Most NFTs have been speculation/land grabs, and the vast majority will go to zero. But the underlying technology is here to stay. Call them by whatever name but they’ll be ubiquitous in 3-5 years. You might be asking, ubiquitous for what? You name it. Concert tickets, the title to your house, memberships to anything, your mortgage etc. A token is simply a verifiable digital asset. In an increasingly blended world of IRL & online, proof of ownership in a secure, verifiable way will be paramount. The ability to engage & reward using blockchain will be a game changer.
6 Likes
Whatever happened to that Metaverse property ownership stuff?
One of my personal issues with it as of now is that I don’t understand ownership of digital “originals” of visual art. I see photographers selling “originals” of their photos, but I don’t understand how that’s differentiated from equal quality copies, or why I should care.
Photography is an interesting comparison. I’d say I lump it with other prints (like posters) in that artists can control value based on the number they release. You can do the same thing with NFTs I believe. They don’t HAVE to be 1 of 1. Is that what you mean?
In terms of proof of ownership, that’s a big point of the block chain. It proves my digital copy is an original while yours is just a right click and save.
Doesnt surprise me that @anon72818525 is an NFT bro.
This is my complete naivety but is there something illegal or preventing artists or whomever from minting two NFTs of the same work?
Not that I’m aware of.
Then this conversation is even more muddy to me. I don’t understand the draw of owning a “unique” piece of digital art when the same art can be minted into another NFT
1 Like
I guess so, yeah, although I’ve seen a lot of them marketed as 1 of 1 “originals”. In something like that, do we as a society value blockchain proved originals over copies of the same quality? I’d lean towards no
A different way to think about “ownership” would be how musicians often don’t own their masters and therefore miss out on a huge chunk of revenue that is generated with their music.
Artists who own their masters control all licensing and revenue streams.
There is only one proprietary piece of intellectual property. Everything else is a controlled derivative (streams, cd sales, any other sort of commercialization)
1 Like
Unless someone mints a new NFT from the same work, right? Or maybe I’m just getting hung up on that.
I work with a lot of very expensive, very limited pieces of art. We have lost clients a few times over the years by expanding what was originally 4 pieces, each a different color to 9 different colors. Same thing happened again when we did a run of 13 and later expanded it to 99. If it can happen in the crystal world you damn well know it is/will happen in the blockchain world.
2 Likes
Brag about it
6 Likes
Yeah, I get having variants of the original work. My question is whether the exact image can be more than one NFT
EDIT: Ok, exact isn’t a great word here. I mean same in terms of pixel to pixel, not same as in the same digital signature
I don’t have an issue with it from a producer standpoint, I just don’t understand it as a consumer
The Rail Ridin’ Rejects
If we continue with the analogy to physical art - I’m sure a painter can reproduce an original painting. Sure, it won’t be as exact of a match as literally duplicating a digital image, but it could be close enough that it doesn’t matter. Would that second art work necessary dilute the value of the original? I’d expect collectors or people who find value in those things would know which was the original vs V2 and the original would still be higher valued.
Not sure what I’m trying to say exactly. Just thinking out loud I guess. For the record, I also don’t really “get” the current implementation of NFTs.
1 Like
Doesn’t surprise me that you totally missed the point of this conversation, including the part where I said I wasn’t into them
That makes sense in the physical world because there will still be subtle variations even if everything looks the same: brushstrokes, color blend, etc…
But with a digital image you can literally make every pixel identical. To me, that diminishes its value. But also, my opinion doesn’t matter cause I don’t participate and don’t know shit about fuck
2 Likes