new) nodes, not to anybody associated with any particular NFT.

Transaction fees are not unique to cryptocurrency. Credit cards, Paypal, bank ATMs etc. all have a way to wet their beak.

Yeah sure but I can actually buy things that aren't illegal drugs or illicit pornography with a credit card or paypal.

As stupid as NFTs are, they are not and have never pretended to be currency.

Now cryptocurrency certainly has, which has been demonstrably untrue. No investment vehicle can reasonably be used as a currency. The two usecases are diametrically opposed.

Even some governors (Thanks Polis) mandated their state accept crypto as a payment source within all agencies. What a great use of our taxpayer dollars to implement that.

Cowrie shells, pelts, cattle, gold, and silver would like to disagree. Not that fiat currency isn't better in pretty much eve ...


Yeah it's like "God you know what I hate about fiat currency?  Stability
 
Displayed 33 of 33 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.