• FishFace@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    18 hours ago

    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).

    • VieuxQueb@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 hours ago

      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.

      • FishFace@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        11 hours ago

        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.

      • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        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.

    • Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      11 hours ago

      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.

        • Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 hours ago

          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.

      • FishFace@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        15 hours ago

        Yes that’s also true… I would venture that it’s not as useful in general to understand the concept though :)