This one goes out to all the NFT bros who a few years ago said "enjoy being poor" to people who rightfully called NFts scams, who are now facing the music.
A lot of these guys aren't the ones facing the music, but the people they suckered in. Most of the NFT bros knew it was a load of rubbish and were in it to make as much money before everyone else realised it too, and the whole thing collapsed. It's basically another speculator bubble, like many that have existed before, despite how many people have tried to convince us otherwise.
I'm shocked it has taken this long for NFTs to go bust. Especially since its not real art and its not tangible. Its like games on an online service. Once its gone, so are the games
NFTs depended on the premise that one day in the near future, someone would be willing to pay millions of dollars for a receipt just because it was associated with a jpeg so unique that there's no other jpeg just like it. It's like people looked at comic books, learned that some nerds are willing to pay insane amounts of money for rare issues, but were completely ignorant of one important factor. That these comic books are almost always older than most people on the internet. And because they're so old, it makes sense that there's only one or three issues in the world from the original print with the first time appearance of a beloved character that is still in pristine condition because it was never subjected to the greasy fingers of a child who bought the comic because they actually wanted to read it. It makes sense that this is something that would have value, in the form of bragging rights, to a community that has existed for half a lifetime. Nobody is going to be interested in a receipt of a jpeg that is only unique because it's a combination of 20 different parts put together from a list of 100 different items picked out by a random number generator on a website in 2020.
One fundamental problem with NFTs always was that no one actually was interested in the product behind it, unlike with comic books. Another problem being that it has no legal meaning, so nothing actually worth owning was ever tied to NFTs
Also Comic book have history behind it. The creator, their imagination, how their life history and hardwork and idea shape the comic he/she created. the comic story, how the comic character/icon born, the beautifull/amazing pages, how their story be inspiring other people etc etc. Meanwhile NFT is just Random Generated Picture which anyone can do by typing something on some aplication. Nothing special.
I think NFTs could be very useful for like... A photographer for example. Once upon a time buying an original Ansel Adams could be an investment. Nfts could bring some of that back. But there has to be value in what's behind it.
As a visual artist that received so many messages from people that asked me to make NFTs because "they wanted to support me as an artist" and saying no because there already was an easy way to support my work through buying prints, shirts, originals, whatever; the NFT market crashing makes me smile :)
@@MuscleCarLover Heavily disagree with the AI art market collapsing. It has only been improving by the day and you can generate most things flawlessly. Hand crafted art is still better at this point in time but AI will slowly encroach until it is undistinguishable.
I love how Muta is holding the camera like this, it feels like he has his hands clasped on our necks while ranting about NFTs. Being held hostage by a man driven insane by the ramblings of the masses about NFTs.
Good comment. But nfts weren't adopted by the masses. They were adopted by tons of nft bros, "get rich quick grifters" and a few companies, who all made a big fuss about them. But most people either didn't care about nfts or they hated them.
Hearing this made my month. Literally had a friend who stopped hanging out with my group because she wanted to focus on NFT with her new NFT buddies and that she wanted to focus on the future with her investments while we we not productive enough for her.
When NFT's were first booming i recall thinking "this seems ridiculous, but maybe there will be some value assigned to these tokens that will give them some kind of legitimate value" which i quickly realized was false, but the dirt on the coffin for me was the constant need for those promoting NFT'S to reassure everyone that "it isnt a scam". Always the true sign of a scam.
>invent a useless asset >hype everyone to buy it so its short term value skyrockets >sell them and cash out >watch as the "investors" are left with a devalued asset literally how all these nfts and cryptos work. the only one that has some use is bitcoin because it's used for illegal shit and paranoid conspiracy types.
the thing is that even if you did assign value like a house or a car to them, the owner can uncouple that ownership. legally the nft doesn't mean anything just the deed(rather the deed registry itself) for the car/house does. plus a nft can be lost so any use like real estate or cars or whatever would need to have a mechanism to move it to a different one.
Didnt those people realize that if they themselves can hang up their nft's or paint them over their walls, so can everybody else without buying the nft? 😂
Remember when Jimmy Fallon and Paris Hilton promoted buying Bored Apes and got sued for not disclosing it was a paid ad? That is what I think of when I think of NFT's.
When NFTs first came out, I actually thought I was being the stupid one for not understanding it. I just couldn't wrap my head around it, I never understood why people would spend their money on NFTs.
something similar will happen again. probably in the crypto market, but not necessarily. the world economy is fucked up with big nosed bankers printing money whenever they want
That's how the entire space is designed, not just NFTs. They're designed to baffle you and leave you wowed thinking "I don't understand it, but clearly there must be something there!". Issue is that if you have a computer science background and try looking into it from a practical angle you'll very quickly find that the tech not only doesn't live up to the manufactured hype and promises, but is actively detrimental. You throw out all the benefits of the traditional systems and you don't even get any benefits from it in return. Their biggest sin is removing the comp sci barrier of entry to understanding it and putting its uselessness up in front of the average joe's face in a way they can understand it.
@@mettaursp309 Oh yeah, in cryptography you can't just accept a claim without mathematically prove it. Because for one, cryptography is brittle. Once you break one of the assumption, the entire protocol is broken. Let's say you mint an NFT, i could just mint another NFT with the exact same content. Unless you have another way of authenticating who is who, my NFT is just as valuable as yours. That simple flaw is so bafflingly simple, it's just never went into cryptobros skull. It's also why art theft is so easy with NFT. Another one, you can't 100% guarantee you can exchange coins between chains, because it's 2 different consensus (you can't merge consensus). To do that, you have to trust a third-party, which has to make sure the transaction is atomic (and take the loss if the value change interim, or if their valuation is wrong, etc).
I would feel sorry for these people losing their money onto this, but then I remember when they were calling us "idiots" for not getting NFTs as well. I remember the guy saying "have fun staying poor". Ubisoft saying NFTs are "the future of gaming". I remember people grabbing art made by someone else without permission and attempting to sell them as NFTs. I even remember a colleague bragging how he made five dollars in profits by selling one and how soon he won't need to work anymore as his NFT trading business will soon skyrocket and how smug he was about it. People were warning them this was a scam from the very beginning. These guys have spit on their faces and laughed instead.
Muta, there's another utility to NFTs that you failed to mention. In truth, they're very useful for identifying shady companies who glom onto them without a second thought. Sure, the value of NFTs is almost zero across the board, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't still point and laugh at Square Enix and Ubisoft.
The people I feel sorry for are the middle aged and elderly people who listened to their nephews about investing and took everything their family members said to heart. They were ignorant and scammed. Anyone younger should have known better.
expecting skins from one game to fit into another is like expecting parts from your diesel truck to fit and work just fine in your gasoline racecar with zero tinkering
We've had cross-game items come up in the industry every now and then. They're rare only because of the effort needed to model the item between the two engines, balance their stats and mechanics between the two games, and hash out licensing/copyright between the two studios. The idea of "transferring" the "ownership" of the item was the only part of this NFTs "solved," and that was already the easiest part of the problem.
This comment section hasn't made any money in crypto/nfts & it shows. BTW crypto/nfts is just starting, still in the baby stages. People shouldn't speak on things they don't comprehend. Most people today are so lost on who controls the world & how it is all connected to crypto. You all are getting left behind
putting up an nft in a virtual mansion is the equivalent of me making my sims live their best lives while i’m depressed at home binge playing video games
it's like selling a cell on your Google sheet next to a link, bytedata, or text and claiming your name in cell means you own whatever is next to it like your random ass cell on random ass Google sheet means anything vs any other. they are selling hyperlinks to images pretending nobody else can link to same website or claiming you magically own whatever you link too. they are pushing limits of reality trying to prove they have a negative iq
I loved how they constantly "what if"-ed until the bitter end but never delivered on anything, every project the creators vanished. Only game that had a product was The Sandbox and I worked with them previously, their entire project was a facade to appear high quality to investors but their product was held together by ducttape and bandaids
I remember playing The Sandbox before the whole NFT thing. Stopped for years because it kept crashing on my Tablet, and the Steam version never worked out for me. Imagine my surprise when, after all these years of not playing, I come back to see them shill NFTs.
NFT’s were only invented to shock the crypto market during its bull run. Governments and Hedge funds were behind it. It successfully deterred money from being invested in BTC, and instead retail bought NFT’s because their favorite Twitter celeb promoted it. Whole crypto market has been in shambles ever since. Successful psy op. So successful most people don’t even recognize it...
NFTs have always from the beginning been an oxymoronic concept to me. It's literally the same thing as commissioning art from an artist except you want to flaunt it online without any water marks to prevent reuse. It's beyond idiotic and it's crazy (yet unsurprising) that people actually thought for a second that buying an image online that is publically displayed WITHOUT a water is going to mean they own that picture and no one else can.
I was never able to wrap my head around NFTs. I don't understand where the prices come from or why anyone would want to pay the absurd prices for a picture or source code or whatever it is you're paying for. Most of the NFTs were trash drawings. Like the monkey ones. I don't understand how anyone would pay thousands for a reskinned picture of a monkey.
Commissioning art from an artist is way better. You can get art customized to you, possibly featuring a character you created. In many ways, you can be said to actually "own" an image you commissioned more than you can some premade NFT.
@@ENCHANTMEN_ Or can you get an artist to commission an NFT and watch the value increase? Maybe sell it for more than you paid for it? You people are such close-minded NPCs. "RUclipsr I like says something is stupid, then I agree it's stupid".
Eh, between you and the client you actually would have been the only one making the money tho, but morality wise I get feeling justified you didn't rip people off
i made them a few times , stopped in the middle then started again . money is money , whatever the client wants to do with their project afterwards is their headache . They normally pay more than the average client as well.
This was the most foreseeable conclusion. People only bought nfts to sell it at a higher price. Once it gets too high you can’t sell it for profit which will tank the price. Absolute SHOCKER.
Finally people are understanding what NFT's are actually worth.. I was in this exact same spot here 2-3 years ago, welcome.. glad you could make it! Sorry about your loss, but the world is better for it.
Only the idiots with enough money to lose it did. Hopefully there weren't actual people living paycheck to paycheck saving up to buy those horrible ideas.
Love it when I see adoptable character designs with actual artistic value that are basically non blockchain nfts having more use and value than actual nfts
Not to mention the art is almost always infinitely better. I'd rather own cute art that I can commission more cute art of and help an artist pay their bills than a reject gross-out show monkey that no one wants to touch because it's so ugly.
those are cute and are created by someone who genuinely wants to share their artistic talent with others while still making a profit, nfts are monkeys with funny hats and letters and numbers
@@user-cu1uj6bl3r oh lucky you! I tried but was never able to make more than like 5 or 10 dollars off of one. I think my style is kinda eclectic lol. Do you have a toyhouse acct? And yeah i feel like some of my stuff is worth 20x a monkey png lol
Muda went complete Rambo on calling stupid people out 😂, being brutally honest is something most don't do nowadays. Thanks for being a genuine human being brother!
I always found it bizarre how obsessed the mainstream was with NFTs all of a sudden in 2021….but most of these people ignored Bitcoin for over a decade.
Mainstream media is always obsessed with everything that creates clicks. But to be fair - it was funny reading about this all the time with a bunch of 🍿🍿🍿
As I remember it, Bitcoin became associated with sites like Silk Road and various dodgy activities fairly early on which tainted it's image, at least to some extent.
Bitcoin for the longest was just seen as a shady way to transfer money between people, so the media didn’t really want to talk about the online criminal world brewing.
During the NFT fever I made hundreds of images for projects, I got paid for the images and I could not care less about the selling profits because none sold, I charged commercial use, I upgraded my machine, I cleared all my debts, I bought cool stuff for me, and the guys I made the projects just got in debt because they paid so much for the arts and the marketing that they got in trouble when the ETH sank. Lots of artists who came before me did the same and made even more money because everyone had wallets full to invest on the arts. I miss NFTs just because of this, it was a free farm of money for artists.
I never scammed anyone, I offered my price, some accepted it, others not. It is how selling art works, specially for commercial use. @@jakefootball9402
@@tuwumuchwell, much like the value of a NFT is based entirely on the believe in the value of the NFT, the value of art is also entirely based on the believe in the value of the art. So, once artificially generated art will become more and more popular, digital art will probably loose most of its value fairly quickly. So any artist out here will soon experience what happened to NFTs first hand.
I do a bit of digital art as a hobby, and one of my uncles told me I should have gotten into making NFTs. I’m glad I didn’t because I’d be pissed if my art was worthless. I’d rather do commissions and get my money upfront
Important note: most NFTs are not stored on the blockchain and the “receipt” you buy is just a link to where the picture is stored. It could be stored on a site like imgur and the landing page of the link can be changed when the actual storage owner feel like it. If the want to change your “bOrEd ApE” to an image of a turd, they very well could do just that
@@soundboardist That depends on the NFT. Take the trump collection. They dont point to an IPFS image, they point to trump's website. /1234.jpg right now is a picture of trump, but if that website goes down, then /1234.jpg points to... nothing. Not all nft images are backed using a link that can't mutate over time. TLDR: Just because a token isn't fungible, doesn't mean the underlying image isn't.
@@soundboardist if the link set in the contract is a redirect link, then the end page can be changed thus the picture changes as well. Otherwise if it is stored at your own local server, you can reroute the server to point to a different location on it. This could definitely be used for a scam/rugpull
The receipt is just a receipt. At the end of the day there is no physical or digital object you own via an NFT. You simply own a unique receipt. The person that owns the object or image can SAY the owner of the receipt owns the object or image but without a contract that is not legally binding.
I once sold 2 NFT's on Opensea for about 80 bucks. It was crazy how someone bought that from me since it took me all of 2 min to make both. I know it's not much but I knew it was worthless when I made them and I am so glad to see this toxic fad fall apart like it should have. A fool and their money are easily parted
NFTs are like having a tickets to a show but then you try and sell those tickets long after the concert is over, and it's available for anyone to see online at anytime anyway
As I pointed out; If you want nft's to have value, make some baised on characters you have copyright/ trademark to, sell them to someone who will use them in media, sue them, and LOSE the lawsuit. It only takes 4 casses, to make consistent case law in a state court, which, is really all most judges look at, if it exists. Do this in places like Florida or California, and, the ken penders sonic character / Disney nft's, will allow enough new, popular media to surface, to jump start the global economy, while making nft investors/ leasers, a pretty good passive income. : )
What always confused me was why so much money and popularity went into NFTs. When I was first told what an NFT was in response to hiking popularity, I was honestly so confused. I couldn't understand why so much money went into it and thought maybe there was some fundamental reasoning I couldn't comprehend because it had something to do with latest technology. I'm sort of glad to see the market normalize back to reality and to see that my initial reaction was accurate
Easy, the popularity was all about the speculation and being able to make money selling it. People looking at this expecting some sort of tech related reasoning missed the points. Imagine you saw a new toaster come out and you see hundreds of people just buying them of Walmart for $20 and turning around and selling it for $20,000 or more, you would go buy some and sell them. Everyone was just trying to get a piece of that cake since they all saw that people were making money. Problem is the reason that they were selling because people thought they would sell for more, and there only so much you could climb before it collapsed.
@@davidgzmn12345 Yes, but a toaster has inherent value. I failed to see any inherent value in NFTs, and I'm not sure what caused the initial jump in prices of it, but after the initial jump(s), it seemed like people were reacting to the price hikes and hoping to claim a piece of the pie. Like, it's within the realm of collectibles and expensive art pieces, where there are people willing to spend a certain amount for certain things. But, NFT's were different in the sense that there was no history, no brand recognition, no famous ties, etc. Speculation I get. But why they chose to speculate in NFTs (before the price hikes) I don't really get. I'm sure most of the initial people who got into NFTs did it for the latest fad and not the money.
If you want an actually cool pfp that supports artists, commission an artist you like to draw a unique one for you on commission. It's a damn sight cheaper than any of this NFT BS, and you actually get something hand-crafted to your preferences. Better yet, you actually end up "owning" the image for real (most of these NFTs you don't even legally "own" the image, you just own the token!)
NFTs were the worst for artists since it made stealing worse and opportunist assholes either scammed artists into pouring dozens of hours of worm into NFTs to steal the money and commission or pay them garbage and pocket 90%
I agree. Not all indie artists do it, not all of them do it all the time, it depends on their schedule, and indie artists usually only do it for non-commercial use (like what you pictured) with prices listed, some (usually big-name artists) only do it for commercial use with no prices listed (instead more like 'contact us for pricing' that B2B companies often do), and I seem to recall that some do both non-commercial and commercial licencing for their commissions but I may be wrong. Edit: I had also remembered that I've been too busy to work on my own art, including model sheets for some characters I had been working on as well as drawing myself. I often see users (or teams at companies in the case of commercial commissions) handing in model sheets to artists they commission to help them with art direction. Some artists even include basic model sheet creation as part of their commissions.
I was actually stupid enough to buy some when it all started back in 2020/2021. I didn't spend a whole lot on them but the fact that I did spend anything at all is baffling to me now.
Well, you can get the value back, with the right mailing addresses and lawyers. I commented it a few seconds ago in full , but, it basically goes like this; Make some nft's of characters YOU own and copyright, sell them to someone who will use them in some form of media, sue them for there use, and lose the case on purpose. Congrats; you just created one of the first 4 case law examples needed, to prove an nft grants a non licensable right, to use or commission use of the character shown in the art. All judges care about is case law. Just rinse and repeat, and, pretty soon, you'll pretty much be able to restart the global economy solely based on the new media and merchandise, like you hit it with an adrenaline needle from pulp fiction. : )
@@jimcable9689i dont think that's how this works lmao, even if you were insane enough to do this this wouldn't magically grant nfts copyright status lol
My only regret is that I didn't scam idiots out of money myself, I know one guy that made one in MS paint as a joke and someone unironically paid him 500$ for it
Whoever bought them are the dumbest people in the world. It was all just a scam from the start and people keep falling for it. Hopefully this NFT topic comes to an end, I was tired of it when it “blew up” and I’m tried of it now.
NFTs and crypto will probably stick around as a new medium for MLMs to operate IMO. But they will probably never blow up like they did in 2021 ever again. Crypto might have a chance but I kinda think it’s been tarnished by SBF/FTX for normal people to trust it.
Crypto is not worth shit. Never was, never will. It's not backed by anything. Its sole value is what a bunch of internet people who have your money claim it is, until too many people want their physical fiat currency back.
@@maddieb.4282a ton of people made a lot of profit on it. It was a legitimate crypto currency. Its like a fashion trend. If a certain kind of jeans is really popular, and you decide to buy like 10.000 of them, and then you sell them for a profit, but after that they loose popularity, some poor Schmuck now owns a worthless pair of pants, while you made a bunch of money. If NFTs would have stayed popular, which they maybe would have if the crypto currency market wouldn't be so ridiculously overinflated already, then they would continue to be a valid currency and value asset. The value of a currency is entirely based on if people believe in the value of that currency.
Hahaha as of yesterday Reddit was still selling them as custom snoos. Like I took the free ones just for the customized snoo, I didn't even acknowledge it being an NFT
It’s amazing that they thought “original” digital files were gonna be worth something in the first place. Do us artists a favor y’all, and buy a commission if you have the money (and don’t talk them down) Edit: also, damn, I haven’t heard of NFTs in a hot minute. You know they fell off when I’m actively in the art community and forgot about them
to be fair bottled air is actually worth something and is being used to be bought as a joke/present "for people that don't need anything"(as they market it as) though still costing money, at least for the plastic bottle itself
I've always explained this to my family and friends. It's like beanie babies, but at the end of it, you'll have a permanent internet record of you being a dumbass, instead of a pile of cute plush animals to give to your kids, grandkids, nieces, etc, and a funny story to tell about the halcyon days of decades ago.
Not to shit at our crypto bros But buying Jpegs for huge amounts of money like they are freaking pokemon cards and then go Pikachu face when they tank their value is just too funny to not laugh at
it's actually worse than that: they don't even own the digital asset: they just own a link, a string of character thatpoint toward a picture. not the picture itself
I always thought that a sort of "free" blockchain like that pi thing wouldve been great for copyrighting for indies. No investment, barely any environmental impact just a timestamp that's confirmed by multiple devices that proves you were the first to share it. I hoped that could be a way to wrestle copyright away from large companies and stop some of that legal bullying.
NFTs have already shown that "first to share it" is meaningless to ownership. Many art pieces got stolen from the original artists and made into an NFT. There's no actual ownership validation with Blockchain
When I was told about NFTs by a friend who was all hyped about it, my mind went immediately to the "If it's too good to be true, it probably isn't" mindset. Seems like I rolled a 20 on my Insight check.
Some people seriously didn't see this coming? YIKES. Literally my entire response to NFTs was "Right click -> Save image as..." This NFT stuff is completely unbelievable. If you wanna take your chances at an unreliable medium of gaining money, just stick to a $2 or $5 scratch ticket every once in a blue moon idk I'm too shocked to get all of my "omg WHYYYYY" into words.
Had a man round here in the summer selling magic mushrooms chocolates with the NFT monkey on it. Didn't pay a penny towards it. Another right click, save image as, solution.
I still remember that one group that essentially was using them as a bonus for going to an event, like it was those little drawings done at free comic book day events, but digitally, and it didn't cost extra or anything, that was honestly the only good usage I've heard of. They were just doodling monkeys as a bonus for going to the event, that's actually fair enough, they weren't meant to hold value except to the recipient.
My mom got an NFT as part of an art project, you went to a website and made a screenshot of a moving 3D object and it was made an NFT for you. Pretty cute.
Great monologue! I dont know if you have any prepared notes but its amazing how you roll off your monologue in such an engaging way and nearly flawlessly.
As someone with subtle knowledge in gamemaking and a lot of rigging/modelling knowledge I can easily tell that you cant simply drag and swap a model into another game. Different games EVEN ON THE SAME ENGINE might work completely differently unless they use the same unified rigging system for said engine. Various games, especially on the unity engine requires modification of models if you would like to move them over to a different game. You would have to rename bonestructures, redo animations probably. So yes. Blockchains wouldnt really make this completely doable. And then there are copyright problems. If these models where frequently shared around there would be even more ripped models floating around the internet than there is already. It would require the full co-operation of every game and for every studio to join up to have teams dedicated into porting models and assets over for the pure reason they are tied to an NFT someone would "like to use" in the different game.
If anything, blockchain would probably make this whole thing *even harder to do,* because on top of everything you've described one would also have to attach the whole blockchain system to actually manage the model/skin migrations based on NFT ownership. But (purely hypothetically) if we already had such a wonderful coordination between multiple companies and model/texture cross-compatibility infrastructure between several games and/or game engines, why do we even need blockchains at all in this equation to begin with?
Obviously you're not just going to move the NFT to another random game and expect it to work. a designer or programmer will still need to implement the NFT and create a representation of its metadata within their own game for it to actually be usable between different games. you might have an NFT of a banana in one game, but when you move it to another game, that NFT meta data could be represented as a machine gun in that game. someone will still need to do the work to create an item out of the actual NFT. but the beauty of the world of cryptocurrency that 99% of people are too stupid to realize the importance of, is the fact that it is permissionless. you dont need authorization from anyone to participate in the development of a project. you can utilize the assests how you see fit. no one will be able to tell you not to make something a certain way. once the infrastructure is actually built up and the first few games pop up with full crypto capability, people will actually begin to understand what permissionless and open source actually means. the NFT is NOT just some picture. the "picture" is just a URL that was saved in the metadata that represents it. It's literally the least I'important aspect of an NFT. what an NFT ACTUALLY is, is a token on a ledger that has every transaction and movement of it recorded. what that token is is totally limitless. it can be anything you want it to be as long as someone is able to code it to behave however they want in whatever environment they want. an NFT cannot exist outside of a blockchain.
@@L7Fx 1. What would that accomplish to be interesting to players? 2. What reason would a developer have to want to spend time implementing that? 3. What stops a developer or anyone involved in that chain of command from at any point deciding that what your NFT links to is now either worthless or removed from the game outright?
It is so refreshing seeing someone with a mature and realistic take on all this shit, especially in the GaMeR space where like so many others loudness and money go further than reason and logic. Great videos. Really enjoying the channel.
It's really sad that people are more willing to trust a random person on the internet or an influencer than they are to trust an actual financial advisor.
@@feIon That's not true at all. Most products are created to fill an identified need in the market. Some products are accidentally created, and then people realize it has properties that fill a market need or are otherwise useful. And then there's products like NFTs that are created because it sounds cool and seems like it might maybe somehow be useful. Very few successful products are created this way.
I mean I see a possible purpose in NFTs by using them as an alternative life time membership, so you have them bound to the blockchain instead of an account and have them transferable through that. Which while technically being possible using conventional methods can be a good way to make memberships more open and transferable. However their utility has to be guaranteed and it should be a company big enough to support it.
Or you could use them as an alternative ownership/share document, so instead of using regular stocks having an NFT function of one and giving shareholder benefits. Of course legal framework is necessary here as well.
I know you described them as “receipts”, but to be clear this is often literally the case. Block chains themselves are so bad at storing data that it is impractical to store the actual assets there, instead opting to point to traditional, accessible, and fallible servers
Saw some dude coping about how "But this NFT is worth $20,000 USD" and some dude pulled up (literal) receipts and showed how that specific NFT entered the market at $140K USD Yeah it still has worth but any stock broker that experienced that kind of loss would be taking the wireless elevator to the ground floor.
Honestly I feel sorry for a lot of people. Loads of people don't have decent financial knowledge, have no hope of a decent future and essentially speculated thinking that if a RUclips financial channel was pushing NFTs then it was good sense. It was presumably a sense of hope that their lives could be changed. They were at least in part scammed. Yes they should have known better I guess but when faced with the idea of never owning a home, never being able to retire and then people you trust give you terrible advice it's sort of understandable in a depressing way.
@@maddieb.4282 you could have had a couple of thousand dollars that you'd worked hard to save over years. Knowing that it would barely cover any medication you might need in later life, let alone a home. The temptation to try and earn more when you are desperate makes people more susceptible to being scammed, and that's exactly what most of this was/is. Influencers online, including those that claim to understand finance, pumping out recommendations without mentioning they are getting kickbacks, pushing people into things they claim will let them live a little better or be able to retire with at least something. Of course people should be better at understanding the situation but a lot of people simply aren't financially literate, or are just plain desperate. They are being preyed upon by people they trust. Again that trust is misplaced but I don't think that looking down on people for being scammed is helpful. Obviously this doesn't cover all the evangelical web3'ers who should know better.
@@RobertLutece909 i just find empathy a better way to live my life. I'm not suggesting you have to do the same, you do you. And honestly I guess I'd rather reserve any feelings I have on the subject to those that scam people over those who for whatever reason couldn't understand it was a scam.
@@stuartmorley6894half the responses here are people who have never dealt with financial struggle. And no, I never bought NFTs, but I grew up on the internet, some people didn’t.
You are correct but if you are smart enough to buy an eft then you must have some brains. People are just so beaten down by the system they gave this a shot
When NFTs were first explained to me, I was hopeful that it would lead to being able to resell digital games and music... it turns out that the publishers would rather just keep selling new "licenses" to let you temporarily play their games.
I sold some of my illustrations as nfts and got involved in some art projects with other artists I admire. However, 3 or 4 months into it I started noticing how twitter threads and voice rooms were filling with a lot of scummy opportunists who started using us for their marketing purposes but our sales were going down. After a year I gave up and continue just doing my illustration work outside of nfts.
Very early on I've seen this happen with artists that were genuinely interested in a new way of commissioning art. Unfortunately the scammers got hold of it well the rest of history
Wanted to contribute that I actually met several artists who also have made honest efforts in the space! There are probably still some who are passionate about it for one reason or another. It may have been a small subsection of the NFT community but there were at least dozens of them! Dozens!!
Yeah if the block chain could of held the actual image then transferring rights for the image would have been an amazing tool for commissions and companies, but alas, it's links to jpegs and cryptobros :(
"unfortunately the scammers got hold of it" The scammers were the originators in the first place. It was a tax scam from day dot. The general public who were dumb enough to sink money into them were icing on the cake for the scammers.
The receipt analogy is actually really good. A lot of people still misunderstand and think you own the picture, but really you only own the reciept that corresponds to the picture, and when you think about shopping reciepts, you can wave around a reciept saying you bought a rolex but no one will care unless you actually have a rolex. So yeah, nfts were always stupid. Crypto has some benefits compared to gold based currency but nfts are nothing.
And it's not even a receipt showing that you have purchased a Rolex. It's a receipt identifying you as the purchaser of a sitting spot that is identifiable by the fact that there is a Rolex there. But the receipt comes with a picture of that Rolex, for easier identification, and so many people don't really read the actual fine print and just assume that now they own a Rolex (and they assume that they can probably flip that Rolex for a lot of money down the line). If someone else puts on the Rolex, you can't do shit about that, since you never had any ownership of the Rolex to begin with.
that could not be further from the truth. you actually have no clue what an NFT actually is. cuz its definitely not the picture lol. NFT's are just as valuable, if not more valuable than a regular crypto. actually, the fact that you think they are significantly different to one another shows your total lack of understanding. the picture is the least important aspect of an NFT.
lol uh obviously? you said that crypto has a use case, but NFT's are worthless. that proves you dont know what your talking about at all because they are one and the same. @@jblen
@@L7Fx they both use blockchain technology but they are not the same. Crypto is fungible, nfts are non fungible. All currency in one coin is worth the same, nfts are individual assets. Maybe read up on it yourself before you throw your money away
I was more “shocked” that people bought into this in the first place. The very first time I first heard about NFTs I said, “well that is stupid and a waste of money”
It's even worse, because NFTs aren't even actually a receipt of supposed ownership of the image associated with the purchase. The actual NFT is just a queue spot in the blockchain, and then that queue spot holds a hyperlink to the given image as a sort of identifying marker. You can think of the image as a scribble in the corner of the queue stump so you can identify it later. This is why there were several NFT mints with the same images associated with some of their queue positions, and other NFTs where the hyperlink now links to either something entirely different or nothing at all.
@@carlpanzram7081 So you buy an NFT, you get the link to the NFT, and when you go to the NFT link there just isn't anything there, and that's better how?
The dramatic irony of this is not lost on me, but still, part of me is kinda sad for these people. Some of them were using most of their net worth to try and get out of their financial standing, and they were suckered into this market. Now they own a worthless jpeg and with nothing to show for it. For as much as I can laugh, it's sad that some people lost so much of their money
I can only feel so much pitty for those people. The amount of people that probably warned them and took the time to explain why it was worthless and a dangerous investment only to respond with "enjoy being poor" was fucking staggering.
Don’t feel bad, actual poor people didn’t buy NFTs because they don’t have the money to invest. It was just greedy well off people trying to get rich quick. They’re reaping what they sowed.
@@FerrariTeddy Not true. I had co workers living check to check who were investing in that garbage... It really targeted young idiots with gambling tendencies. Lots of gamblers bet with money they don’t even have...
@@Wallychans true, but I feel about as bad for them as crackheads spending money they don’t have. You gotta do better, especially if you don’t have the luxury to fuck around.
"you're still living in a crack house in reality, image how depressing that is. I'm live in a cardboard box with a stupid helmet on but, at least I'm looking at the mansion around me." I 3D modelled, textured and did all the fancy lighting stuff for a world for myself in VRChat which is essentially my VR home where I hide away from reality, Plus I use it to display art I've actually taken the time to make myself. And I did it without NFT's. But I am in the same situation.
The deed scenario is even worse than you've described here. It would be like keeping your deed in your mailbox, and simply opening a random letter someone dropped into your mailbox gives that person permission to reach in and grab the deed, and now it's legally theirs because that's how the system works.
The only use case I ever thought might be interesting for NFTs would be something like software ownership. Basically, instead of tying everything to an account/email/whatever it's just tied to an NFT which would let you sell it and open up a used market for software... Why would any company ever implement or go near that idea after they spent so long trying to destroy the used market to begin with. So basically, the only use case I could think of that would actually be beneficial to consumers will never exist. In addition, companies could just implement that functionality without NFTs by letting you more software licenses between accounts, which they also would never do since they want you to just buy a new license.
Yeah, could you imagine Digital Games ownership being a NFT, better yet, as a cross-store option. It would help with digital stores closing and you NOT losing your games, or it you would be banned from a store and not losing access to these games. Not to mention the digital second hand market. But this will never happen
Trouble is, NFTs and crypto in general is really bad at hosting actual software. The storage capacity of an NFT isn't even enough for an actual image file never mind a whole software. Not to mention, the fact you couldn't ever update the software. You make a point tho that the companies wouldn't ever go to this system even if it did work. If they won't even do permanent software licenses anymore, they're sure as shit not gonna be sanctifying your ownership on the blockchain.
@@TheRealPifflesticks Good point. Since NFTs are largely identified by very specific hashes that will change wildly at the slightest alteration there would have to be some way to dynamically update a public database every time a change was made. Or I suppose that the core program would stay the same but every add-on and update would have to be loaded completely separate from the core program with some kind of plugin system but I'd image that would make software devs want to stick their head in a woodchipper. Or worse, companies would just paywall updates.
Honestly, the most frustrating and exasperating part of all this has been just seeing people you liked start selling it; I don't mean the usual hype man influencers or get rich con-mans, but the talented artists or "visionary" creators that were either complicit in the scam or didn't think about the consequences of their actions. I don't give a shit about the former, but I was so disappointed in those in the latter. Really reminded me that just because someone makes a great thing, doesn't mean they're a great person.
Why were you disappointed in them? They made something, put it up for a price, and someone else chose to buy it. Honestly, don't understand what you think they were complicit in.
This is painfully hilarious because a family member of mine bought an NFT and hyped about it on Facebook a while back. We've since been astranged due to unrelated matters but to see this just makes me not feel bad for them AT ALL. They didn't lose their entire funds but to see them make such a useless investment that could have gone towards more important things just makes me giggle. Edit: For context, they have this superiority complex of being the "breadwinner" of our entire family and to see it backfire like this is what makes it so god damn funny.
That is funny because certain people in almost anyone's family really suck. It's just an odds game. Since a high % of people suck. Odds are at least 1 is in your family 😂
Once I understood computers are just illusion boxes, I managed to turn my life into a more physical life. Yes computers are good but dumping all your time and money into it won't get you as far as maybe a releationship with a person or even a run in the park would do to yourself.
True. We are over due for a nice solar flare that will force reset these poor NPC kids who are glued to an ipad since birth. Its terrifying. Seen vids of kids trying to scroll tiktok in their sleep, trying to "scroll" the page of an actual book, having a melt down cuz pepe pig froze....and parents think this is fine cuz thwyre just "too busy" to parent. The generation of gamer addicts will be nothing compared to the future tablet kids.
When people were first talking about NFTs, I immediately got a couple red flags in my mind. You pay money, you get a digital artwork, there's some ambiguous digital protection... Hold on a second, what good does it make? If you show it publicly on the internet, people can just grab a screenshot. Unlike real world art, there's virtually no quality loss of artwork reproduction and the source material is not tangible paint on wood. But then they said it's not a form of protection, really, just a form of certification of ownership... which makes even less sense, because everyone else can still just screengrab your artwork and share it and your claim to ownership is a laughable hash code nobody cares about. But then it turned out that NFTs don't even really certificate the ownership, they just encode the link to the artwork. And even if the artwork was of good quality (not just some iteration of bored ape) the only thing you still own is a piece of hash code that nobody wants. So with metric shitton of copium going around the NFT community, the only way for the entire thing to collapse, was to have all these dudes asking "you wanna buy my bored ape?". And the universe whispered "No".
That’s the insane thing to me. I always thought that at least the NFT is unique hash of the file you bought with it. No… it’s a fucking hashed URL. Unreal how stupid that is… The whole experience of learning about them was like a Matroska doll of ever increasing stupidity. And the first layer was already really stupid. It’s incredible how willing people are to throw money to a project they understand nothing about over some flashy marketing. But most worryingly is how much of the tech sector got involved when they definitely should have known better
Both of you don't understand the block chain. NFTs are not any less stable than any other crypto currency, and crypto currencies aren't any less stable than actual currencies. The value of a currency is based on a shared believe in the value of that currency. When a dollar doesn't mean anything to you, then I can't trade it for anything with you. If enough people stop believing in the dollar, suddenly the value of the dollar drops, until it completely collapses, because dollars are literally just little paper rectangles. The quality of the artwork is completely irrelevant. The important aspect is the decentralized system that verifies ownership. Everybody that owns a NFT automatically owns the verification of every other NFT. What verifies the dollar is it's specific material conditions. The serial number, the material it's made of, the ink used, and so on. What verifies a NFT is the block chain. A document that included in the NFT that records every exchange of ownership of every NFT in that system. The reason NFT failed is merely that there was a inflation of crypto currencies, and a lack of people interested in that specific form of currency. It's like gold. You know gold is valuable right? Why? Why is gold valuable? It's notnuseful to you at all. The reason Gold is valuable, is because people THINK it's valuable, and because it's very inert (essentially indestructible and easy to verify authenticity) and very limited (it's unlikely the gold market experiences any sudden inflation) Outside of these things, gold is completely useless. Same with NFTs. Outside eof their authenticity and their limited number, they are completely useless. Welcome to the concept of currency. If you want to say "the dollar and gold are real material goods" I will have to remind you that the MAJORITY of all dollars are not even printed. They exist litteraly in the SAME for that NFTs and other crypto currencies exist, with the simple difference that their verification is done by a single institution, instead of by the system itself.
Well NFTs are a secure method of showing that the image os the original non edited version BUT FOR GOD SAKE WE DONT SELL ENCRYPION KEYS!!! yeah they always had 0€ valule
Lol I only collected NFTs from reputable artists… the NFT value plummeted but the utilities got me a bunch of free physical art that I collectively sold for about $9k. With an investment of $700, I have zero complaints.
Never understood why NFTs couldnt be applied to adoptables artists and artist commissions. It's a recipt that you own the art and its a ready made system for adoptable trading. This way the artist can make a commission off of the resale (typical adoptable trade fees) without ever being involved in the sale. Artists can stop doing manual certs between every trade, because the owner changes automatically.
That might work best for traditional art media where the purchaser gets physical custody of the item. The blockchain ledger could be a way of establishing provenance, right up until a purchaser decides they don't want to appear in the ledger.
@@timothy8428 Adoptables already run on public forums and websites with public databases. NFTs would just make running an adoptable easier because the trading infrastructure is built in.
@@geeperjanenot to mention that adoptables are strictly based off of a trust system and i don't think that a trust system would save you in court if the original artist decides to reclaim their art and start using it again
Because the technology isnt real. the image isnt encoded with any sort of non fungible metadata. its all fake, the adoptables you buy from an artist are just as non fungible right off the bat.
I never understood the purpose of NFT when you could just buy or commission a painting from an artist. It would be expensive but you'd still have a one of a kind work of art. That you can actually use
its just an absolute proof of ownership. if they minted the art on the blockchain, the current owner can 100% be confirmed to be the sole owner of the art instead of going off of a trust system with the artist
I actually liked the idea of nfts, that you can buy something in one game and use it in another. I also like the idea Pokemon being able to catch a bear like creature and raise it and become friends but just like NFTs once reality hits it all comes crumbling down.
I could have told you that that would never happen. How would that even work? Every game has to reimplement all the items of every other game? Even if that would be feasible, why would a game developer do that? Give people an incentive to leave? Also why would you need an NFT for that? The billing is literally the easiest part in making items usable cross games.
@@blenderpanzi Ya it would need to be something like ready player one where for some reason every ip trusts a single game to handle it all. Then again it isn't too crazy looking at fortnite lol
@@yalhexander5641 You can bet that there is a lot of real money changing hands for all the fortnight stuff. The NFT game item ideas would have been that a player buys something once and then without more money changing hands can use it in other games. So it would be a lot of effort by the game companies for which they get no more money. Meanwhile in reality game companies want you to pay to be able to play the same old games on new consoles. Again and again. They want you to pay subscriptions every month, not buy something once and then use it in any game for the rest of time.
That supposed idea was nothing more than the vague BS that crypto bros fed you to trick you into wasting your money into useless junk that does nothing.
The one thing i can think of that would give NFT's actual utility would be in enabling true ownership of digital games. True ownership requires you to be able to resell your copy, which is the literal only defining feature of NFT's. They would be created and sold at retail price just as physical copies are. The only problem is that would require distributors to decide to give consumers some of their rights back, which will never happen unless they are forced to.
The issue with that is that the block chain has a very limited amount of space for each node. You wouldn't be able to mint any game bigger than a snes game
@@Upload098765432 it doesn't have to be the game itself, the actual data on the chain could be a cryptographic key that proves ownership for the purposes of downloading and playing the game.
@Upload098765432 no NFT is large enough to carry the entirety of what it's a receipt for. Most just keep a url that directs you to view a copy of whatever it's a receipt for. You might be able to use one to unlock access to the game on startup as a part of your DRM, but that's already more thought than I want put into that idea and would require the game to be always online (so you won't actually own it anyway).
Thank you for bringing up Star Citizen. Whenever Starfield suddenly came out, after years of development, I mistook it for that and argued with my friend and debated about how horrible the "game" is not realizing it was another overhyped game.
Maybe it's because I never saw a single trailer or heard anything about it, but Starfield doesn't seem that bad to me. It's a Bethesda game. It's as fun as fallout and skyrim are, it's just a different setting. I don't get the hate, but I also don't get the hate for Fallout 4, considering it's undeniably better than every previous game if only for the sole reason they did away with equipment condition.
@@supermexicanroboninja3116Its not nearly as fun as Skyrim they went for width instead of depth. Instead of one densely packed open world where you can discover things at every turn, its a bunch of sparsely packed worlds where you will walk for forever to find stuff that isn't that cool
@@supermexicanroboninja3116Honestly same i really do don't get the Hate for Starfield, with the exception of the game being not your cup of Tea. It's a Bethesda Game. It's a Todd Howard's Game. Just see the Track record. If you think you will get a Good Game with little to no Bug and soo many Graphical Detail you're in the wrong Place. If you're looking for Long Replayable Game with funny glitches sometimes and questionable optimization and so goddamn easy to Mod with well arguably good story i guess. Welcome you're in the right place.
This one goes out to all the NFT bros who a few years ago said "enjoy being poor" to people who rightfully called NFts scams, who are now facing the music.
Next should be those crypto bros.
And they still have to pay taxes on them and all other forms of crypto
Pointing and laughing at them
Was their utility
@@hoze1235and my way of staying sane. They deserve more and worse than being pointed at and ridiculed.
A lot of these guys aren't the ones facing the music, but the people they suckered in. Most of the NFT bros knew it was a load of rubbish and were in it to make as much money before everyone else realised it too, and the whole thing collapsed.
It's basically another speculator bubble, like many that have existed before, despite how many people have tried to convince us otherwise.
I'm shocked it has taken this long for NFTs to go bust. Especially since its not real art and its not tangible. Its like games on an online service. Once its gone, so are the games
Not real art? What do you mean?
@@webcap7653 ah yes **takes screenshot** the most exquisit pngs
@@webcap7653 bruhhh if you really think NFTs are art then I’m Mf Picasso 💀
Bruh, reality isn’t real.
It is still an actual drawing so it is still art. Might not be good art but art nontheless.
NFTs being worthless now? Imagine my shock 😂
Bro, I forgot about that shit until today
NFT, now that’s a name I haven’t heard in a long time
Now? They never were 😂
What is NFT?
Fry: “Well, not that shocked.”
NFTs depended on the premise that one day in the near future, someone would be willing to pay millions of dollars for a receipt just because it was associated with a jpeg so unique that there's no other jpeg just like it. It's like people looked at comic books, learned that some nerds are willing to pay insane amounts of money for rare issues, but were completely ignorant of one important factor. That these comic books are almost always older than most people on the internet.
And because they're so old, it makes sense that there's only one or three issues in the world from the original print with the first time appearance of a beloved character that is still in pristine condition because it was never subjected to the greasy fingers of a child who bought the comic because they actually wanted to read it. It makes sense that this is something that would have value, in the form of bragging rights, to a community that has existed for half a lifetime.
Nobody is going to be interested in a receipt of a jpeg that is only unique because it's a combination of 20 different parts put together from a list of 100 different items picked out by a random number generator on a website in 2020.
One fundamental problem with NFTs always was that no one actually was interested in the product behind it, unlike with comic books. Another problem being that it has no legal meaning, so nothing actually worth owning was ever tied to NFTs
Also Comic book have history behind it. The creator, their imagination, how their life history and hardwork and idea shape the comic he/she created. the comic story, how the comic character/icon born, the beautifull/amazing pages, how their story be inspiring other people etc etc.
Meanwhile NFT is just Random Generated Picture which anyone can do by typing something on some aplication. Nothing special.
Best part is that the jpeg doesn't have to be unique, you can have the same image in another chain 😅
Action Comics #1, the first Superman comic, is the most expensive comic book ever printed and is valued at over $3 million today.
I think NFTs could be very useful for like... A photographer for example. Once upon a time buying an original Ansel Adams could be an investment. Nfts could bring some of that back. But there has to be value in what's behind it.
As a visual artist that received so many messages from people that asked me to make NFTs because "they wanted to support me as an artist" and saying no because there already was an easy way to support my work through buying prints, shirts, originals, whatever; the NFT market crashing makes me smile :)
Hopefully the same happens to AI art. We're already seeing the new wave of AI dissolving
@@MuscleCarLover Heavily disagree with the AI art market collapsing. It has only been improving by the day and you can generate most things flawlessly. Hand crafted art is still better at this point in time but AI will slowly encroach until it is undistinguishable.
Some people called me dumb for not selling NFTs of my artwork. Imagine tainting your reputation for unethical short term gains. Can't be me.
@@MuscleCarLover not really, people have kinda already seen what they wanted to see out of AI art so most people have moved on
@@MuscleCarLover AI art is speeding up and growing if anything
I love how Muta is holding the camera like this, it feels like he has his hands clasped on our necks while ranting about NFTs. Being held hostage by a man driven insane by the ramblings of the masses about NFTs.
this is a beautiful comment my fellow gooner
this is a beautiful reply
Muta POV, now I’ve seen everything
the dream
Good comment.
But nfts weren't adopted by the masses. They were adopted by tons of nft bros, "get rich quick grifters" and a few companies, who all made a big fuss about them. But most people either didn't care about nfts or they hated them.
Hearing this made my month. Literally had a friend who stopped hanging out with my group because she wanted to focus on NFT with her new NFT buddies and that she wanted to focus on the future with her investments while we we not productive enough for her.
Out of curiosity l, what happened to that friend and their friends?
Cult behavior right there
U dodged a bullet.
She was never a friend in the first place then. She cut herself off of your life, that was actually really good for you.
Imagine leaving your friends behind just so that you can focus on something that will clearly become worthless in a few years.
“NFTs are worthless?!”
Always have been.
Square Enix must be proud of their NFT investments.
At least they can book it as intellectual property investments.
Still dumb tho lol
capcon too.
I still can't believe that they sold off Tomb Raider and Deus Ex extremely cheaply just so they could get some cash to invest in NFTs 😂😂
lmao
@@KryzysX more like lmfao ;)
When NFT's were first booming i recall thinking "this seems ridiculous, but maybe there will be some value assigned to these tokens that will give them some kind of legitimate value" which i quickly realized was false, but the dirt on the coffin for me was the constant need for those promoting NFT'S to reassure everyone that "it isnt a scam". Always the true sign of a scam.
>invent a useless asset
>hype everyone to buy it so its short term value skyrockets
>sell them and cash out
>watch as the "investors" are left with a devalued asset
literally how all these nfts and cryptos work. the only one that has some use is bitcoin because it's used for illegal shit and paranoid conspiracy types.
the thing is that even if you did assign value like a house or a car to them, the owner can uncouple that ownership. legally the nft doesn't mean anything just the deed(rather the deed registry itself) for the car/house does.
plus a nft can be lost so any use like real estate or cars or whatever would need to have a mechanism to move it to a different one.
Did you mean 'nail in the coffin'?
@ nah, the nails were already in. I mean the dirt that goes on top when you bury the coffin. Doesn't get as much play as "nail in the coffin"
@@destructivecriticism3734 Interesting. Might use that later
I remember being in the NFT space and saw people painting their homes with images of their NFT’s. 100% they’re painted over and normal looking now
😂🤣😂
Didnt those people realize that if they themselves can hang up their nft's or paint them over their walls, so can everybody else without buying the nft? 😂
They the biggest clowns 🤡 🤣
In today's day and age I'm surprised they could do that since it seems like everywhere in USA has an HOA now unless you're out in the country
@@Born2GrindNot true at all.
There's TONS of towns and cities with entire neighborhoods that won't have any HOA.
Remember when Jimmy Fallon and Paris Hilton promoted buying Bored Apes and got sued for not disclosing it was a paid ad? That is what I think of when I think of NFT's.
When NFTs first came out, I actually thought I was being the stupid one for not understanding it. I just couldn't wrap my head around it, I never understood why people would spend their money on NFTs.
something similar will happen again. probably in the crypto market, but not necessarily. the world economy is fucked up with big nosed bankers printing money whenever they want
That's how the entire space is designed, not just NFTs. They're designed to baffle you and leave you wowed thinking "I don't understand it, but clearly there must be something there!".
Issue is that if you have a computer science background and try looking into it from a practical angle you'll very quickly find that the tech not only doesn't live up to the manufactured hype and promises, but is actively detrimental. You throw out all the benefits of the traditional systems and you don't even get any benefits from it in return.
Their biggest sin is removing the comp sci barrier of entry to understanding it and putting its uselessness up in front of the average joe's face in a way they can understand it.
Same, never could grasp what was being purchased.
It was all just money laundering and ways to scam people. Nothing more.
@@mettaursp309 Oh yeah, in cryptography you can't just accept a claim without mathematically prove it. Because for one, cryptography is brittle. Once you break one of the assumption, the entire protocol is broken.
Let's say you mint an NFT, i could just mint another NFT with the exact same content. Unless you have another way of authenticating who is who, my NFT is just as valuable as yours. That simple flaw is so bafflingly simple, it's just never went into cryptobros skull. It's also why art theft is so easy with NFT.
Another one, you can't 100% guarantee you can exchange coins between chains, because it's 2 different consensus (you can't merge consensus). To do that, you have to trust a third-party, which has to make sure the transaction is atomic (and take the loss if the value change interim, or if their valuation is wrong, etc).
I would feel sorry for these people losing their money onto this, but then I remember when they were calling us "idiots" for not getting NFTs as well. I remember the guy saying "have fun staying poor". Ubisoft saying NFTs are "the future of gaming". I remember people grabbing art made by someone else without permission and attempting to sell them as NFTs. I even remember a colleague bragging how he made five dollars in profits by selling one and how soon he won't need to work anymore as his NFT trading business will soon skyrocket and how smug he was about it.
People were warning them this was a scam from the very beginning. These guys have spit on their faces and laughed instead.
bet ur still poor
@@feIonit’s you’re
@@BriarPatchNyralmao
i hope he bought a latte the day he quit so he could flaunt that newfound wealth to the boss on his way out
@@feIon How'd you even know if they're poor or not?
Muta, there's another utility to NFTs that you failed to mention. In truth, they're very useful for identifying shady companies who glom onto them without a second thought.
Sure, the value of NFTs is almost zero across the board, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't still point and laugh at Square Enix and Ubisoft.
that's actually priceless
Go ahead and throw capcom in there, too.
@@DWN-020damn fr Capcom fell for that scam too that's hilarious 😂.
Im going to screenshot your NFT, keep it for myself and you cannot do nothing
put wildworks (the makers of animal jam) in there too
The people I feel sorry for are the middle aged and elderly people who listened to their nephews about investing and took everything their family members said to heart. They were ignorant and scammed. Anyone younger should have known better.
People are stupid, lazy and too trusting and vulnerable to gaslighting.
Got news for you. Most of us old farts looked at that nephew and wondered when he started smoking crack, and held onto our Berkshire Hathaway and SPY.
@@bfg1836 it doesnt take tech knowledge to catch a scam haha
expecting skins from one game to fit into another is like expecting parts from your diesel truck to fit and work just fine in your gasoline racecar with zero tinkering
More like using diesel parts for a battery operated snow blower.
It will happen
They want to turn every game into asset flips.
Because you know, mixing assets with no artistic consistency never results in a mess, right?
I don't think most people understand that analogy.
We've had cross-game items come up in the industry every now and then. They're rare only because of the effort needed to model the item between the two engines, balance their stats and mechanics between the two games, and hash out licensing/copyright between the two studios.
The idea of "transferring" the "ownership" of the item was the only part of this NFTs "solved," and that was already the easiest part of the problem.
NFTs are the embodiment of the expression, "a fool and his money are soon parted".
This was such a glorious trainwreck to watch.
What I wanna know is how the fool and his money actually got together in the first place.
@@whatevr99Daddy's inheritance
@@SelfProclaimedEmperor
Yeah, that sounds about right. 😁
A fool and his monkey
This comment section hasn't made any money in crypto/nfts & it shows. BTW crypto/nfts is just starting, still in the baby stages. People shouldn't speak on things they don't comprehend. Most people today are so lost on who controls the world & how it is all connected to crypto. You all are getting left behind
Nfts were great. I bought a picture of a doge with a pink backround for 4.50$ and resold it for about 400$. That was my entire nft career 😂
salute to you for making money off of the dumb
You beat the idiots game then quit. [Salute]
Based
Wtf??
"Oh, I like this guy." -GLaDOS
putting up an nft in a virtual mansion is the equivalent of me making my sims live their best lives while i’m depressed at home binge playing video games
In sims you can at least choose what you do, an NFT is already premade
it's like selling a cell on your Google sheet next to a link, bytedata, or text and claiming your name in cell means you own whatever is next to it like your random ass cell on random ass Google sheet means anything vs any other. they are selling hyperlinks to images pretending nobody else can link to same website or claiming you magically own whatever you link too. they are pushing limits of reality trying to prove they have a negative iq
I loved how they constantly "what if"-ed until the bitter end but never delivered on anything, every project the creators vanished.
Only game that had a product was The Sandbox and I worked with them previously, their entire project was a facade to appear high quality to investors but their product was held together by ducttape and bandaids
I remember playing The Sandbox before the whole NFT thing.
Stopped for years because it kept crashing on my Tablet, and the Steam version never worked out for me.
Imagine my surprise when, after all these years of not playing, I come back to see them shill NFTs.
NFT’s were only invented to shock the crypto market during its bull run.
Governments and Hedge funds were behind it.
It successfully deterred money from being invested in BTC, and instead retail bought NFT’s because their favorite Twitter celeb promoted it.
Whole crypto market has been in shambles ever since.
Successful psy op. So successful most people don’t even recognize it...
Is that the pixel-based 2D game thing that had God as the mascot? Or is this a different The Sandbox?
@@JackFoxtrotEDM same company but they made a 3D voxel game instead
People have been selling NFT as a number goes up technology. There is no other value/Usages of NFT beside the hope of number going up.
NFTs have always from the beginning been an oxymoronic concept to me. It's literally the same thing as commissioning art from an artist except you want to flaunt it online without any water marks to prevent reuse. It's beyond idiotic and it's crazy (yet unsurprising) that people actually thought for a second that buying an image online that is publically displayed WITHOUT a water is going to mean they own that picture and no one else can.
And the fact that toy company’s like Hasbro and Mattel tried to sell them will never stop being sad.
I was never able to wrap my head around NFTs. I don't understand where the prices come from or why anyone would want to pay the absurd prices for a picture or source code or whatever it is you're paying for. Most of the NFTs were trash drawings. Like the monkey ones. I don't understand how anyone would pay thousands for a reskinned picture of a monkey.
Digital Watermarking exists.
Commissioning art from an artist is way better. You can get art customized to you, possibly featuring a character you created. In many ways, you can be said to actually "own" an image you commissioned more than you can some premade NFT.
@@ENCHANTMEN_ Or can you get an artist to commission an NFT and watch the value increase? Maybe sell it for more than you paid for it? You people are such close-minded NPCs. "RUclipsr I like says something is stupid, then I agree it's stupid".
As an artist I have never felt so vindicated about refusing to make NFTs despite everyone constantly begging me to. 😂
your loss. Couldve made money off losers
If it's any consolation, I think it's an insult to artists to call the visual content of most NFT's 'art', anyway.
Eh, between you and the client you actually would have been the only one making the money tho, but morality wise I get feeling justified you didn't rip people off
i made them a few times , stopped in the middle then started again . money is money , whatever the client wants to do with their project afterwards is their headache . They normally pay more than the average client as well.
We know you made at least some 😂😂😂😂
This was the most foreseeable conclusion. People only bought nfts to sell it at a higher price. Once it gets too high you can’t sell it for profit which will tank the price. Absolute SHOCKER.
Finally people are understanding what NFT's are actually worth.. I was in this exact same spot here 2-3 years ago, welcome.. glad you could make it! Sorry about your loss, but the world is better for it.
I mean most people were there.
Only the idiots with enough money to lose it did. Hopefully there weren't actual people living paycheck to paycheck saving up to buy those horrible ideas.
took them almost 3 years
Yes, market correcting themselves
Imagine my shock.
wow, didn't expect that
I remember the outrage from them when it was obvious one could just screenshot a bored ape. What a weird time.
Love it when I see adoptable character designs with actual artistic value that are basically non blockchain nfts having more use and value than actual nfts
Not to mention the art is almost always infinitely better. I'd rather own cute art that I can commission more cute art of and help an artist pay their bills than a reject gross-out show monkey that no one wants to touch because it's so ugly.
oh man, i miss seeing adoptable batches on deviantart when i was little, they were always so cute but i wasnt allowed to buy them 😭😭
I literally make a living from adoptables. People make profile pages based on the characters, and their trade value goes up, rarely ever down.
those are cute and are created by someone who genuinely wants to share their artistic talent with others while still making a profit, nfts are monkeys with funny hats and letters and numbers
@@user-cu1uj6bl3r oh lucky you! I tried but was never able to make more than like 5 or 10 dollars off of one. I think my style is kinda eclectic lol. Do you have a toyhouse acct?
And yeah i feel like some of my stuff is worth 20x a monkey png lol
For the NFT bros "Play stupid games, win stupid prizes."
Muda went complete Rambo on calling stupid people out 😂, being brutally honest is something most don't do nowadays. Thanks for being a genuine human being brother!
I always found it bizarre how obsessed the mainstream was with NFTs all of a sudden in 2021….but most of these people ignored Bitcoin for over a decade.
Mainstream media is always obsessed with everything that creates clicks. But to be fair - it was funny reading about this all the time with a bunch of 🍿🍿🍿
As I remember it, Bitcoin became associated with sites like Silk Road and various dodgy activities fairly early on which tainted it's image, at least to some extent.
Bitcoin for the longest was just seen as a shady way to transfer money between people, so the media didn’t really want to talk about the online criminal world brewing.
Btc is a scam too tho....no matter how much you try to justify it as not being one. It makes 0 sense.
It’s called a “PSY OP”
During the NFT fever I made hundreds of images for projects, I got paid for the images and I could not care less about the selling profits because none sold, I charged commercial use, I upgraded my machine, I cleared all my debts, I bought cool stuff for me, and the guys I made the projects just got in debt because they paid so much for the arts and the marketing that they got in trouble when the ETH sank. Lots of artists who came before me did the same and made even more money because everyone had wallets full to invest on the arts. I miss NFTs just because of this, it was a free farm of money for artists.
Honestly artists need more demand like this to be paid.
@@tuwumuch I gonna wait for the next dumb trend to farm a little more.
I never scammed anyone, I offered my price, some accepted it, others not. It is how selling art works, specially for commercial use. @@jakefootball9402
@@tuwumuchwell, much like the value of a NFT is based entirely on the believe in the value of the NFT, the value of art is also entirely based on the believe in the value of the art.
So, once artificially generated art will become more and more popular, digital art will probably loose most of its value fairly quickly.
So any artist out here will soon experience what happened to NFTs first hand.
@@carlpanzram7081 sad but true
Any artist that was sick of NFT bs these past few years can finally just embrace the joy of this.
I do a bit of digital art as a hobby, and one of my uncles told me I should have gotten into making NFTs.
I’m glad I didn’t because I’d be pissed if my art was worthless. I’d rather do commissions and get my money upfront
Tell him that you'd prefer to not scam people
Important note: most NFTs are not stored on the blockchain and the “receipt” you buy is just a link to where the picture is stored. It could be stored on a site like imgur and the landing page of the link can be changed when the actual storage owner feel like it. If the want to change your “bOrEd ApE” to an image of a turd, they very well could do just that
@@soundboardist That depends on the NFT. Take the trump collection. They dont point to an IPFS image, they point to trump's website. /1234.jpg right now is a picture of trump, but if that website goes down, then /1234.jpg points to... nothing.
Not all nft images are backed using a link that can't mutate over time.
TLDR: Just because a token isn't fungible, doesn't mean the underlying image isn't.
@@soundboardist if the link set in the contract is a redirect link, then the end page can be changed thus the picture changes as well. Otherwise if it is stored at your own local server, you can reroute the server to point to a different location on it. This could definitely be used for a scam/rugpull
The receipt is just a receipt. At the end of the day there is no physical or digital object you own via an NFT. You simply own a unique receipt.
The person that owns the object or image can SAY the owner of the receipt owns the object or image but without a contract that is not legally binding.
@@soundboardist the picture isn't the NFT but the picture is why people bought the NFT, no one cares about the NFT itself
@@deidyomegaIPFS isn’t permanent either.
I once sold 2 NFT's on Opensea for about 80 bucks. It was crazy how someone bought that from me since it took me all of 2 min to make both. I know it's not much but I knew it was worthless when I made them and I am so glad to see this toxic fad fall apart like it should have.
A fool and their money are easily parted
I would've kept going tbh if it was that easy
So, you made good money and someone else got what they wanted? Wow, thank goodness that's ending. =P
@@ribowrightI don’t think he got what he wanted in the end lol
@@TriflingWhiteBoyif he intentionally bought an NFT he wanted nothing to begin with.
@@ribowright Yeah, I think they wanted to flex that they sold something.
NFTs are like having a tickets to a show but then you try and sell those tickets long after the concert is over, and it's available for anyone to see online at anytime anyway
Its more like amiibos
At least amiibos look cool on a shelf.
As I pointed out;
If you want nft's to have value, make some baised on characters you have copyright/ trademark to, sell them to someone who will use them in media, sue them, and LOSE the lawsuit.
It only takes 4 casses, to make consistent case law in a state court, which, is really all most judges look at, if it exists.
Do this in places like Florida or California, and, the ken penders sonic character / Disney nft's, will allow enough new, popular media to surface, to jump start the global economy, while making nft investors/ leasers, a pretty good passive income. : )
What always confused me was why so much money and popularity went into NFTs. When I was first told what an NFT was in response to hiking popularity, I was honestly so confused. I couldn't understand why so much money went into it and thought maybe there was some fundamental reasoning I couldn't comprehend because it had something to do with latest technology. I'm sort of glad to see the market normalize back to reality and to see that my initial reaction was accurate
Easy, the popularity was all about the speculation and being able to make money selling it. People looking at this expecting some sort of tech related reasoning missed the points. Imagine you saw a new toaster come out and you see hundreds of people just buying them of Walmart for $20 and turning around and selling it for $20,000 or more, you would go buy some and sell them. Everyone was just trying to get a piece of that cake since they all saw that people were making money.
Problem is the reason that they were selling because people thought they would sell for more, and there only so much you could climb before it collapsed.
@@davidgzmn12345 Yes, but a toaster has inherent value. I failed to see any inherent value in NFTs, and I'm not sure what caused the initial jump in prices of it, but after the initial jump(s), it seemed like people were reacting to the price hikes and hoping to claim a piece of the pie.
Like, it's within the realm of collectibles and expensive art pieces, where there are people willing to spend a certain amount for certain things. But, NFT's were different in the sense that there was no history, no brand recognition, no famous ties, etc.
Speculation I get. But why they chose to speculate in NFTs (before the price hikes) I don't really get. I'm sure most of the initial people who got into NFTs did it for the latest fad and not the money.
That particular gold rush was kicked off by a crypto whale buying a collage of digital art for $69 million dollars.
I remember when NFT's were first released, I thought about buying one. Then I remembered I'm not a fucking idiot 😂
Thanks for not using the skull emoji
You're a true gigachad for doing that
@@SMCwasTaken💀
@@SMCwasTaken 💀💀💀💀
@@thediddy6115🪑🪑🪑🪑
If you want an actually cool pfp that supports artists, commission an artist you like to draw a unique one for you on commission. It's a damn sight cheaper than any of this NFT BS, and you actually get something hand-crafted to your preferences. Better yet, you actually end up "owning" the image for real (most of these NFTs you don't even legally "own" the image, you just own the token!)
Yeah if nothing else this whole NFT fiasco has made me appreciate commission artists. They do good work
True, instead of buying overly priced shit you won't even own, why not just commission an artist for far cheaper? Support an artist.
NFTs were the worst for artists since it made stealing worse and opportunist assholes either scammed artists into pouring dozens of hours of worm into NFTs to steal the money and commission or pay them garbage and pocket 90%
I agree. Not all indie artists do it, not all of them do it all the time, it depends on their schedule, and indie artists usually only do it for non-commercial use (like what you pictured) with prices listed, some (usually big-name artists) only do it for commercial use with no prices listed (instead more like 'contact us for pricing' that B2B companies often do), and I seem to recall that some do both non-commercial and commercial licencing for their commissions but I may be wrong.
Edit: I had also remembered that I've been too busy to work on my own art, including model sheets for some characters I had been working on as well as drawing myself. I often see users (or teams at companies in the case of commercial commissions) handing in model sheets to artists they commission to help them with art direction. Some artists even include basic model sheet creation as part of their commissions.
Thats a really good recommendation.
I was actually stupid enough to buy some when it all started back in 2020/2021. I didn't spend a whole lot on them but the fact that I did spend anything at all is baffling to me now.
Well, you can get the value back, with the right mailing addresses and lawyers.
I commented it a few seconds ago in full , but, it basically goes like this;
Make some nft's of characters YOU own and copyright, sell them to someone who will use them in some form of media, sue them for there use, and lose the case on purpose.
Congrats; you just created one of the first 4 case law examples needed, to prove an nft grants a non licensable right, to use or commission use of the character shown in the art.
All judges care about is case law.
Just rinse and repeat, and, pretty soon, you'll pretty much be able to restart the global economy solely based on the new media and merchandise, like you hit it with an adrenaline needle from pulp fiction. : )
@@jimcable9689 and then go bankrupt.
worth!
@@jimcable9689i dont think that's how this works lmao, even if you were insane enough to do this this wouldn't magically grant nfts copyright status lol
I hope you didn't spend a lot. We all do stupid things in our life and lessons learned
Were you young? I’ve done some cringy stuff in my youth I look back on and it keeps me up at night sometimes lol. But at least you’re wiser now.
Mutahar, you are a great source of honest and rational news and in a world today where manipulated and dishonest news is the norm.
My only regret is that I didn't scam idiots out of money myself, I know one guy that made one in MS paint as a joke and someone unironically paid him 500$ for it
Whoever bought them are the dumbest people in the world. It was all just a scam from the start and people keep falling for it.
Hopefully this NFT topic comes to an end, I was tired of it when it “blew up” and I’m tried of it now.
Scummy people love the prey on people's desperate need for money.
@@okami-chan9772while that is true, some people have more money than brains. Most people who bought them did it for clout or to flex.
NFTs and crypto will probably stick around as a new medium for MLMs to operate IMO. But they will probably never blow up like they did in 2021 ever again.
Crypto might have a chance but I kinda think it’s been tarnished by SBF/FTX for normal people to trust it.
@@okami-chan9772the desperate people themselves are often scum too.
Crypto is not worth shit. Never was, never will. It's not backed by anything. Its sole value is what a bunch of internet people who have your money claim it is, until too many people want their physical fiat currency back.
I ended up buying 800 dollars worth of reddit nfts when they first came out, sold them a couple months later for 6k. Dear god I feel lucky.
You may have been one of the only people to actually make a profit off of it haha
@@maddieb.4282a ton of people made a lot of profit on it.
It was a legitimate crypto currency.
Its like a fashion trend.
If a certain kind of jeans is really popular, and you decide to buy like 10.000 of them, and then you sell them for a profit, but after that they loose popularity, some poor Schmuck now owns a worthless pair of pants, while you made a bunch of money.
If NFTs would have stayed popular, which they maybe would have if the crypto currency market wouldn't be so ridiculously overinflated already, then they would continue to be a valid currency and value asset.
The value of a currency is entirely based on if people believe in the value of that currency.
nice play ~
Hahaha as of yesterday Reddit was still selling them as custom snoos. Like I took the free ones just for the customized snoo, I didn't even acknowledge it being an NFT
did you get a1099? cuz that shit is taxable
It’s amazing that they thought “original” digital files were gonna be worth something in the first place. Do us artists a favor y’all, and buy a commission if you have the money (and don’t talk them down)
Edit: also, damn, I haven’t heard of NFTs in a hot minute. You know they fell off when I’m actively in the art community and forgot about them
I have actual respect to anyone who Sold an NFT. Made some serious cash off something cheaper then bottled air.
The power of hype
They still has to pay influencers a few grands to promote it on Twitter but still very very cheap
why respect con artists and charlatans
to be fair bottled air is actually worth something and is being used to be bought as a joke/present "for people that don't need anything"(as they market it as) though still costing money, at least for the plastic bottle itself
Sometimes I wish I had no moral qualms about scamming people. Seems so easy to make money these days.
NFTs was the digital equivalent of the beanie baby bust in the 2000s.
I completely forgot beanie babies was a thing
I've always explained this to my family and friends. It's like beanie babies, but at the end of it, you'll have a permanent internet record of you being a dumbass, instead of a pile of cute plush animals to give to your kids, grandkids, nieces, etc, and a funny story to tell about the halcyon days of decades ago.
At least beany babies are cute and worth something
@@aeoligarlic4024and are tangible.
The Moon: NFTs should arrive here shortly.
*The Earth: Ignore the moon, he rarely gets any visitors.*
Not to shit at our crypto bros
But buying Jpegs for huge amounts of money like they are freaking pokemon cards and then go Pikachu face when they tank their value is just too funny to not laugh at
I’m glad I listened to you and didn’t go with the trends! Thanks for saving me Muta, cuz a few people I know lost lots of money on this garbage.
it's actually worse than that: they don't even own the digital asset: they just own a link, a string of character thatpoint toward a picture. not the picture itself
That's not how the blockchain works
it is 💀@@Gormezzz
@@GormezzzIs it a simplified explanation? Kind of. Does it capture the gist of the thing? Yes.
@@galacsinhajto true. It would be cool if everyone understood the blockchain though.
this isn't always the case, it's just what most people believe to be true
I always thought that a sort of "free" blockchain like that pi thing wouldve been great for copyrighting for indies.
No investment, barely any environmental impact just a timestamp that's confirmed by multiple devices that proves you were the first to share it.
I hoped that could be a way to wrestle copyright away from large companies and stop some of that legal bullying.
NFTs have already shown that "first to share it" is meaningless to ownership. Many art pieces got stolen from the original artists and made into an NFT. There's no actual ownership validation with Blockchain
When I was told about NFTs by a friend who was all hyped about it, my mind went immediately to the "If it's too good to be true, it probably isn't" mindset.
Seems like I rolled a 20 on my Insight check.
Yeah I have always held to the mindset if something sounds to good to be true 99% it is so do research before you commit
if NFTs seemed "too good to be true" to you, you also rolled a 20 on your gullibility check...
@@AnimatedStoriesWorldwide? xD
@@AnimatedStoriesWorldwide how where they gullible when the its too good to be true mentality saved them form losing money
Genre savvy.
Some people seriously didn't see this coming? YIKES. Literally my entire response to NFTs was "Right click -> Save image as..." This NFT stuff is completely unbelievable. If you wanna take your chances at an unreliable medium of gaining money, just stick to a $2 or $5 scratch ticket every once in a blue moon idk I'm too shocked to get all of my "omg WHYYYYY" into words.
Can't argue with logic against these brainlets.
Had a man round here in the summer selling magic mushrooms chocolates with the NFT monkey on it. Didn't pay a penny towards it. Another right click, save image as, solution.
I still remember that one group that essentially was using them as a bonus for going to an event, like it was those little drawings done at free comic book day events, but digitally, and it didn't cost extra or anything, that was honestly the only good usage I've heard of. They were just doodling monkeys as a bonus for going to the event, that's actually fair enough, they weren't meant to hold value except to the recipient.
My mom got an NFT as part of an art project, you went to a website and made a screenshot of a moving 3D object and it was made an NFT for you. Pretty cute.
Great monologue! I dont know if you have any prepared notes but its amazing how you roll off your monologue in such an engaging way and nearly flawlessly.
As someone with subtle knowledge in gamemaking and a lot of rigging/modelling knowledge I can easily tell that you cant simply drag and swap a model into another game. Different games EVEN ON THE SAME ENGINE might work completely differently unless they use the same unified rigging system for said engine. Various games, especially on the unity engine requires modification of models if you would like to move them over to a different game. You would have to rename bonestructures, redo animations probably. So yes. Blockchains wouldnt really make this completely doable. And then there are copyright problems. If these models where frequently shared around there would be even more ripped models floating around the internet than there is already. It would require the full co-operation of every game and for every studio to join up to have teams dedicated into porting models and assets over for the pure reason they are tied to an NFT someone would "like to use" in the different game.
If anything, blockchain would probably make this whole thing *even harder to do,* because on top of everything you've described one would also have to attach the whole blockchain system to actually manage the model/skin migrations based on NFT ownership. But (purely hypothetically) if we already had such a wonderful coordination between multiple companies and model/texture cross-compatibility infrastructure between several games and/or game engines, why do we even need blockchains at all in this equation to begin with?
And as a game developer I can confirm that you'd have to make each item from the ground up.
Obviously you're not just going to move the NFT to another random game and expect it to work. a designer or programmer will still need to implement the NFT and create a representation of its metadata within their own game for it to actually be usable between different games. you might have an NFT of a banana in one game, but when you move it to another game, that NFT meta data could be represented as a machine gun in that game. someone will still need to do the work to create an item out of the actual NFT.
but the beauty of the world of cryptocurrency that 99% of people are too stupid to realize the importance of, is the fact that it is permissionless. you dont need authorization from anyone to participate in the development of a project. you can utilize the assests how you see fit. no one will be able to tell you not to make something a certain way. once the infrastructure is actually built up and the first few games pop up with full crypto capability, people will actually begin to understand what permissionless and open source actually means.
the NFT is NOT just some picture. the "picture" is just a URL that was saved in the metadata that represents it. It's literally the least I'important aspect of an NFT. what an NFT ACTUALLY is, is a token on a ledger that has every transaction and movement of it recorded. what that token is is totally limitless. it can be anything you want it to be as long as someone is able to code it to behave however they want in whatever environment they want.
an NFT cannot exist outside of a blockchain.
@@L7Fxfound the incel
@@L7Fx 1. What would that accomplish to be interesting to players?
2. What reason would a developer have to want to spend time implementing that?
3. What stops a developer or anyone involved in that chain of command from at any point deciding that what your NFT links to is now either worthless or removed from the game outright?
It is so refreshing seeing someone with a mature and realistic take on all this shit, especially in the GaMeR space where like so many others loudness and money go further than reason and logic. Great videos. Really enjoying the channel.
"Gamers"
Found your problem.
I don’t often enjoy other people’s misery but oh boy I love this.
It's really sad that people are more willing to trust a random person on the internet or an influencer than they are to trust an actual financial advisor.
They can't afford a financial advisor
Muta implying that NFT’s were worth something in the first place.
We need a wall of shame for every celebrity that advertised NFTs not too long ago.
NFTs always struck me as a tool in search of utility, a solution in search of a problem. In the end, there was no reason at all for them to exist
this is basically how most products are originally created lmao
@@feIon That's not true at all. Most products are created to fill an identified need in the market. Some products are accidentally created, and then people realize it has properties that fill a market need or are otherwise useful. And then there's products like NFTs that are created because it sounds cool and seems like it might maybe somehow be useful. Very few successful products are created this way.
I mean I see a possible purpose in NFTs by using them as an alternative life time membership, so you have them bound to the blockchain instead of an account and have them transferable through that. Which while technically being possible using conventional methods can be a good way to make memberships more open and transferable. However their utility has to be guaranteed and it should be a company big enough to support it.
Or you could use them as an alternative ownership/share document, so instead of using regular stocks having an NFT function of one and giving shareholder benefits. Of course legal framework is necessary here as well.
@@ogge8375isn't that just the concept of the block chain as a Distributed ledger?
I know you described them as “receipts”, but to be clear this is often literally the case. Block chains themselves are so bad at storing data that it is impractical to store the actual assets there, instead opting to point to traditional, accessible, and fallible servers
The amount of effort NFTBros go to hide their blockchain history. Bless Coffeezilla, KiraTV & Callum Upton !
Saw some dude coping about how "But this NFT is worth $20,000 USD" and some dude pulled up (literal) receipts and showed how that specific NFT entered the market at $140K USD
Yeah it still has worth but any stock broker that experienced that kind of loss would be taking the wireless elevator to the ground floor.
Imagine yugioh but every single character is the dark magician with different hats, colors, and expressions.
Holy shit, take my ether!
Honestly I feel sorry for a lot of people. Loads of people don't have decent financial knowledge, have no hope of a decent future and essentially speculated thinking that if a RUclips financial channel was pushing NFTs then it was good sense. It was presumably a sense of hope that their lives could be changed. They were at least in part scammed. Yes they should have known better I guess but when faced with the idea of never owning a home, never being able to retire and then people you trust give you terrible advice it's sort of understandable in a depressing way.
If they had the money to f around with NFTS and had the tech & knowledge to actually buy and own one I don’t feel sorry for them at all
@@maddieb.4282 you could have had a couple of thousand dollars that you'd worked hard to save over years. Knowing that it would barely cover any medication you might need in later life, let alone a home. The temptation to try and earn more when you are desperate makes people more susceptible to being scammed, and that's exactly what most of this was/is. Influencers online, including those that claim to understand finance, pumping out recommendations without mentioning they are getting kickbacks, pushing people into things they claim will let them live a little better or be able to retire with at least something. Of course people should be better at understanding the situation but a lot of people simply aren't financially literate, or are just plain desperate. They are being preyed upon by people they trust. Again that trust is misplaced but I don't think that looking down on people for being scammed is helpful. Obviously this doesn't cover all the evangelical web3'ers who should know better.
@@RobertLutece909 i just find empathy a better way to live my life. I'm not suggesting you have to do the same, you do you. And honestly I guess I'd rather reserve any feelings I have on the subject to those that scam people over those who for whatever reason couldn't understand it was a scam.
@@stuartmorley6894half the responses here are people who have never dealt with financial struggle. And no, I never bought NFTs, but I grew up on the internet, some people didn’t.
You are correct but if you are smart enough to buy an eft then you must have some brains. People are just so beaten down by the system they gave this a shot
When NFTs were first explained to me, I was hopeful that it would lead to being able to resell digital games and music... it turns out that the publishers would rather just keep selling new "licenses" to let you temporarily play their games.
I sold some of my illustrations as nfts and got involved in some art projects with other artists I admire. However, 3 or 4 months into it I started noticing how twitter threads and voice rooms were filling with a lot of scummy opportunists who started using us for their marketing purposes but our sales were going down. After a year I gave up and continue just doing my illustration work outside of nfts.
Very early on I've seen this happen with artists that were genuinely interested in a new way of commissioning art. Unfortunately the scammers got hold of it well the rest of history
Wanted to contribute that I actually met several artists who also have made honest efforts in the space! There are probably still some who are passionate about it for one reason or another. It may have been a small subsection of the NFT community but there were at least dozens of them! Dozens!!
yeah the idea for artists could have been good but crypto bros are the worst
Yeah if the block chain could of held the actual image then transferring rights for the image would have been an amazing tool for commissions and companies, but alas, it's links to jpegs and cryptobros :(
"unfortunately the scammers got hold of it"
The scammers were the originators in the first place. It was a tax scam from day dot. The general public who were dumb enough to sink money into them were icing on the cake for the scammers.
The receipt analogy is actually really good. A lot of people still misunderstand and think you own the picture, but really you only own the reciept that corresponds to the picture, and when you think about shopping reciepts, you can wave around a reciept saying you bought a rolex but no one will care unless you actually have a rolex. So yeah, nfts were always stupid. Crypto has some benefits compared to gold based currency but nfts are nothing.
And it's not even a receipt showing that you have purchased a Rolex. It's a receipt identifying you as the purchaser of a sitting spot that is identifiable by the fact that there is a Rolex there. But the receipt comes with a picture of that Rolex, for easier identification, and so many people don't really read the actual fine print and just assume that now they own a Rolex (and they assume that they can probably flip that Rolex for a lot of money down the line). If someone else puts on the Rolex, you can't do shit about that, since you never had any ownership of the Rolex to begin with.
that could not be further from the truth. you actually have no clue what an NFT actually is. cuz its definitely not the picture lol. NFT's are just as valuable, if not more valuable than a regular crypto. actually, the fact that you think they are significantly different to one another shows your total lack of understanding. the picture is the least important aspect of an NFT.
@@L7Fx my brother in Christ did you even read the comment
lol uh obviously? you said that crypto has a use case, but NFT's are worthless. that proves you dont know what your talking about at all because they are one and the same. @@jblen
@@L7Fx they both use blockchain technology but they are not the same. Crypto is fungible, nfts are non fungible. All currency in one coin is worth the same, nfts are individual assets. Maybe read up on it yourself before you throw your money away
Ita funny until you realize an absolutely massive amount of carbon was dumped into the atmosphere for worthless receipts.
I was more “shocked” that people bought into this in the first place. The very first time I first heard about NFTs I said, “well that is stupid and a waste of money”
It's even worse, because NFTs aren't even actually a receipt of supposed ownership of the image associated with the purchase. The actual NFT is just a queue spot in the blockchain, and then that queue spot holds a hyperlink to the given image as a sort of identifying marker. You can think of the image as a scribble in the corner of the queue stump so you can identify it later. This is why there were several NFT mints with the same images associated with some of their queue positions, and other NFTs where the hyperlink now links to either something entirely different or nothing at all.
How is that worse?
That's actually BETTER than just buying digital art 😂
@@carlpanzram7081
So you buy an NFT, you get the link to the NFT, and when you go to the NFT link there just isn't anything there, and that's better how?
this totally makes up for everything we went through in 2021.
Much props to Dan Olsen and his video, "The Line Goes Up" for dispelling a lot of the intrigue of NFTs.
NFT is spending money and hoping it magically generates into more money.
Lmao imagine a jpg on the internet not being worth anything. What a shocker.
you can always buy some Steam inventory items, especially ones you can't use like the Glitched Circuit, if you want a cheaper NFT experience
If you wanna own a piece of art, become an artist.
or commission a real artist. pretty sure you legally own whatever they make for you
I remember all of my friends going crazy about NFTs while i was saying it's biggest bs ever 😂😂😂
2:41 Technically Muta, as an environmental scientist, I have to point out that earth technically mints out new plates of tectonic plates every day
The dramatic irony of this is not lost on me, but still, part of me is kinda sad for these people. Some of them were using most of their net worth to try and get out of their financial standing, and they were suckered into this market. Now they own a worthless jpeg and with nothing to show for it. For as much as I can laugh, it's sad that some people lost so much of their money
I can only feel so much pitty for those people. The amount of people that probably warned them and took the time to explain why it was worthless and a dangerous investment only to respond with "enjoy being poor" was fucking staggering.
Nah dude. Bitcoin already existed.
These were just greedy idiots...
Don’t feel bad, actual poor people didn’t buy NFTs because they don’t have the money to invest. It was just greedy well off people trying to get rich quick. They’re reaping what they sowed.
@@FerrariTeddy Not true. I had co workers living check to check who were investing in that garbage...
It really targeted young idiots with gambling tendencies. Lots of gamblers bet with money they don’t even have...
@@Wallychans true, but I feel about as bad for them as crackheads spending money they don’t have. You gotta do better, especially if you don’t have the luxury to fuck around.
"you're still living in a crack house in reality, image how depressing that is. I'm live in a cardboard box with a stupid helmet on but, at least I'm looking at the mansion around me." I 3D modelled, textured and did all the fancy lighting stuff for a world for myself in VRChat which is essentially my VR home where I hide away from reality, Plus I use it to display art I've actually taken the time to make myself. And I did it without NFT's. But I am in the same situation.
The difference is that you modelled it. It’s better to have talent yourself than to pay someone to do it for you.
I love visiting the worlds you and people like you make! Keep being awesome!
@@irarelyupload6930what a stupid response. paying for an art commission from an artist shouldnt be considered a bad thing by any means
@@feIon
It hundredth percent should be if you’re living in a cardboard house you sped!
The deed scenario is even worse than you've described here. It would be like keeping your deed in your mailbox, and simply opening a random letter someone dropped into your mailbox gives that person permission to reach in and grab the deed, and now it's legally theirs because that's how the system works.
The only use case I ever thought might be interesting for NFTs would be something like software ownership. Basically, instead of tying everything to an account/email/whatever it's just tied to an NFT which would let you sell it and open up a used market for software... Why would any company ever implement or go near that idea after they spent so long trying to destroy the used market to begin with. So basically, the only use case I could think of that would actually be beneficial to consumers will never exist. In addition, companies could just implement that functionality without NFTs by letting you more software licenses between accounts, which they also would never do since they want you to just buy a new license.
Yeah, could you imagine Digital Games ownership being a NFT, better yet, as a cross-store option. It would help with digital stores closing and you NOT losing your games, or it you would be banned from a store and not losing access to these games. Not to mention the digital second hand market. But this will never happen
I was gonna say the same thing. The very idea of course, puts the fear of God into publishers and distributors
Trouble is, NFTs and crypto in general is really bad at hosting actual software. The storage capacity of an NFT isn't even enough for an actual image file never mind a whole software. Not to mention, the fact you couldn't ever update the software. You make a point tho that the companies wouldn't ever go to this system even if it did work. If they won't even do permanent software licenses anymore, they're sure as shit not gonna be sanctifying your ownership on the blockchain.
if they try that then more developers will start building open source alternatives :D
@@TheRealPifflesticks Good point. Since NFTs are largely identified by very specific hashes that will change wildly at the slightest alteration there would have to be some way to dynamically update a public database every time a change was made. Or I suppose that the core program would stay the same but every add-on and update would have to be loaded completely separate from the core program with some kind of plugin system but I'd image that would make software devs want to stick their head in a woodchipper. Or worse, companies would just paywall updates.
Honestly, the most frustrating and exasperating part of all this has been just seeing people you liked start selling it; I don't mean the usual hype man influencers or get rich con-mans, but the talented artists or "visionary" creators that were either complicit in the scam or didn't think about the consequences of their actions. I don't give a shit about the former, but I was so disappointed in those in the latter. Really reminded me that just because someone makes a great thing, doesn't mean they're a great person.
You think you're so smart.
Complicit
@@kubli365 thanks
I found it helpful to cut those people and companies out of my life.
Why were you disappointed in them? They made something, put it up for a price, and someone else chose to buy it. Honestly, don't understand what you think they were complicit in.
This is painfully hilarious because a family member of mine bought an NFT and hyped about it on Facebook a while back. We've since been astranged due to unrelated matters but to see this just makes me not feel bad for them AT ALL. They didn't lose their entire funds but to see them make such a useless investment that could have gone towards more important things just makes me giggle.
Edit: For context, they have this superiority complex of being the "breadwinner" of our entire family and to see it backfire like this is what makes it so god damn funny.
That is funny because certain people in almost anyone's family really suck. It's just an odds game. Since a high % of people suck. Odds are at least 1 is in your family 😂
So.. The type of people NFT's were targeted to.
EnJoY bEiNg PoOr!
The metaverse is nothing more then playing the sims but with a 500.00 head set
Let’s go 🎉
Could honestly never predicted shady business practices from crypto 😂
Crypto is doing fine. NFT's were always a joke.
Once I understood computers are just illusion boxes, I managed to turn my life into a more physical life. Yes computers are good but dumping all your time and money into it won't get you as far as maybe a releationship with a person or even a run in the park would do to yourself.
true
True. We are over due for a nice solar flare that will force reset these poor NPC kids who are glued to an ipad since birth. Its terrifying. Seen vids of kids trying to scroll tiktok in their sleep, trying to "scroll" the page of an actual book, having a melt down cuz pepe pig froze....and parents think this is fine cuz thwyre just "too busy" to parent. The generation of gamer addicts will be nothing compared to the future tablet kids.
When people were first talking about NFTs, I immediately got a couple red flags in my mind. You pay money, you get a digital artwork, there's some ambiguous digital protection... Hold on a second, what good does it make? If you show it publicly on the internet, people can just grab a screenshot. Unlike real world art, there's virtually no quality loss of artwork reproduction and the source material is not tangible paint on wood. But then they said it's not a form of protection, really, just a form of certification of ownership... which makes even less sense, because everyone else can still just screengrab your artwork and share it and your claim to ownership is a laughable hash code nobody cares about. But then it turned out that NFTs don't even really certificate the ownership, they just encode the link to the artwork. And even if the artwork was of good quality (not just some iteration of bored ape) the only thing you still own is a piece of hash code that nobody wants. So with metric shitton of copium going around the NFT community, the only way for the entire thing to collapse, was to have all these dudes asking "you wanna buy my bored ape?". And the universe whispered "No".
That’s the insane thing to me. I always thought that at least the NFT is unique hash of the file you bought with it. No… it’s a fucking hashed URL. Unreal how stupid that is…
The whole experience of learning about them was like a Matroska doll of ever increasing stupidity. And the first layer was already really stupid. It’s incredible how willing people are to throw money to a project they understand nothing about over some flashy marketing. But most worryingly is how much of the tech sector got involved when they definitely should have known better
Both of you don't understand the block chain.
NFTs are not any less stable than any other crypto currency, and crypto currencies aren't any less stable than actual currencies.
The value of a currency is based on a shared believe in the value of that currency.
When a dollar doesn't mean anything to you, then I can't trade it for anything with you.
If enough people stop believing in the dollar, suddenly the value of the dollar drops, until it completely collapses, because dollars are literally just little paper rectangles.
The quality of the artwork is completely irrelevant. The important aspect is the decentralized system that verifies ownership. Everybody that owns a NFT automatically owns the verification of every other NFT.
What verifies the dollar is it's specific material conditions. The serial number, the material it's made of, the ink used, and so on.
What verifies a NFT is the block chain. A document that included in the NFT that records every exchange of ownership of every NFT in that system.
The reason NFT failed is merely that there was a inflation of crypto currencies, and a lack of people interested in that specific form of currency.
It's like gold.
You know gold is valuable right?
Why?
Why is gold valuable? It's notnuseful to you at all.
The reason Gold is valuable, is because people THINK it's valuable, and because it's very inert (essentially indestructible and easy to verify authenticity) and very limited (it's unlikely the gold market experiences any sudden inflation)
Outside of these things, gold is completely useless.
Same with NFTs.
Outside eof their authenticity and their limited number, they are completely useless.
Welcome to the concept of currency.
If you want to say "the dollar and gold are real material goods" I will have to remind you that the MAJORITY of all dollars are not even printed. They exist litteraly in the SAME for that NFTs and other crypto currencies exist, with the simple difference that their verification is done by a single institution, instead of by the system itself.
Well NFTs are a secure method of showing that the image os the original non edited version BUT FOR GOD SAKE WE DONT SELL ENCRYPION KEYS!!! yeah they always had 0€ valule
@@carlpanzram7081 Wow, the amount of copium is strong with this one.
Lol I only collected NFTs from reputable artists… the NFT value plummeted but the utilities got me a bunch of free physical art that I collectively sold for about $9k.
With an investment of $700, I have zero complaints.
this video will age like a fine wine
Never understood why NFTs couldnt be applied to adoptables artists and artist commissions. It's a recipt that you own the art and its a ready made system for adoptable trading. This way the artist can make a commission off of the resale (typical adoptable trade fees) without ever being involved in the sale. Artists can stop doing manual certs between every trade, because the owner changes automatically.
That might work best for traditional art media where the purchaser gets physical custody of the item. The blockchain ledger could be a way of establishing provenance, right up until a purchaser decides they don't want to appear in the ledger.
@@timothy8428 Adoptables already run on public forums and websites with public databases. NFTs would just make running an adoptable easier because the trading infrastructure is built in.
@@geeperjanenot to mention that adoptables are strictly based off of a trust system and i don't think that a trust system would save you in court if the original artist decides to reclaim their art and start using it again
Because the technology isnt real. the image isnt encoded with any sort of non fungible metadata. its all fake, the adoptables you buy from an artist are just as non fungible right off the bat.
We ordinary gamers have had to tell ourselves enough times 'it's just pixels bro' that we already knew NFTs weren't worth anything
I never understood the purpose of NFT when you could just buy or commission a painting from an artist. It would be expensive but you'd still have a one of a kind work of art. That you can actually use
its just an absolute proof of ownership. if they minted the art on the blockchain, the current owner can 100% be confirmed to be the sole owner of the art instead of going off of a trust system with the artist
@@feIon we already have that it's called copyright
@@feIon And what good does it do to have "proof of ownership"? It still doesn't stop anyone from copying it.
I actually liked the idea of nfts, that you can buy something in one game and use it in another. I also like the idea Pokemon being able to catch a bear like creature and raise it and become friends but just like NFTs once reality hits it all comes crumbling down.
I could have told you that that would never happen. How would that even work? Every game has to reimplement all the items of every other game? Even if that would be feasible, why would a game developer do that? Give people an incentive to leave? Also why would you need an NFT for that? The billing is literally the easiest part in making items usable cross games.
@@blenderpanzi Ya it would need to be something like ready player one where for some reason every ip trusts a single game to handle it all. Then again it isn't too crazy looking at fortnite lol
@@yalhexander5641 You can bet that there is a lot of real money changing hands for all the fortnight stuff. The NFT game item ideas would have been that a player buys something once and then without more money changing hands can use it in other games. So it would be a lot of effort by the game companies for which they get no more money. Meanwhile in reality game companies want you to pay to be able to play the same old games on new consoles. Again and again. They want you to pay subscriptions every month, not buy something once and then use it in any game for the rest of time.
That supposed idea was nothing more than the vague BS that crypto bros fed you to trick you into wasting your money into useless junk that does nothing.
The one thing i can think of that would give NFT's actual utility would be in enabling true ownership of digital games. True ownership requires you to be able to resell your copy, which is the literal only defining feature of NFT's. They would be created and sold at retail price just as physical copies are.
The only problem is that would require distributors to decide to give consumers some of their rights back, which will never happen unless they are forced to.
the ability to resell your copy of a digital game would be fantastic but yeah as you said, distributors would never want you to actually own something
@@feIonEven the copies are supposedly be a "license" to play the game. You do not even posses the game, even if you have a physical copy of it.
The issue with that is that the block chain has a very limited amount of space for each node. You wouldn't be able to mint any game bigger than a snes game
@@Upload098765432 it doesn't have to be the game itself, the actual data on the chain could be a cryptographic key that proves ownership for the purposes of downloading and playing the game.
@Upload098765432 no NFT is large enough to carry the entirety of what it's a receipt for. Most just keep a url that directs you to view a copy of whatever it's a receipt for.
You might be able to use one to unlock access to the game on startup as a part of your DRM, but that's already more thought than I want put into that idea and would require the game to be always online (so you won't actually own it anyway).
after a long rough day coming home and seeing this just made my day.
Thank you for bringing up Star Citizen. Whenever Starfield suddenly came out, after years of development, I mistook it for that and argued with my friend and debated about how horrible the "game" is not realizing it was another overhyped game.
Maybe it's because I never saw a single trailer or heard anything about it, but Starfield doesn't seem that bad to me. It's a Bethesda game. It's as fun as fallout and skyrim are, it's just a different setting. I don't get the hate, but I also don't get the hate for Fallout 4, considering it's undeniably better than every previous game if only for the sole reason they did away with equipment condition.
@@supermexicanroboninja3116Its not nearly as fun as Skyrim they went for width instead of depth. Instead of one densely packed open world where you can discover things at every turn, its a bunch of sparsely packed worlds where you will walk for forever to find stuff that isn't that cool
I got these games mixed up too. Couldn’t believe it was really coming out.
Scam Citizen
@@supermexicanroboninja3116Honestly same i really do don't get the Hate for Starfield, with the exception of the game being not your cup of Tea.
It's a Bethesda Game.
It's a Todd Howard's Game.
Just see the Track record.
If you think you will get a Good Game with little to no Bug and soo many Graphical Detail you're in the wrong Place.
If you're looking for Long Replayable Game with funny glitches sometimes and questionable optimization and so goddamn easy to Mod with well arguably good story i guess.
Welcome you're in the right place.
*REMEMBER WHEN CRYPTO BRO's* were telling us WE were the ones that didnt get it...? We just didn't understand the block chaininess of the NFTism