NFTs

PostRe: NFTs by **Green Gecko** » Wed Nov 17, 2021 1:39 pm

Lex-Man wrote:Even at it's best it seems really awful. My understanding is that you put a URL on to the blockchain, the URL points to a piece of artwork. The idea is that the creator of the original work creates the NFT and then sells it. Whoever buys it gets a link back to the NFT created by the creator. Whoever then bought it can sell the NFT on to another buyer who gets another link in the chain so you basically get a line of ownership that looks like:

original creator signed (NFT) -> First Buyer -> Second Buyer ... -> Nth Buyer

The value is meant to be created by the association to the original creator. Anyone could create an NFT but without that link to the creator they're meant to be worthless. If I wanted to I could create an NFT to any link on the internet, say a picture of the Mona Lisa, but it wouldn't be worth anything because I have no connection to the art work. Maybe if an art gallery created an NFT it would have more value as it would be linked to the organisation. Also a creator could create multiple NFTs to the same piece of artwork and sell them all, although they would all be distinct and this may dilute the overall value. Also an NFT could be made for anything online it doesn't have to link to a picture it could be a text document or a video.

The problems with the system for the buyers is that they don't actually own the images copyright. So they wouldn't get paid a royalty if the image was put on a t-shirt for example. Also they don't own the hosting platform so they have no guarantee the link will work even stay at the link the NFT is pointed at. My personal issue is that buying artwork by random artists isn't going to hold value because people are just going to forget about them and they'll get buried under hundreds of other artists NFTs that are for sale. If a specific famous artist made an NFT, for example if Damien Hirst made a NFT for his art, I could see it retaining some value as people know who he is, although the art market in general is really weird.

That said the whole markets value, like cryptocurrency, is held up on the belief of using the system. As long as people believe it has value, it'll have value. Even if a lot of people are standing around saying the whole thing has no clothes on.

Just like with games though, artists almost never sell their copyright. Most items don't have their copyright transferred so that remains the intellectual property of the artist. The only intrinsic value in a print for example is the ink impression (which is a copy of some kind), the number of editions i.e. How scarce it is and the identity of the artist. The difference is the NFT has no intrinsic value as its completely immaterial while also immutable. It could be argued software or patents are the same, but rights are granted with that. NFTs come with very little rights besides ascribed ownership to the link itself.

There is a whole lot of nonsense in the art market but NFTs are particularly mad, but really what is better than that anyway beyond most visual arts or objet des artes etc that took time, skills and materials to render and those remain evident in the object, which for NFTs they basically don't. The vast, vast majority of the art market consists of licensed copies already that are virtually indistinguishable from one another.

Basically most people have no idea how the framework of copyright and intellectual property rights work already, leading to misunderstanding of what the value of an NFT actually is, especially seeing as they can be minted from almost nothing besides the "proof of work" (energy consumed), but then so can digital money.

PostRe: NFTs by **Preezy** » Wed Nov 17, 2021 1:48 pm

JCDenton wrote:
Preezy wrote:
JCDenton wrote:
Preezy wrote:Not to be confused with the real good guys in Deus Ex, amirite JC?

I never worked for the NSF, but my brother did.

Don't you want to hear why your brother came over to our side?

He makes his own decisions.

Tell me what you know about the NSF operation

Uh I dunno, uh a lot of people yell n stuff :shifty:

PostRe: NFTs by **JCDenton** » Wed Nov 17, 2021 2:09 pm

Preezy wrote:
JCDenton wrote:
Preezy wrote:
JCDenton wrote:
Preezy wrote:Not to be confused with the real good guys in Deus Ex, amirite JC?

I never worked for the NSF, but my brother did.

Don't you want to hear why your brother came over to our side?

He makes his own decisions.

Tell me what you know about the NSF operation

Uh I dunno, uh a lot of people yell n stuff

The NSF aren't kidding around.

PostRe: NFTs by **Lex-Man** » Wed Nov 17, 2021 3:08 pm

Green Gecko wrote:
Lex-Man wrote:Even at it's best it seems really awful. My understanding is that you put a URL on to the blockchain, the URL points to a piece of artwork. The idea is that the creator of the original work creates the NFT and then sells it. Whoever buys it gets a link back to the NFT created by the creator. Whoever then bought it can sell the NFT on to another buyer who gets another link in the chain so you basically get a line of ownership that looks like:

original creator signed (NFT) -> First Buyer -> Second Buyer ... -> Nth Buyer

The value is meant to be created by the association to the original creator. Anyone could create an NFT but without that link to the creator they're meant to be worthless. If I wanted to I could create an NFT to any link on the internet, say a picture of the Mona Lisa, but it wouldn't be worth anything because I have no connection to the art work. Maybe if an art gallery created an NFT it would have more value as it would be linked to the organisation. Also a creator could create multiple NFTs to the same piece of artwork and sell them all, although they would all be distinct and this may dilute the overall value. Also an NFT could be made for anything online it doesn't have to link to a picture it could be a text document or a video.

The problems with the system for the buyers is that they don't actually own the images copyright. So they wouldn't get paid a royalty if the image was put on a t-shirt for example. Also they don't own the hosting platform so they have no guarantee the link will work even stay at the link the NFT is pointed at. My personal issue is that buying artwork by random artists isn't going to hold value because people are just going to forget about them and they'll get buried under hundreds of other artists NFTs that are for sale. If a specific famous artist made an NFT, for example if Damien Hirst made a NFT for his art, I could see it retaining some value as people know who he is, although the art market in general is really weird.

That said the whole markets value, like cryptocurrency, is held up on the belief of using the system. As long as people believe it has value, it'll have value. Even if a lot of people are standing around saying the whole thing has no clothes on.

Just like with games though, artists almost never sell their copyright. Most items don't have their copyright transferred so that remains the intellectual property of the artist. The only intrinsic value in a print for example is the ink impression (which is a copy of some kind), the number of editions i.e. How scarce it is and the identity of the artist. The difference is the NFT has no intrinsic value as its completely immaterial while also immutable. It could be argued software or patents are the same, but rights are granted with that. NFTs come with very little rights besides ascribed ownership to the link itself.

There is a whole lot of nonsense in the art market but NFTs are particularly mad, but really what is better than that anyway beyond most visual arts or objet des artes etc that took time, skills and materials to render and those remain evident in the object, which for NFTs they basically don't. The vast, vast majority of the art market consists of licensed copies already that are virtually indistinguishable from one another.

Basically most people have no idea how the framework of copyright and intellectual property rights work already, leading to misunderstanding of what the value of an NFT actually is, especially seeing as they can be minted from almost nothing besides the "proof of work" (energy consumed), but then so can digital money.

I think the difference from my perspective is that entire point of NFT is to make money. You don't buy a computer game generally for it to go up in value. Art is a bit different because a lot is bought as an investment. So it does seem reasonable that an NFT would give the buyer some form of ownership even though that's not the case.l, even though that's not the case.

I'm not a lawyer but I imagine it would be possible to draw a contract that tied ownership of an image's copyright to an NFT. So it would be possible to create this kind of ownership. There might be some benefits to this system as often it becomes quite difficult to track down who owns what. That said it would probably create an unnecessary middle man.

PostRe: NFTs by **Green Gecko** » Wed Nov 17, 2021 9:46 pm

We'll probably end up with some kind of NFT brokerage for artists as yes there's a huge amount of middleman bullshit in the market. Auction houses, museums, galleries and shops are all middlemen that are part of the value equation.

One thing they could replace is certification of the authenticity of a piece or art because that is quite hard for artists to actually create as well as fairly easy to defraud or fake, ownership would need to be tied to a contract of transfer of ownership and/or copyright of that work, yes. So when an artists stamps a work and says "this is an art I did" and sometimes issues a certificate or similar that says "this person owns this genuine art I did" (but not necessarily copyright which is different, they may have an implicit or explicit license to reproduce the work but not profit from it, for example). That could be a valid use of NFTs and yes that has some value to it and people can put a monetary value to it. Artist might have strawberry float all to do with that. Most art value is speculative to absurd, quite often the artist sees none of it at all and just keeps making other gooseberry fool.

PostRe: NFTs by **Knoyleo** » Sun Nov 21, 2021 3:22 pm

'Piracy' website offers NFT art as free downloads

The NFT Bay purports to offer "all NFTs from Ethereum and Solana" - two cryptocurrency networks - in a whopping 17 terabyte (TB) file.

Critics of NFTs point out that anybody can access, download and copy the digital artwork attached to the "token of ownership".

"NFT art right now is nothing more then directions on how to access or download an image. The image is not stored on the blockchain," said Mr Huntley.

However, proponents of cryptocurrency say owning the NFT carries clout and bragging rights - and that simply right-clicking and saving an image is not the same.

It also happens to be an effective way of laundering money, but I guess they're not so keen to shout about that.

PostRe: NFTs by **Lex-Man** » Sun Nov 21, 2021 3:30 pm

I was sort of thinking about all the computer game stuff that we'll probably never see again, like No One Lives Forever, because nobody can bother spending the time checking who actually owns it, having an blockchain would be really helpful. If all IP was on a publically accessible chain then it would be really easy to make an offer to buy IP. Getting private companies to actually sign up to that scheme would be difficult though.

PostRe: NFTs by **Cuttooth** » Wed Feb 02, 2022 11:15 am

twitter.com/wwf_uk/status/1488800080819802116

Had to check this was actually the WWF. Looking forward to the same day embarrassing climb down. :fp:

PostRe: NFTs by **Victor Mildew** » Wed Feb 02, 2022 11:17 am

GRcade NFTs when

PostRe: NFTs by **Knoyleo** » Wed Feb 02, 2022 11:30 am

Cuttooth wrote:

twitter.com/wwf_uk/status/1488800080819802116

Had to check this was actually the WWF. Looking forward to the same day embarrassing climb down.

Absolutely baffling.

PostRe: NFTs by **Tomous** » Wed Feb 02, 2022 11:31 am

How many hours until they delete and back down do we think?

I give it 4 hours

PostRe: NFTs by **Green Gecko** » Wed Feb 02, 2022 11:41 am

Y'know, you can drink that water. And recycle it, basically forever.

PostRe: NFTs by **site23** » Wed Feb 02, 2022 11:47 am

Victor Mildew wrote:GRcade NFTs when

Just write down "I own GRcade" on a bit of paper and keep it in your pocket. It's the same but less harmful and embarrassing.

PostRe: NFTs by **Victor Mildew** » Wed Feb 02, 2022 11:52 am

BLOCKCHAIN

PostRe: NFTs by **Qikz** » Wed Feb 02, 2022 11:54 am

site23 wrote:
Victor Mildew wrote:GRcade NFTs when

Just write down "I own GRcade" on a bit of paper and keep it in your pocket. It's the same but less harmful and embarrassing.

I did this a long time ago, getting ready to sell for $Xmill soon see yall later.

PostRe: NFTs by **rinks** » Wed Feb 02, 2022 12:02 pm

Latest one I’ve heard about is these strawberry floaters called Hit Piece. They’re selling NFTs linked to the songs of independent artists - without permission or credit - and the artists are given none of the proceeds. Pure scam.

twitter.com/OllieWride/status/1488648208863703040

PostRe: NFTs by **Moggy** » Wed Feb 02, 2022 12:10 pm

Cuttooth wrote:

twitter.com/wwf_uk/status/1488800080819802116

Had to check this was actually the WWF. Looking forward to the same day embarrassing climb down.

Chris Packham was right, just let the pandas die.

PostRe: NFTs by **Winckle** » Wed Feb 02, 2022 12:15 pm

site23 wrote:
Victor Mildew wrote:GRcade NFTs when

Just write down "I own GRcade" on a bit of paper and keep it in your pocket. It's the same but less harmful and embarrassing.

I wrote it down on my Komi-san wa, Komyushō Desu notepad and whilst queuing at GAME to pick up the latest Nintendo Switch title, it fell out of my pocket and the checkout lady picked it up and started laughing. She showed it to all the other staff who kept laughing and pointing at me, asking me "Is GRcade was your cartoon girlfriend's name?". I tried to explain that the question itself was ridiculous, but this just seem to make them laugh even harder.

That experience was still less embarrassing than paying for an NFT.

PostRe: NFTs by **Robbo-92** » Wed Feb 02, 2022 12:17 pm

I kind of worry about anyone who buys an NFT thinking it’s a good thing, I’m not well versed in what NFTs actually are (basically from what I can tell, you’re buying a picture, of a picture, or something that’s been put online and had a price tag slapped on it?) but they seem dodgy as strawberry float.

PostRe: NFTs by **Victor Mildew** » Wed Feb 02, 2022 12:18 pm

I have made this whole page in to a NFT. Please pay me eleventy million pounds or I will be forced to set Rudi Giuliani on you.

NFTs

Who is online

Affiliates