OT: Ray, how's your Bitcoin investment going?

[goonster]

Originally Posted by Michael D

They literally think an NFT is a monkey jpeg and can’t imagine the implication of tying ownership of a thing to the blockchain.

OK, I'll bite. How is it not a monkey jpeg (sorry, digital asset) with an ownership registry, and what are the implications? Maybe this really is a generational thing, but no amount of explaining would make me want to trade a vinyl LP for a unique, registered .flac (when I can have authorized digital copies for free).

Originally Posted by Michael D

man, it’s so hard to take people seriously that don’t seem to understand technology.

Maybe that's your blind spot. What makes you think we don't understand technology?

Crypto technology is not a scam, per se, but the implicit promises of high yields and regulation-free financial paradise are.

"If someone has to explain to you that it's money, then it's not money." (Nouriel Roubini, I think)

"You just don't understand the strategy." (Albanian bricklayer, 1996)

[rice rocket]

Originally Posted by goonster

OK, I'll bite. How is it not a monkey jpeg (sorry, digital asset) with an ownership registry, and what are the implications? Maybe this really is a generational thing, but no amount of explaining would make me want to trade a vinyl LP for a unique, registered .flac (when I can have authorized digital copies for free).

People investigating have found many of the high profile NFT sales have been backed by the auction houses themselves, or a paid representative. Literally paying themselves in order to create media buzz to try to bring legitimacy to the practice, when in reality, there is no real market for 6-figure JPGs.


https://amycastor.com/2021/03/14/met...t-defi-scheme/

Last week, a crypto whale going by the moniker “Metakovan” bought a Beeple artwork via Christie’s auction for $69 million—$60 million in ETH and $9 million in fees, also in ETH*—outbidding a surprised Justin Sun, founder of the Tron blockchain, in the last minute.


After the barest amount of digging, I am going to hazard a guess that the mystery Beeple buyer is Vignesh Sundaresan, a crypto entrepreneur who has been in the crypto landscape for about seven years.


...


The token distribution is something to pay attention to. Metakovan has 59% of all the B20 tokens. Why does he own the majority of tokens? As he explains it, that is to prevent any single person from owning more than half of B20 tokens—and snatching up all this wonderful artwork for themselves. The idea is to decentralize and democratize art, only Metakovan controls the token supply.

What’s interesting is that Beeple, the creator of the artwork, is actually a business partner of Metakovan’s. He owns 2% of all the B20 tokens. I’m sure there is no conflict of interest here.


WhaleStreet hosted the B20 sale on Jan. 23. Apparently, 1.6 million B20 tokens were sold to the public for $0.36 per token. After the Christie’s auction, B20 shot up to $23. It’s now down to around $16, according to Coinmarketcap. That’s a nice profit for anyone who got in early—and worth over $3 million for Beeple, if he dumps his coins quickly and there’s enough liquidity to actually sell them.

Anyways.

[Michael D]

I feel like now might be a good time to mention my long position in crypto = 0.

I might exchange USD for crypto then spend the crypto immediately but from where I sit I don’t care how much it’s worth relative to usd as long as it’s stable enough for both parties (but mainly me) to complete a transaction.

Cryptocurrency as an investment is hard for me to understand and to me is a separate topic from the actual purpose and utility of cryptocurrency.

[goonster]

Originally Posted by Michael D

actual purpose and utility of cryptocurrency.

Nobody here is disputing that, I don't think. I'm open to using cryptocurrency when that becomes a stable, reliable, convenient means of transaction.

[Michael D]

Originally Posted by goonster

OK, I'll bite. How is it not a monkey jpeg (sorry, digital asset) with an ownership registry, and what are the implications? Maybe this really is a generational thing, but no amount of explaining would make me want to trade a vinyl LP for a unique, registered .flac (when I can have authorized digital copies for free).



Maybe that's your blind spot. What makes you think we don't understand technology?

Crypto technology is not a scam, per se, but the implicit promises of high yields and regulation-free financial paradise are.

"If someone has to explain to you that it's money, then it's not money." (Nouriel Roubini, I think)

"You just don't understand the strategy." (Albanian bricklayer, 1996)

To your first point I think the implications are far greater than you have dared to imagine.

When you think of a digital asset what do you think that is? Let me tell you what some people might think that is. A $60 video game. These days you download the files and things aren’t always on a disk. Yeah but who cares about video games. Look how much money is in that industry. Now you or me can sell a game we don’t want anymore and someone else can/will buy it. This extends to many other kinds of digital assets.

Counterfeit protection. It’s not possible to have more than one of a single NFT. If you have one colnago issued Uber edition c68 NFT then two bikes roll into the shop, someone had better be asking questions.

Theft protection. You are able to prove that you own something therefore failure to provide evidence of ownership for certain things could stop a lot of criminals dead in their tracks.

I could go on and on about NFTs lol

Anyways the point of an NFT isn’t that an arbitrary thing that’s worth an arbitrary speculative amount. Again I feel like this side of the conversation is separate from the potential as a technology.

[Michael D]

Originally Posted by goonster

Nobody here is disputing that, I don't think. I'm open to using cryptocurrency when that becomes a stable, reliable, convenient means of transaction.

I mean, it kinda already is for the most part. I feel like the issue is people need a convenient wallet and they need to understand how it works. Keeping cryptocurrency on an exchange on the other hand, well, if you’ve been following the news then you may have found out why you shouldn’t keep your crypto on an exchange!

[echappist]

Originally Posted by Michael D

When you think of a digital asset what do you think that is? Let me tell you what some people might think that is. A $60 video game. These days you download the files and things aren’t always on a disk. Yeah but who cares about video games. Look how much money is in that industry. Now you or me can sell a game we don’t want anymore and someone else can/will buy it. This extends to many other kinds of digital assets.

It's disingenuous to lump in useful software along with NFT and crypto and call all of those as digital assets, as if there were no other major differences of substance among them (when there is), and then to say just because one subset of computer codes has value, it therefore stands that all computer codes have value. You are missing at least one key step in your reasoning by inductive proof.

[goonster]

Originally Posted by Michael D

I think the implications are far greater than you have dared to imagine.

So you presume.

Originally Posted by Michael D

A $60 video game. These days you download the files and things aren’t always on a disk. Yeah but who cares about video games. Look how much money is in that industry. Now you or me can sell a game we don’t want anymore and someone else can/will buy it.

I could see your $60 video game, and raise you a $100k+ industrial automation solution, but that raises the question of whether you are talking about authentication or licensing. Apps don't have to be authentic, they just have to run. The games you are talking about are not licensed (business case, etc.) and the secondary market is at GameStop, if they are on physical media. If they need a license to run, the vendor will not relinquish that to a distributed blockchain, because there's nothing in it for them.

I get it: NFT's support a secondary market, for digital assets whose value relies on uniqueness, but currently that is mostly limited to the ape jpegs, due to a failure of the collective imagination.

Originally Posted by Michael D

Counterfeit protection.
Theft protection.

Okay.

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by Michael D

Counterfeit protection. It’s not possible to have more than one of a single NFT. If you have one colnago issued Uber edition c68 NFT then two bikes roll into the shop, someone had better be asking questions.

NFTs don't always prevent counterfeiting. It is true that a single NFT is unique - but all that proves is that the NFT itself hasn't been counterfeited. If there is an object that has an NFT associated with it, but somehow that object gets lost or destroyed, what's to keep someone from applying that same NFT to a copy of the object? For example, there are bike frames with Colnago stickers that are fake Colnagos - the stickers might be real, but the frame they are applied to is not.

Also keep in mind that although themselves NFTs are unique, it is possible to associate multiple NFTs to the same object. This is how artists have been able to sell multiple NFTs for the same work of art.

[flying]

Celcius Halts withdrawing

That may concern a few

First Mover Americas: Bitcoin, Ether Plunge Anew as Celsius Halts Withdrawals

[jkbrwn]

NFTs are so effing stupid that it literally makes me want to jump off a bridge. I hate this timeline and I sincerely hope that cryptocurrencies and NFTs die out before I die out.

PS, I know cryptocurrency probably won't, but NFTs are not going to be around for very long IMO. Literal, total, hot steaming garbage ponzi-like scam that is here only to make people a quick buck. And I am 29, so it's not like I'm an old man who doesn't 'get it' yelling at clouds.

[yinzerniner]

Originally Posted by jkbrwn

NFTs are so effing stupid that it literally makes me want to jump off a bridge. I hate this timeline and I sincerely hope that cryptocurrencies and NFTs die out before I die out.

PS, I know cryptocurrency probably won't, but NFTs are not going to be around for very long IMO. Literal, total, hot steaming garbage ponzi-like scam that is here only to make people a quick buck. And I am 29, so it's not like I'm an old man who doesn't 'get it' yelling at clouds.

This is correct. The only good that I can think of from the NFT idiocy is some people getting money for their image being used over the years without just compensation. Other than that it’s just a total scam built on resources we can’t spare.

At least the respected cycling media hasn’t taken the bait to the detriment of their core businesses. What is that you say?
https://gearjunkie.com/news/outside-...inc-outerverse

[Michael D]

This has been a fun and entertaining conversation!

[seanile]

Does anyone else read this thread title in Harold Ramis's voice?

[mstateglfr]

Originally Posted by Michael D

Thanks for the civil response and I will think about it.

I have to point out though that among certain people I’ve noticed a huge lack of imagination when it comes to NFTs. They literally think an NFT is a monkey jpeg and can’t imagine the implication of tying ownership of a thing to the blockchain.

Then the same people swoop in and call bitcoin a scam, which it probably seems like some pump and dump Ponzi scam if you don’t understand the history and technology, but man, it’s so hard to take people seriously that don’t seem to understand technology.

I will guess that many people think an NFT is a monkey jpeg because what is being sold is literally a monkey jpeg. People think what they see.
I can see the potential value of blockchain and still look at a monkey jpeg and think it is beyond stupid. Those two positions can(and do) exist at the same time within people.

NFTs have been bought by people trying to prop up...NFTs. It has certainly created news buzz since even 60min managed to do a story on NFTs this past season.
I am a white 41 year old male and while I accept that I am now past the prime years to be marketed to, this entire to the moon stuff should be right up my alley. But it isnt.
I dont have any interest in owning a gif of something I can just download and save on my phone. I 'own' it too now. I dont want to own a digital copy of art that I would rather have on my wall.

Again, blockchain as a concept is something I fully understand and can accept as a potential benefit in many parts of western society.
But that doesnt mean I have to think NFTs are actually cool or beneficial or even useful.



Luka Garza, the 2021 College Basketball POY, sold his NFT for $41,000 last year. It featured highlights from his career at Iowa. Highlights that are available on youtube, thru the university, on ESPN, on B10, and can be downloaded and saved by anyone.
Oh, and he also included some physical prizes like some shoes and the chance to play HORSE together.
Apparently the interest in an NFT only wasnt going to be strong enough.
https://www.thescore.com/ncaab/news/2165306