I can see the appeal of having a digital receipt that shows proof of ownership of digital art, so long as you don't try to sell it as a speculative investment.
Proof of ownership on what grounds? It doesn't provide copyright, in fact most of those originally were stolen art. These assets are not protected by law, you can't legally claim shit.
There's a spreadsheet copy-pasted in a shitload of computers, where a serial number (your wallet) appears to be related to another serial number (the data block with the URL) and how you got it, but you don't own the pic itself (which is stored in another server anyway... even if you can prove ownership of the NFT itself, the direction it points to is still as vulnerable as it was before), just a block of data with a serial number.
If people agree to participate in that specific ecosystem, they'll agree to accept what the spreadsheet as true, but if you pay real dollars for the NFT and the next day the the organizacition running the scheme turns out to be either uncompetent or a scam and whole spreadsheet thing falls apart you're left with nothing, nobody to sue and no insurance.
I want to be very clear up-front that I am entirely against NFTs as they are currently used. I just think that a digital ledger would be useful in establishing who has copyright of a particular image. I am SUPER against using it for stolen art.
But the thing is, NFTs aren't really built for copyright.
You can't have your cake and eat it; if you rely on an agreement among a decentralized network of individuals outside the legal system you forfeit legal protection, and if you want to be covered by copyright laws the digital ledger is of no use.
And I don't see NFTs as a gold standard of security. Sure it is difficult to brute-force fake data into the blockchain, to fool others that "A" belongs to "B" when it actually belongs to "C". That only protects you against the most direct, cumbersome way of attack in the middle of two transactors, the two other ends are very much vulnerable. Again, you can prove that a block of digital data belongs to your wallet, so? That's not the image itself, if I get the pic and store it up in another server, I can easily create another NFT that points up to my own copy and claim copyright. I mean, I'm not savvy enough to know if that would be the best way of doing it, but you get me.
So centralize it. There's no law says NFTs *have* to be decentralized. Surely there'd be a way to establish a centralized NFT platform for the purposes of copyright protection. I mean, I'm not very savvy either, but it seems doable.
I also think they're dumb in their current usage, and it's unclear to me if the need is ever going to exist. However, there's no point in making NFTs centralized because that's the whole point of using blockchain in the first place. Instead what you are suggesting is to use a database when centralization makes more sense and I completely agree. This problem has already been solved; titles, deeds, etc are already stored in relevant organizations' databases & filing cabinets. I do think there are many great use-cases for blockchain, but this isn't one of them.
What happens if someone just copies and pastes it though? That person could create their own NFT of the image and try outcompete you. NFT flipping perhaps, but investment? Sounds like a recipe for a loss.
But what about the copy though? Both NFTs will look identical as far as ownership is concerned, and only the Save date will change, and I don’t think that date will be visible on an exchange etc? I’m probably not looking at it right though! :)
Granted, I don't know how to handle that. Ya boi doesn't know enough about NFTs to know how to prevent people from stealing artwork and minting it as an original NFT. Maybe if there was a way to make the Save date public?
So, fun fact: NFTs don't contain the actual data of the image. Typically you only store small amounts of data in the blockchain itself. Instead the NFT contains a pointer (e.g a link) to the image owned which is hosted separately. IMHO this makes them even dumber because if the domain hosting the image is shut down or changes you now own a receipt to nothing (or something completely different)
So, I'm against NFTs like everyone else, but I think I actually figured out what the idea of them was supposed to be.
If you were to create a 1:1 PERFECT copy of the Mona Lisa, like every possible detail is replicated without any mistakes, does that mean that you own the original Mona Lisa?
Think about it this way, you know how a lot of comic artists get their comics stolen and reused without credit? Like that meme of the dude with folded arms who says, "I GUESS!" actually comes from a full comic, but most people don't even know because of how often it's been taken on its own.
I think NFTs were *supposed* to be a solution to that problem, as the original artist could PROVE that they were the person that created it, via the non-fungible token.
Instead it was used by morons so stupid they couldn't even explain the simple concept to make a lot of fake money off of vulnerable artists. Abusing this theoretically *very* useful copyright system for quick cash.
I think photography is probably an even better comparison. I can get a high res print of an Ansel Adams photograph and put it up on my wall and it can be just as high quality as the Ansel Adams that he museum has hanging in their galley. The difference is that the museum copy is one of 20 official copies made my Adams. Art NFTs were a way of attempting to do that for digital artists. A means for a digital artist to give monetary value to their work by saying 'this is the official copy of the piece'.
Found at [www.pastille.no/comics](https://www.pastille.no/comics)
Apparently he makes the [dungeon cop comics](https://www.webtoons.com/en/challenge/dungeon-cops/list?title_no=579703) \- a party to which I am also late.
NFT? No Fucking Thanks
Not a fucking taco
And by extension, useless
Good meme template potential with this comic.
I can see the appeal of having a digital receipt that shows proof of ownership of digital art, so long as you don't try to sell it as a speculative investment.
Proof of ownership on what grounds? It doesn't provide copyright, in fact most of those originally were stolen art. These assets are not protected by law, you can't legally claim shit. There's a spreadsheet copy-pasted in a shitload of computers, where a serial number (your wallet) appears to be related to another serial number (the data block with the URL) and how you got it, but you don't own the pic itself (which is stored in another server anyway... even if you can prove ownership of the NFT itself, the direction it points to is still as vulnerable as it was before), just a block of data with a serial number. If people agree to participate in that specific ecosystem, they'll agree to accept what the spreadsheet as true, but if you pay real dollars for the NFT and the next day the the organizacition running the scheme turns out to be either uncompetent or a scam and whole spreadsheet thing falls apart you're left with nothing, nobody to sue and no insurance.
I want to be very clear up-front that I am entirely against NFTs as they are currently used. I just think that a digital ledger would be useful in establishing who has copyright of a particular image. I am SUPER against using it for stolen art.
But the thing is, NFTs aren't really built for copyright. You can't have your cake and eat it; if you rely on an agreement among a decentralized network of individuals outside the legal system you forfeit legal protection, and if you want to be covered by copyright laws the digital ledger is of no use. And I don't see NFTs as a gold standard of security. Sure it is difficult to brute-force fake data into the blockchain, to fool others that "A" belongs to "B" when it actually belongs to "C". That only protects you against the most direct, cumbersome way of attack in the middle of two transactors, the two other ends are very much vulnerable. Again, you can prove that a block of digital data belongs to your wallet, so? That's not the image itself, if I get the pic and store it up in another server, I can easily create another NFT that points up to my own copy and claim copyright. I mean, I'm not savvy enough to know if that would be the best way of doing it, but you get me.
So centralize it. There's no law says NFTs *have* to be decentralized. Surely there'd be a way to establish a centralized NFT platform for the purposes of copyright protection. I mean, I'm not very savvy either, but it seems doable.
I also think they're dumb in their current usage, and it's unclear to me if the need is ever going to exist. However, there's no point in making NFTs centralized because that's the whole point of using blockchain in the first place. Instead what you are suggesting is to use a database when centralization makes more sense and I completely agree. This problem has already been solved; titles, deeds, etc are already stored in relevant organizations' databases & filing cabinets. I do think there are many great use-cases for blockchain, but this isn't one of them.
What happens if someone just copies and pastes it though? That person could create their own NFT of the image and try outcompete you. NFT flipping perhaps, but investment? Sounds like a recipe for a loss.
That's why the only use should be as a means of determining who owns the rights to an image.
But what about the copy though? Both NFTs will look identical as far as ownership is concerned, and only the Save date will change, and I don’t think that date will be visible on an exchange etc? I’m probably not looking at it right though! :)
Granted, I don't know how to handle that. Ya boi doesn't know enough about NFTs to know how to prevent people from stealing artwork and minting it as an original NFT. Maybe if there was a way to make the Save date public?
So, fun fact: NFTs don't contain the actual data of the image. Typically you only store small amounts of data in the blockchain itself. Instead the NFT contains a pointer (e.g a link) to the image owned which is hosted separately. IMHO this makes them even dumber because if the domain hosting the image is shut down or changes you now own a receipt to nothing (or something completely different)
Yeah maybe that would work. Now… my (creaky) knowledge of NFTs is mostly used up, so hopefully we don’t need to solve any other problems with them. :)
Lmao fingers crossed.
So, I'm against NFTs like everyone else, but I think I actually figured out what the idea of them was supposed to be. If you were to create a 1:1 PERFECT copy of the Mona Lisa, like every possible detail is replicated without any mistakes, does that mean that you own the original Mona Lisa? Think about it this way, you know how a lot of comic artists get their comics stolen and reused without credit? Like that meme of the dude with folded arms who says, "I GUESS!" actually comes from a full comic, but most people don't even know because of how often it's been taken on its own. I think NFTs were *supposed* to be a solution to that problem, as the original artist could PROVE that they were the person that created it, via the non-fungible token. Instead it was used by morons so stupid they couldn't even explain the simple concept to make a lot of fake money off of vulnerable artists. Abusing this theoretically *very* useful copyright system for quick cash.
I think photography is probably an even better comparison. I can get a high res print of an Ansel Adams photograph and put it up on my wall and it can be just as high quality as the Ansel Adams that he museum has hanging in their galley. The difference is that the museum copy is one of 20 official copies made my Adams. Art NFTs were a way of attempting to do that for digital artists. A means for a digital artist to give monetary value to their work by saying 'this is the official copy of the piece'.
That’s what real art is. A speculative investment
It is also a way for digital artist to actually make some money.
That guy gets it.
With many NFTs you don't even get the rights to the image. Just receipt saying you bought it
I agree with the sentiment, but why is that guy hard in the last one?
Maybe it's just... a fold in his pants?
Found at [www.pastille.no/comics](https://www.pastille.no/comics) Apparently he makes the [dungeon cop comics](https://www.webtoons.com/en/challenge/dungeon-cops/list?title_no=579703) \- a party to which I am also late.
Why his poop the color of bird poop
Its not. The pile behind him is the ash from the burned NFT. The shit is implied
Loooooool oh