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  
•       •       •

1048 clicks; posted to STEM » on 28 Sep 2022 at 4:40 PM (18 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



Voting Results (Funniest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

 
2022-09-28 6:05:40 PM  
11 votes:

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 5:44:09 PM  
8 votes:

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  
7 votes:
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-09-28 7:41:02 PM  
6 votes:
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 5:38:56 PM  
5 votes:

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 5:51:41 PM  
5 votes:

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 4:47:25 PM  
3 votes:

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 6:05:13 PM  
2 votes:

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 5:48:40 PM  
1 vote:
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 8:57:07 PM  
1 vote:

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.
 
Displayed 10 of 10 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.