Bitcoins/Litecoins/Virtual Currencies

LachiusTZ · Aug 25, 2021

James said:
Why are you so upset that you can't figure out NFTs are a non-fungible store of value like an MMO character?

Ftfy

James · Aug 25, 2021

A very apt analogy, actually. If you could secure your MMO character absent any central authority, you have the basic concept of an NFT down. Your character's metadata makes it more or less valuable in the collection of all MMO characters depending on the scarcity of the metadata properties.

Flobee · Aug 25, 2021

James said:
A very apt analogy, actually. If you could secure your MMO character absent any central authority, you have the basic concept of an NFT down. Your character's metadata makes it more or less valuable in the collection of all MMO characters depending on the scarcity of the metadata properties.

NFTs make the most sense to me in a gaming or virtual world context. Having a character as an NFT that could move between different games and maintain some set of characteristics between those games (As agreed upon by developers) is really interesting. Its a key piece for creating a larger metaverse similar to something like Ready Player One type world.

It gets more dystopian when you consider the privacy and control aspects of having an NFT as a "digital ID" that is attached to your real identity and required for use of various online services. A true walled garden environment could be created where only those that comply with a set of guidelines could participate in society. This latter use case is more likely to manifest first IMO.

LachiusTZ · Aug 25, 2021

James said:
A very apt analogy, actually. If you could secure your MMO character absent any central authority, you have the basic concept of an NFT down. Your character's metadata makes it more or less valuable in the collection of all MMO characters depending on the scarcity of the metadata properties.

Primarily depends on the utility of the metadata properties.

Secondary consideration for value is scarcity.

Same reason I'm not a BTC maximalist

James · Aug 25, 2021

Flobee said:
It gets more dystopian when you consider the privacy and control aspects of having an NFT as a "digital ID" that is attached to your real identity and required for use of various online services.

No it doesn't, zero knowledge proofs exist.

LachiusTZ said:
Primarily depends on the utility of the metadata properties.

Secondary consideration for value is scarcity.

Same reason I'm not a BTC maximalist

But you would agree that BTC has value far beyond the utility of its metadata, yes? Figuring out the utility of NFTs is exactly what's exciting right now, and for social influencers the clout provided by owning certain NFT collections is as real a utility as anything else.

Flobee · Aug 25, 2021

James said:
No it doesn't, zero knowledge proofs exist.

What? If a service requires your ID to have certain characteristics ZKP does nothing to solve that. It simply allows for authentication without disclosing all the details. It would depend on implementation requirements. If a verification checkpoint checked you digital ID and required the "vaccinated" flag for example ZKP would simply allow that query to be done without disclosing your "degenerate gamer" tag as well.

LachiusTZ · Aug 25, 2021

James said:
No it doesn't, zero knowledge proofs exist.

But you would agree that BTC has value far beyond the utility of its metadata, yes? Figuring out the utility of NFTs is exactly what's exciting right now, and for social influencers the clout provided by owning certain NFT collections is as real a utility as anything else.

No. BTC has whatever value people think it has. It's scarcity value is entirely based on the perception of value. It's why I like ETH, there is real utility in it.

"Clout" for having a half million dollar cartoon rock does not have as real a utility as land.

You might end up right. But it's going to be long after we are all dead.

Flobee · Aug 25, 2021

LachiusTZ said:
No. BTC has whatever value people think it has. It's scarcity value is entirely based on the perception of value. It's why I like ETH, there is real utility in it.

Ignoring the utility of a permissionless, peer to peer, censorship resistant electronic payment network is foolish. The store of value narrative is based on scarcity and perceived value, sure. The actual reason Bitcoin was created is consistently overlooked and ignored. ETH can do more things, but the things BTC does well it does better than anything else that exists.

If you're paying attention to geopolitics and the shift away from American control over international trade you should see the value of a decentralized alternative to the digital Yuan. Stating BTC value is purely based on a meme or perceived value is a flawed perspective.

James · Aug 25, 2021

Flobee said:
If a verification checkpoint checked you digital ID and required the "vaccinated" flag for example ZKP would simply allow that query to be done without disclosing your "degenerate gamer" tag as well.

Which means the privacy aspect is simply a non-issue, and you're simply a paranoid freak about "walled gardens" when the reality is freedom of association will always exist.

LachiusTZ said:
"Clout" for having a half million dollar cartoon rock does not have as real a utility as land.

In a digital landscape, clout is as real a utility as anything else. Again, you're on the FoH boards and not the LoS or IGN boards.

Arden · Aug 25, 2021

Rangoth said:
On NFTs….real questions.
I think I understand it all and to me I see the value in buying a real thing with an NFT “tag”. Like a first edition baseball card, painting, autograph, etc.

But honest question, if I buy an nft meme or image. Why can’t someone just screenshot it and use it? Who do I “sue” for using it off license? Do my lawyers send a cease and desist to someone? Not being a wiseass, genuinely curious. How does one protect a digital asset?

I think your question is less about NFTs and more about copyright laws. There are already comparable examples that exist for your scenario. NFTs don't really add any new elements into the equation that can't be addressed with existing laws.

Scenario 1- You own "The Old Guitarist," an original work by Picasso. You own the actual work of art, but you don't own the copyright. There are a million prints of "The Old Guitarist" floating around out there and you can't do shit about it just because you own the original.

Scenario 2- You own the copyright to "Eleanor Rigby" by the Beatles. Because you own the reproduction rights, if someone reproduces the song without your permission you can take action against them.

Cryptopunks or those stupid "rocks" and "acorns" that are selling for hundreds of thousands of dollars are basically Scenario 1. You can own them, but you can't sue anyone for making a copy of them and distributing it (at least I don't think you can).

Eventually, we will definitely run into Scenario 2 with NFTs, I'm just not sure we are really there yet.

Flobee · Aug 25, 2021

James said:
freedom of association will always exist.

This shows a distinct lack of historical knowledge. Freedom is not guaranteed and is in no way shape or form the norm. If you don't think systems will be created to enforce compliance then you're not paying attention. You're free to disagree on this point of course but it shows a deep seated difference between our world views that likely explains our asset preferences. You appear to be defaulting to trust in systems and those who create them and I lean towards implicitly distrusting them.

James · Aug 25, 2021

No, it shows that you don't understand that blockchains are fucking trustless. Spend some effort figuring it out.

LachiusTZ · Aug 25, 2021

James said:
Which means the privacy aspect is simply a non-issue, and you're simply a paranoid freak about "walled gardens" when the reality is freedom of association will always exist.

In a digital landscape, clout is as real a utility as anything else. Again, you're on the FoH boards and not the LoS or IGN boards.

Civil rights act killed freedom of association

Digital landscape is a derivative of reality. Utility in reality is... Tangible. Clout is intangible. Internet clout can have utility, but it's not the same ballpark as physical assets, it's not even the same game.

You can't eat your cartoon rocks.

I get what your saying, but comparing it to land makes you look fucking stupid and crazy.

Flobee · Aug 25, 2021

James said:
No, it shows that you don't understand that blockchains are fucking trustless. Spend some effort figuring it out.

You've got to be trolling me

James · Aug 25, 2021

LachiusTZ said:
Civil rights act killed freedom of association

There's no civil rights act on the Ethereum blockchain as far as I'm aware.

LachiusTZ said:
Clout is intangible. Internet clout can have utility, but it's not the same ballpark as physical assets, it's not even the same game.

And yet tons of rich people are spending real money on an intangible like clout. You're blatantly refusing to admit what's already reality.

Flobee said:
You've got to be trolling me

No, I'm fucking not, you continually fail to understand how decentralization, permisionlessness, and trustlessness protect blockchain users from nefarious structures. Seriously, spend some effort at least thinking about it.

Tmac · Aug 25, 2021

LachiusTZ said:
Ftfy

If Lord British or Asmongold were NFT’s that shit would sell.

Tmac · Aug 25, 2021

Arden said:
I think your question is less about NFTs and more about copyright laws. There are already comparable examples that exist for your scenario. NFTs don't really add any new elements into the equation that can't be addressed with existing laws.

Scenario 1- You own "The Old Guitarist," an original work by Picasso. You own the actual work of art, but you don't own the copyright. There are a million prints of "The Old Guitarist" floating around out there and you can't do shit about it just because you own the original.

Scenario 2- You own the copyright to "Eleanor Rigby" by the Beatles. Because you own the reproduction rights, if someone reproduces the song without your permission you can take action against them.

Cryptopunks or those stupid "rocks" and "acorns" that are selling for hundreds of thousands of dollars are basically Scenario 1. You can own them, but you can't sue anyone for making a copy of them and distributing it (at least I don't think you can).

Eventually, we will definitely run into Scenario 2 with NFTs, I'm just not sure we are really there yet.

There is not yet case law regarding the duplication of NFT’s.

Arden · Aug 25, 2021

Tmac said:
There is not yet case law regarding the duplication of NFT’s.

Not surprising. It's definitely going to be an emerging area of law though. Young lawyers smart enough to focus on that area of IP work aren't going to lack for clients and the near future I'd imagine.

Lightning Lord Rule · Aug 25, 2021

Haus said:
This convinces me we're now in a race to see which happens first... Cypto saves society, or crypto destroys society... Currently at coin flip odds.

I think we already covered this, or at least I covered it. Gun Club membership, And all the shop items should be NFTs. Hell, ownership/admin over your own sub-forum could be an NFT someone purchases, and then could later sell to someone else. And encoded in the NFT contract could be that FOH makes a cut of whatever the sale price is. Combine the various currencies and make one parachain for $FOH , People who invest in $FOH and stake/farm can then purchase rights and abilities on the board.

It actually is what the endgame is for NFTs in many ways.

Forgot to respond to this the other day. I do remember you posting about this before, but I honestly have no idea how to go about doing this and then integrating it into the forum software.
PM me if you have some ideas on how to get it done

James · Aug 25, 2021

Arden said:
Eventually, we will definitely run into Scenario 2 with NFTs, I'm just not sure we are really there yet.

We kind of are, the problem is that an NFT by definition cannot be reproduced or copied, but for instance Ciphersquares transfers the rights to the art piece represented by the NFT on sale as well: Ciphersquares

Ciphersquares is a digital art collectible built on top of the Ethereum network. The collection consists of 3,623 unique digital artworks (the “Ciphersquares” or “Art”) that are hashed on the blockchain and are represented by a non-fungible token (“NFT”) each, stored in .jpeg format on arweave.net. The Ciphersquares smart contract allows participants to purchase the NFT representing the digital artworks from The Company. The Company does not provide or intend to provide a secondary marketplace for the NFT. Ciphersquares will provide a user interface to visualize the digital art works. After the sale of the NFT, the ownership of the NFT and to the connected Art, is transferred from the Ethereum smart contract to the purchaser and concludes the business transaction between both parties.

The Company is selling the Art via the NFT and is making the Application available to you. The Ciphersquares are digital art works and serve no other purpose other than that of an art work.

Bitcoins/Litecoins/Virtual Currencies

Rogue Deathwalker Box

Ahn'Qiraj Raider

Vyemm Raider

Rogue Deathwalker Box

Ahn'Qiraj Raider

Vyemm Raider

Rogue Deathwalker Box

Vyemm Raider

Ahn'Qiraj Raider

Blackwing Lair Raider

Vyemm Raider

Ahn'Qiraj Raider

Rogue Deathwalker Box

Vyemm Raider

Ahn'Qiraj Raider

Adventurer

Adventurer

Blackwing Lair Raider

Il_Duce Lightning Lord Rule

Lightning Fast

Ahn'Qiraj Raider