You own a reciept that points to where the monkey is currently. And there’s no gurantee the monkey will be there the next time you wanna look at it.
Still false, you own the token representing the monkey but not the monkey itself
The correct understanding of NFTs has always been trivial: they’re certificates. What they certify is not determined.
Anyone telling you anything else is either lying, or a moron (or has been lied to, which is not incompatible with being a moron).
The type of use case I see it could be good for is Software ownership. One could sell his copy of a game or give it to someone else by exchanging the token and the software could use it to validate ownership.
Isn’t it basically just a receipt?
It’s more general than that; a receipt is like a certificate that certifies that you bought something, but an NFT could certify something else.
Provenance is a major issue in art. NFTs provide the best provenance yet.
Pretty much. They basically serve the same purpose as Copyright Registration. If there is a question of who holds the rights to a work, I can submit my copyright registration as evidence that I claimed the work at that specific date and time. If you can conclusively prove you had it earlier, my later registration is irrelevant.
You creating an NFT of the work and putting it on the block chain before my registration with the copyright office would conclusively disprove my own registration claim to being the original creator. NFTs could be used as evidence of prior art.
NFTs could also be used as evidence of intent to transfer the copyright of a work to another.
Keep in mind, NFTs are evidence, not proof. I could submit an NFT before a court in a court to support my claim of copyright, but the court is going to weigh my evidence against all the other evidence in the case. My ownership of an NFT of my work is not going to replace my signed and notarized agreement to transfer the copyright of the work to someone else.
Yuppp
The anti-NFT crowd won with lies, helped by the loudest pro-NFT voices also being absolute morons and focusing on the dumbest possible ways to actually implement it.
Let it go man, the NFTs aren’t coming back.
You sound like someone who thinks an nft is something other than a certificate.
Good ideas never die ;)
To be clear I didn’t get into “NFTs” during the craze at all because I knew what NFTs are supposed to be and personalized pictures of monkeys is not it.
At the same time it was hilarious how stupid the arguments on both sides were.
It’s a bitcoin that can’t be swapped for other bitcoins, right?
Yes that’s also true… I would venture that it’s not as useful in general to understand the concept though :)
Replace “token” with “title” and “monkey” with “car,” and you’ve got a formula most people understand.
I own the title, but I don’t own the car.
Unlike the monkey, you can go find the car in the real world.
A closer analogy is Copyright Registration. You submit a work to the copyright office, claiming to be the original artist. If there is ever a dispute, the submission serves as evidence as to the date and time you claimed the work. If it predates the claims of another, and they can’t prove you transferred the work to them, you win the case.
But eventually you own the car. You never own the monkey.
Plus you can trust that no one else has your car, whereas you have no way of knowing how may times your monkey was copied or how may exist outside the scope of your “certificate”
“You wouldn’t download a car…”
That’s the worst part, where the reality is the opposite.
- my car has value because it exists as a physical thing that is useful to me. If I could download a car, it doesn’t take away from anyone, just adds value for me
- the monkey could only have value in exclusivity. It is not a material possession nor is it useful to me, but can only have value if I can prevent anyone else from having it. If I could download someone else’s monkey, then they lose any value they think it had
Its not about whether you actually own the thing or not, its the record of you owning it.
Without a central body enforcing it its basically pointless, similar to if you don’t own the title of the car you don’t actually have record of ownership and therefore don’t have the rights to go along with that legally. (In theory lol)
The potential advantage of it being on an immutable blockchain means there’s a permanent record that isn’t tied to a piece of paper, and the distributed nature of most blockchains ensure there isn’t a single point of failure. (In theory again)
If you don’t have the title to your car, and no one else does either, you can prove ownership by possession. Same with NFT, you prove ownership because you possess the wallet credentials.
So what if someone steals your car, what then?
Edit agree on the NFT point, that is the whole idea right lol
Nooo bro, I totally OWN that jay-peg bro, you can look it up bro, the token is non fungible bro, do you even know what that means, bro?
I wonder about the source of this image. She looks horribly uncomfortable…
They are actors playing wrestling in a scripted reality series
https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/john-silver-explaining-to-anna-jay
Lol from that page
Thanks!
But, wait… The guy in the OG Bro Explaining me is not Adam Sandler?!
This is why I like the other one because the bro being explained to just looks like his soul is dying.
It could have also just been unfortunate timing.
It looks set up unlike the original.
Turns out it is set-up, actually.
