Can you imagine, how much money went into all this and where it all ended up? It couldn’t have gone up in flames, it had to end with some people. I don’t think NFT’s as-is have a future, but I think that NFT’s will eventually end up in the hands of the masses in a format that isn’t focussed on profit but more as a means to share, create and own art for digital games etc.
There are countless other examples where some new service gets a lot of funding and eventually dies. Most probably really was spent out without being pocketed, fancy office was rented, state of the art tech used, huge sallaries and ridiculous benefits etc.
I cannot imagine NFTs or crypto in general being widely used. Tech is inefficient and not solving anything better than what we already have been using for years. If someone wants to sell digital art there already are ways like DeviantArt, Patreon etc.
True, I’ve been using DeviantArt and Patreon myself. But when it comes to gaming, there is something in people and wanting to collect. I think that where NFTs might make a difference is in gaming (assuming games won’t be the profit-focussed, web3 “X to earn” kind of game and actually focus on storytelling, gameplay and land well with the masses).
For example, Fortnite uses all kinds of psychological tactics to get people to buy more stuff, folding ideas explains it well: www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPHPNgIihR0
I don’t play the game myself, but I feel that this is where NFT might make a better alternative. You keep that ability to make things collectable without all the nasty bussines tactics (IF implemented that way, ofcourse).
But you could already do all that without NFTs. And if we are talking about transferring items across games which was a popular talking point in the past, I still cannot imagine how it would work and why would any dev implement this. Imagine Fortnite gun later used in Call of Duty.
Yeah moving items across games would be impossible at the moment. But I feel that with nft’s, you at least get to own the item. That, and people get to make their own. It’s not easy to add your own skin to Fortnite, for example.
I don’t want to sound like I’m for NFT’s, but I think if done right, it has a usecase.
But that’s the thing that there kind of is not a use case and I cannot imagine there ever being one that is the only viable solution to a problem.
Fortnite could provide an option to create your skins in some sort of editor with an option to share them, sell/buy them using any currency including some fake in-game currency or even export to offline file that could be later imported back. Ownership would be tied to online account and exported file could be signed.
You’re right, I didn’t really think of that. When looking solely at the purpose of sharing, just a “framework” for skins would suffice. This is basically what Minecraft is doing with their skins (at least in the Java version).
Ownership would still be a feature, but we’re really scraping at the bottom of the barrel then in regards to what is left for NFT’s to offer.
Who's going to do it? For a myriad of reasons, including "why would we?" it won't be the game developers. How would it be done without support from the developers?
Also, this already exists in a sense in the Steam Workshop.
Yes, but having it assigned in a public ledger that no one can manipulate means it’s free of censorship and is resilient against downtime, open source and something that can be orchestrated by those involved in the community rather than a single company taking a cut each time it sells and defining it’s own rules (sometimes against consumer interests).
I know I’m really stretching it here but that’s where I can see a usecase that nobody has executed so far (as all the web3 gaming stuff is just focussed on profit and earnings)
So basically, Signature and Silvergate did. Their problem was not crypto directly, but crypto customers - they had billions in deposits which didn’t stay in the bank, the customers kept withdrawing huge amounts at short notice like it was their own money or something. Neither bank could quite cover the deposits at such short notice, and eventually they just died. Both were kept working in that time. Silicon Valley Bank went down soon after in the same way, except the hot money depositors were VCs and startups.
That’s a very nice explanation, thanks! Also nice to interact with people on Lemmy! I was curious, “withdrawing huge amounts at short notice like it was their own money or something”, if that’s what you can do with it, isn’t that exactly what it is, your money?
I see, I misread it then. Slightly off-topic, but I just realized you are the one who wrote the Attack of the 50 foot blockchain and now I feel I’m in the precense of a legend. I’m going to buy your book, because I’m genuinly interested in an in-depth perspective by someone who is anti-crypto. I’m not anti-crypto, but I like to keep an open mind!
Great to see you here David! It’s a little quiet here, for sure. The FED’s wording here is a little vague as to what it will actually do (par for the course) but I wonder if proper stablecoin audits are finally on the menu.
You're telling me that my limited edition GIF of the Backstreet Boys which I got for free by having a ticket to the Backstreet Boys reunion tour is worthless?? I should have sold it for $0.10 back when the market was at its peak 😔
Crypto enthusiasts are hopeful that a once-in-four-years event which rewrites the underlying code of the world’s biggest cryptocurrency will extend the current market rally.
Buttcoin - The Crypto-Critical Comedy GODL Mine
Hot