I don't think anyone will be able to right click on an NFT in the future. The places where the NFTs are displayed will likely disable the right click feature over NFTs - it's not hard. If anyone copies the NFT using a program like snippet, this can obviously be found to be an illicit copy because it has no unique identifiers like a token ID which is generated when a valid copy is made and is then imbedded in the NFTs file. It's almost impossible to make a fraudulent copy with token id because when the unique item is created, a record of that goes public on the blockchain ledger.
“Buying NTFs is like having a husband or wife that cheats on you every day, but it’s cool because you have marriage papers so they’re still technically yours” - Benjamin Franklin
I find it interseting that NFTs are usually not even the data itself, but a link to a place that contains that data. Images are large, URLs to image hosting sites are not, and blockchains can't store megabytes worth of data in a transaction, which is how most of this goes down, with a token containig an adress to somewhere being traded around. The interesting problem then is that while that link can't change since it is forever part of the blockchain, what is hosted there can be, or the domain can just lapse. The ammount of times that both has happened combined with the anonymity of these marketplaces should be evidence enough that this is just an investment scheme and a breeding ground for scammers and fraudsters.
Huh, that's news to me. I always assumed that there was some identifier related to the work itself, like a low resolution copy embedded into the NFT, which would be the only reason to sell jpgs the way everyone has been. If it's just a url, it's even more useless to try attaching an NFT to a digital good. Wow. That's genuinely completely useless.
@@scienceface8884 Some NFTs are actually attached to the token in their entirety, but since the data limit is so low, we are talking things like 32x32 pixels with 8 bit colour. That's why I say usually they don't contain the data and not always. Some people take the token's history as validation since anyone could in theory make a token with the same link even, and that also happens. The non-fungibility of the token means that you can't copy it, but you can copy its content.
Right, and this is also one reason that purchasing an NFT does not mean you "own" the underlying asset in any way, shape, or form. You own the right to enter into certain blockchain transactions related to the token - and literally nothing more.
Feel free to disagree, but I feel digital scarcity is horrible. Wasn't the Internet built to share everything? Nothing is off limits? Everyone can access everything?
@@knowledgehusk no, the point is that the copies / sharing are still easy to create and spread. Fans / supporters can directly support artists if they choose. Kind of like the whole free on RUclips patreon subscribers you’ve got here. Except if someone supports a lot of channels, they can receive neat art that can also serve as a ticket to performance etc and additionally have all the artists they support organized on their wallets. To go a bit further - Is it objectionable for someone to create guides to video games and accept donations from fans? Is it objectionable if that person awards supporters with tokens of appreciation / pass to closer access / other content? The tragedy is all the financial pieces already occur outside of NFTs, except RUclips takes the Lionshare of revenues, not creators. NFTs simply provide an option / alternate structure. Literally no one will require you to engage with NFTs at all
As far as I know, NFTs do two things: 1)Rob idiots of their money through the power of pseudo-crypto 2)Allow millionaires and billionaires to launder money or dodge taxes
As far as 2) is concerned, it’s SUPER weird how NFTs took off JUST after a global crackdown on physical artworks being used in that way was announced… 👀
@@philcorrigan5641 So few people talk about this, but when hoity toity Christie's started selling a $69 mil Beeple NFT soon after, it was so obvious! It's just another way for the rich to get away w/ shady shıt in plain sight.
I think everyone is so desperate not to be like that guy in 2004 who thought touchscreen phones were dead on arrival that we’re willing to buy into any wacky notion that comes up because “Hey, maybe this time?”
@@Zones33 I like your thinking. I actually know some Welsh entrepreneurs who are gonna try and do that reality late next year or early 2023. Let's wish them luck
I thought the reason people pay such ridiculous sums for NFTs was because of FOMO. The same reason every startup in the late '90s that involved the internet or some vague application of "interactive technology" made a million dollars. The same reason 10 years later every service-as-an-app and x-sharing service had a multimillion dollar IPO. The same reason everyone now is vaguely integrating "crypto" and "the blockchain". In short, a bubble.
For the longest time, I thought a "blockchain" was some kind of blocking technique from a fighting game, like Street Fighter or Tekken. Like, push this certain combo of buttons within a certain time and you can block someone's entire combo.
Exactly. People buy it a cause they don't understand what it is or does(or because they've been sold a lie about what it does or is) but they know it's connected to the block chain and they missed out on bitcoin so they're afraid of missing out on the next big crypto thing but don't realize that NFTs are nothing like crypto.
@@travhatestrav1729 The video already mentioned that. As long as you can pass off the hot potato in time before it blows, you're safe. The last poor sap in the end is ruined.
There's a lot to profit from failures, even if an entire market drops, if you know well about what is going on, you will still profit. It's just an endless cycle of smart people creating trends to take the money from those that follow trends.
@@exMuteKid yeah that doesn't mean anything. You would think that we would be able to get over it considering how smart we are, but apparently we're just retarded animals at the end of the day. Not worth destroying the environment over though
The "hot potato" analogy nails it. Speculation (gambling) is not investing - sure you COULD be that person that makes money off of it. But by the time it gets out to the mainstream, the system is usually set and it exists to make someone else money.
@@tycooperaow hey I just took a screenshot of your ugly mug. Where do you guys play hot potato at and sell those monkey NFTs? I think I can get AT least a dollar for yours.
@@tycooperaow The token is me saying I have the original. Im the first and only person to screen shot your ugly mug. anyone else who screen shots my screen shot...is a scammer! now give me money!!
@@tycooperaow *pets you on the head* I see what you're trying to do here, but its not going to work. NFTs can, and will only be "worth something" if you can CONVINCE people to BELIEVE it has worth. Let me explain...why is a babe ruth baseball card expensive? its because EVERYONE collectively AGREED it to be of high value. why did do think its worth a small fortune? idk,? beats me, I don't even like sports....BUT If literally *anyone* were to find an old card like that regardless if they like sports or not, that individual could sell it for money. Now... imagine one day the world said stops and everyone thinks to themselves *"ya know what???! baseball cards are just squares of cardboard...complete junk."* BAM just like that...Like magic, the card turns to trash in the blink of eye... All because its what EVERYONE agrees. This whole "worth" nonsense you're talking about is hilarious because you *know* that WITHOUT absolutely everyone "being on board with the idea that your monkey pixel is an asset"... it becomes just like that baseball card when everyone decides it's cardboard trash. yall clowns just don't want to to admit to yourselves that no one is going to buy your stupid monkey photos online.
Apparently this will be in the heart of the metaverse. Companies selling clothing for your avatar as NFTs. Imagine how much Nike will save it they can sell sneakers without having to manufacture them.
@@hollyc5417 Wow I just realized people are already so used to buying virtual items (or even just the chance of getting virtual items), with this scheme in the future people will be convinced that it's normal for digital items to have limited quantities. (and probably be just as hard to convince that an item really can be duplicated, if the company willed it). It'll be just a fundamental part of reality for them
@@CaliMeatWagon That is very reductive. A digital bar code reader doesn't need the electricity consumption of a *small country* to operate. A digital bar code reader isn't an attempt by the right wing to turn the internet into an Ayn Randian paradise. Where everything on the internet is given artificial scarcity so that crypto bros can bet on them and everyone is constantly trying to grift everyone else in an endless orgy of scam pitches. And that is not being hyperbolic. That is exactly what the crypto bro say that they want. Verbally. Repeatedly. Everywhere. That is exactly the world the diamond hand true beleivers shout that they want from this everywhere you find them. They think that sounds wonderful and that anyone who doesn't agree is an idiot.
Fun fact! That fictional marketplace that you described towards the end of the video with artificial scarcity and reselling and limited times actually does exist and it's on Roblox. They do this predatory marketing but not even towards adults it's literally towards children
People don't buy limiteds to sell later (most people) they buy them to flex as accounts have a RAP value that kinda shows what you're account is worth.
@@DabaronDaVinci Not entirely true, most people do actually trade till they get the item as their goal item to get. After that they usually just trade it off later and work up to another item. I only see developers and youtubers keeping their limiteds as it's usually their signature look on their avatar (e.g. stickmasterluke and his dominus).
It often turns into, say, a stock market gambling sort of system. Although with children being on the site spending money on popular items. These popular items are often hundreds of thousands of real life dollars (converted into the form of "Robux" for spending).
Child exploitation aside, its funny how roblox did all of this without some crazy blockchain technology. They had this shit working in like 2007 and its still a better implementation than anything a hypothetical NFT marketplace could pull off.
ROBLOX already has NFTs in the form of limited minted items and it’s ridiculous how expensive they are, on a platform for CHILDREN. People have lost hundreds to thousands of dollars on these items- and there’s even graphs that track the price over time, allowing minted items to be speculated on. There is a video by “People Make Games” that goes into the numerous problems with Roblox, these NFTs being a big one.
I mean, movies are technically “infinitely replicable” too. All digital things are. I could sit there and make a bajillion copies of shrek and spend almost no time, effort, or money while doing it. I could make enough copies to essentially provide one to everyone in the world for free. But I’m not allowed to do that. The scarcity of shrek is controlled by the company that made it, through copyright and IP laws. Even though their product can be reproduced infinitely, they still treat it like it’s a scarce item. Otherwise, shrek would be worthless and would have never been made. No one bats an eye when movie companies give their films artificial scarcity. Just kind of ironic to me that everyone’s up in arms about it with NFTs
The picture in itself is pointless, its about the file it is atached too, because said file is what you actualy buy and hope to resell. The picture is just for idiots who don't understand whats actualy going on in the blockchain to give them a secure feeling. Very silly indeed.
@@hohrhamikaiolaf464 They're stickers, essentially. But here it's just the sticker art with no actual physical sticker to stick on something else. It's difficult to imagine something more worthless.
@@Chapterhouse In fact, movies and music would be the only place where NFT's could have some sense. Scarcity in a controlled environment do not need NFT. If I rule Roblox or GTA... why should I implement some stupid super complicated protocol to hold accountability of what every user can or cannot use? Makes no sense. The only sense I can imagine is that Sony and all major music or movie holders AGREE to validate some given NFT standar, so they say... hey... if someone has THIS NFT property, I am not suing whoever is reproducing the content. So, they all sell the same kind of NFT's and all kind of services can appear to serve that music or movies to those NFT holders. Reason? Suposedly a Movie has more value if I buy it from Google Play but I know I can resell it or play it in the future in any other platform. So music or movies market can charge you more... except that... if you can put your NFTs in the market... they are going to loose a huge amount of money in the future. Anyway... any NFT market that makes sense will always start with the market agents agreeing on the standard and then the NFT, and not the other way around.
The problem with NFTs is that the whole business around them is entirely a speculative bubble. Because the only reason to purchase one of the chimp NFTs is to sell it later on. It has no real value. Now NFTs *can* have value, but only under specific circumstances. If someone is the creator of a meme or a digital artwork they could sell the NFT to someone who genuinely wants to say that they own that image. But people would only want to buy something like that if it is important, beautiful, relevant to our culture. There is no actual market for a bunch of bad artwork, same-y pictures of a chimpanzee or superhero. So when people realize that no one actually wants to spend over a million on a .jpeg, the whole thing will crash.
even the meme thing is arguable. Especially because the nft gives you no rights to the image besides claiming you paid a high price for it. I like the idea where NFTs for actual art afford the creator a share of the sales whenever it changes hands, that's a cool modernization of the concept of comissions imo, and that's as far as I think it can go if it's gonna be something viable. Other than that, it's just a bunch of people betting on their jpeg to become more valuable, which is as much as a lie as the fact that that artwork is unique in any way.
So those were the first iteration of NFTs but the space has evolved. I don’t like Axie personally but you can use their NFTs in game and even “breed” them to make new NFTs. NFT land will always be popular just for the prospect of being able to build on it. And projects like Wilder World are developing NFTs that can be staked for $WILD coins. The space will continue to evolve to satisfy more and more needs until it’s everywhere imo.
@@flowermaze___ well a lot of the people who are spending huge amounts are people who are now millionaires because they’ve been in the space for 5-10years. Luckily we live in a free market world so if you want to spend a million bucks on a watch that tells time or a shoe that sits on a shelf or a jpeg that makes you money then we are all free to do so.
Diamonds also have a myriad of utilitarian uses, too. We've had the technology to make large artificial diamonds that are almost identical to their naturally made counterparts for many decades. Yet people with a lot of money will gladly shell out $60,000 for a gold necklace covered in natural diamonds and sapphires for their Wife's anniversary.
you people really like saying "it's the future, it's inevitable" because you know that the more you shove it in people's faces, the more likely they invest in your crappy bored ape wannabe
Usually ever single idea is originated about a decade to two before any actual attempted implementation. Digital Currency was theorized as far back as the 70s and 60s, long before "Crypto" was a thing.
Well, there are some examples of actual talented artists who put time and effort into their work turning their art into NFTs, and as much as I hate them for selling out I won't deny that they have talent. But the NFTs you think of first when you hear the word (the apes, the lions, etc.) are literally randomly generated by an algorithm. That's how they make so many NFTs in so little time; they have a randomized selection of parts placed onto a template. Of course, because they're random, they don't follow the traditional rules of what makes art appealing, meaning you often end up with ugly combinations with elements that clash.
Perhaps but it could also bring players from other games into their game so now you built an audience. Actually NFT projects are already doing that for example if you minted a NFT another project will advertise their NFT in the discord of your NFT if the creators are OK with it.
@@InteresanteSnap yeah but how is that NFT gun even gonna be able to be inported to other games without breaking the game or ruining it for the people that can't buy the NFT's?
@@InteresanteSnap first that either that NFT contain all of the weapon data which is unlikely or the other games contain all the weapon data that you just need a NFT key but then i will just gonna force activate it anyway because it's already in the game and i own it
Oh no not for devs. For game designers, yes. Every game would start competing to have the most insane weapons, so your classic style shooter would get fucked when someone brings in a hand gun that shoots nukes.
@@neasper You're right for the game you have in mind. But NFT native games will understand that there could be a balancing issue. Another thing is even though something is an NFT it doesn't have to be artificially limited it can be minted infinitely or there can be a collaboration between developers to give you a different kind of item that may pay homage to what you original NFT is. Basically the only limitation is your imagination. Everything I say is possible it depends what people want in the end of the day but NFTs gives the people more of a vote if you will.
I’m a digital artist and Senior Illustrator at CIA (Cleveland Institute of Art, graduate now) and I frequently get told that I should go into NFTs. Thing is, I don’t even really know what that is because it’s so weird and vague. But to me it looks like a quick way or attempt to make fast money, which isn’t really why I do my art so it’s kind of hard to get on board with. I kinda like my art to speak for itself and I like the work for it
THANK YOU Being told to get into NFTs and to dip your toes into it is alot more annoying than I thought it would be Yea they make fat stacks, and it's tempting But for my art, that's not what I want. I want to make money from my art, but not in such a low effort way.
If you want a simple, easy to understand explanation, you should watch Josh Strife Haye’s video. The condensed explanation is that an NFT is a receipt you own for a spot on the queue. It doesn’t matter what the item is, a song, a video, a book or even a page; you don’t own that item nor the copyright nor the ability to say you own X. What you do own is a code that says you bought a spot on a queue that was sold in relation to an item by someone who may or may not be the owner of said item. Something noticeable to point out is that if you want to collect royalties or anything special to promote these things as “a passive income for artists,” you then have to add a script or something else to the purchase otherwise you will only receive the funds from selling this receipt once.
@@googleplusisgone9435 and what little they can do, can already be done using an SQL database, albeit without the public ledger thing. Seriously that public ledger is the only good part about NFTs, and for like 90 percent of all use cases, youre still better off with a regular database.
Video games haven't changed from $60 since 1998... That's ~23 years that the price has remained stable despite inflation. $60 today is only worth $35 in 1998. $60 of 1998 money would be $102.
the current NFT fad has a very real point. to redistribute wealth, up... while also programming people even deeper into digital addiction. depends which project we're talking about. also, the initial money wave was astro turfed. people buying from themselves. trail points to off shore crypto casino money.
You just hear about all of the people who were skeptical of the internet or iPhones but being a young person myself, I wonder what are some new technologies that everyone thought was the "next big thing" but ended up being a total flop
NFTs are decentralized. You don't legally own anything except the NFT token. Whatever data it points to is just a representation of where the token is on the queue.
Great... they've introduced incentive to AVOID trying to reach a post-scarcity future, the dream of so many speculative science fictions. "In the year 2820... we were approaching a glorious post-scarcity paradigm... but then companies figured out that they could make more money if they kept things scarce, even artificially so."
This channel, KnowledgeHub in general shows what REALLY is possible. Holograms are sort of possible (I myself saw a hologram in a Robotics Exposition show, but it was just a spinning propeller with lights on it that made a picture) ... Flying cars are a bad idea too... It is like everything I wanted from 2021+ was a lie (I am a 2000s kid, now 23 year old)
If you want to spend an evening doing a deep dive trawl through the depths of NFTs, Folding Ideas has a magnificent 2 hour plus documentary on NFTs, their background and the community surrounding them that I can highly recommend.
I will be looking that video up. Even though I am not stepping into nft, I want to learn more about it. I keep on hearing about nft in my business course. Anyway, thank you.
That 'culture' consists of people trying to make you the last one paying too much, or those who try to be like the former, but end up being the latter.
The sad part is they are pointless for now, and it'll be worse when they aren't. NFT bros envision a metaverse future where you can't create and freely share stuff online. They salivate at the thought of ol Zuck coming in and making it impossible to throw up free artwork on your meta wall you found on the net.
@@misterb.s.8745 "I know this sounds dumb, but it's deep"... Nah the punk 6529 Twitter thread was just dumb. He's spouting off ideas that have been around since currency was a thing like they're new, just because they use crypto.
@@TheUnRemarkableGamer his most recent tweet is literally "no to the corporateverse" but go off about how we love zucc apparently? Being disingenuous is a sure sign that you're not gonna make it, sorry.
I mean, I mostly agree but I think the "point" of NFTs is obvious: to grift the gullible, socially illiterate and economically precarious into willingly handing over what money hasn't already been taken from them by banks, gambling or 'live-service,' loot box games. The fact that people are lonely enough they actually "find community" in getting scammed and poor-shamed by con artists on the internet actually makes me deeply angry and sad at the same time.
the funny thing about nfts is that in reality, you don't even own the image or video or whatever because they're just links to where the real image or video is stored for example google drive, Mediafire, an FTP server any other kind or server(remember is just a link) meaning that If the owner of that server decide to delete the content or change the domain you essentially become the owner or a dead link
@@FelixCepedaChannel nah I've been through the NFT ringer. Whitelist grinding, flipping, holding, etc. It truly is pointless, and save for a small handful of utility projects, they only serve to make flippers and sellers money right now. Truly sad.
The link in the token is not important at all since there is no guarentee it's even unique, also there are decentralized ways to ensure the link stays up. The problem of NFTs is not the link but the fact that it has no value beyond the one people are willing to give them. Right now the only entity who give them value is generally the issuer, for example with in-game skins or exclusive access to some "club". In this sense it's not much different from a membership card, the only entity that cares about it is the one who gave it to you and it's value is whatever perk the issuer gives you for owning it. NFTs are really just an ID with a traceable ownership, the metadata in it is mostly worthless. The traceable ownership is the most important. Basically I can know that a NFT is legit because it traces back to the artist/company who created it. What the consequences of owning a "legit" token are however is up for people to decide, they have no intrinsic value, much like a writen contract or fiat currency is worthless without a government backing it's legitimacy.
The whole 'hot potato' analogy reminds me of the housing bubble. The salesmen making the loans knew the loans were going to end up worthless, so they sold them to the bank. The bank sold those mortgages to bigger banks. And the megabanks just hoped to sell off their assets to unsuspecting investors.
Every single time I read and hear the phrase “late capitalism” I want to rip my brain out of my skull, but the fact that there’s a market for NFTs is very much a sign of late capitalism imo
I've found that there is a market for EVERYTHING! Skins for Minecraft Bedrock edition, Analytics software, Roblox is a mess too, everything the video shows... I also wanna tear some when I see what long-term capitalism can do!
I've come to the conclusion that this is the latest incarnation of the "Art" industry. No one in their right mind would pay $12,000 to buy a canvas of an orange dot slightly off-centre on a black field in an art gallery unless they are very bored and have a vast amount of disposable income. Combine that mentality with the latest "investment" trends, and this is what we get... 😑
@@Константинос-х1у That is a good point. To be fair, I do respect the work and time put into most of those pieces, but I still believe all of them are very much overpriced. I had a conversation with a gallery owner two years ago who explained to me which paintings she sold the most: Nude figure paintings and very detailed landscapes or still lives (to the point of photographic accuracy) were by far the most popular. Every other work remains on the wall for years.
I actually watched a video recently about NFTs in the "Art Industry" that basically came to a similar conclusion. More or less, because popular art has become dominated by neo-modernist-abstraction, while the market has also become dominated by price gouging galleries/collectors artificially inflating the market to make a quick buck, as well as the rapid rise of "digital art", NFTs are *clearly* the next logical step down the line of "progress".
@@richarddickjohnson516 The people I feel the worst for are the Artists. The vast majority are young women who have just graduated from University, and it's actually comparable to the Modeling industry in how new people are treated. Creativity is only rewarded if you learn to exploit other creative people, in that world. It makes me sick.
Knowledge is a freely reproduceable resource, meaning you can teach without loosing what you just teached. All digital media works in the same way and it is fine the way it is. All things should be like this in a perfect world but not everything can. We need to go up, not down.
@@tycooperaow You missed the point so hard I just intellectual damage. Never before have I seen such a poor rebuttal lol. "Oh yeah? You want a post-scarcity society? Well we don't currently live in one haha 😎 got him!"
It’s an unforgeable deed. That’s it. The hype is absolutely overblown and the vast majority of what is happening now is a scam. But the technology isn’t useless.
Agreed. Unfortunately we'll probably have to wait for at least a few years after the NFT art fad ends and most of the bitter taste to be out of people's mouths for those actual uses to be capitalized on when .
The problem with those uses is this: unless some authority recognizes it, it is meaningless. The deed to my house has value because the government recognizes that I possess this deed. So I am entitled to summon armed people if someone tries to encroach upon my land. The copyright on my work of art matters because it empowers me (if I have enough money to pay a lawyer, filing fees, etc) to wield the power of the government upon those who infringe upon my copyright. Private property and intellectual property exist only because people with guns will eventually be mobilized against those who encroach upon those rights. Until someone with power and authority starts caring about these "unforgettable deeds", they are merely bits on a blockchain.
@@GeneralBolas Correct. Mostly. There needs to be a central database that is trusted to store NFT logs to indicate “this NFT exists and represents this property.” After that, it is proof of ownership. From there, normal laws regarding property rights apply.
GeneralBolas historically this is so incorrect. Just look at money, was it meaningless before governments started to recognize it? Were things like gold somehow only accepted for transactions only after the government gave their thumbs up? Furthermore, why does it need to be the government to be such authority? How is bitcoin not only a thing, but actually considered an actual currency instead of speculative investment before it became popular? Furthermore, why does it need to be the government the authority? If Elon musk announced a new currency in which you can buy tesla cars with, doesn't it have the same (or at least similar) amount of validity as any other currency? Heck, considering currencies like the Argentinian peso, it'd probably be MUCH more valid and accepted.
I've literally been watching videos on what these things are and I'm still none the wiser as to why so many people are into them. What's to be proud of owning something that isn't physical and can be copied and shared by everyone? If this is the future, count me out!
Digital art on its own is something one can be proud of but the hole idea of nft's are more so a book list where each action is written down on it where you buy a serial code that points to one line in that list
Most people are into NFT's for the potential profit, its just a money making/laundering scheme IMO. I'm sure there are the few that legit want to "own" that image, but I doubt it is very many because it's just too absurd. Then again, I have been surprised by people's stupidity in the past so we will see.
This is exactly what I've been trying to tell people since this whole thing began. Speculative markets are terrible and will cause major pain to some people when it all crashes
@@jazes8423 mainly because we are social beings sure some stuff may make us care less for instance why do you care why he cares? and many wanna prevent their friends and family being the ones holding the hot potato at the end of the game
ditch speculation, get productive. Make shit with your hands, join a craftsman's guild, build a co-op garden, keep chickens, learn the violin, get HVAC training, work with lumber. We're turning our economical classes into another beast, soon it will be the investment class that speculates off of the productive class and what they produce. That already exists in the form of commodities, etc. but it is going to get WORSE, and fast if people don't knock this shit off. Speculators are like those small parasitic fish on the bellies of sharks.
It's crazy that people try to find any way to validate these things, "you could own the original copy of the piece" (paraphrased) this has literally been done by artists for YEARS as part of commissioned work lol. Good vidjeo.
None of those arguments really mean anything, or aren't novel.(ie the supposed application isn't something that has just now become possible because of this, and possibly isn't easier than the alternative either) It's chanted with such confidence, yet if you think about it for even a second it falls apart.
Yeah except commissioned work just wasn't really resold, nor had much reason to be. Plus NFTs allow selling and then trading non-commissioned artwork, which again wasn't really a thing before - closest was buying a full-res JPEG for personal use. What validates these things, is that it takes real art trading - something that was around for hundreds of years and is also based on paying too much money for generally useless items that everyone can have a cheap copy of - and puts it into digital form. I have no idea why people can grasp one concept, but not the other.
Only humans could take something that’s infinite and free and implement scarcity in it so they can keep their oh so precious status symbols and hierarchies.
Bingo: people want to feel important. Some people are genuine losers who will never be important in any way. So they join this pathetic NFT cult to feel important.
The macroeconomics of the NFT market theoretically works… but the perceived usability of them beyond being a luxury item to show your wealth cuts off the demand of SO many people.
The NFT market works in the sense that people are buying and selling them for real money. When the hype fades and NFT prices crash, that will also be an indication that the NFT market is working. Markets can go in either direction.
It’s not “percieved usability” there IS NO USABILITY. And no, the market doesn’t work in theory, it’s a text book example of what’s known in economics as a “greater fool’s” market. Works like this: I sell someone dumb like you something valueless because I trick you into seeing it’s value. Now, in order to make this pay off you have to convince someone even dumber than you that it’s worth even more. This cycle continues until anyone in the buyer’s market responds to the listing of the item’s price with “well no one is that stupid,” necessitating a sale at a loss, or more likely no sale at all making you what people like me call the “bag holder”. I handed you an empty bag with a “$” on it and bolted with the cash. Leaving you thinking you’re rich with nothing but air.
I was given the opportunity to work with some nft guys on a game dev project and I bailed on day one. Every single idea those crypto guys were throwing out was either illegal gambling, or intentionally creating a power vacuum wherein the most wealthy players were the only ones who could succeed. Always trust your intuition lol. I cant believe this nft crap got so big.
and at thaz point you'd probably ask yourself "why the fck am i even using a slow ass environmental damage inducing blockchain for this when i could just use any other database system?"
Does the benefit come in when you want to agree upon protocols that the actual centralized minting platforms won't accommodate whatever that might be? Is it blockchain > a database system? No third-party? Seems like it's just a way to have digital signatures without a third-party but blockchain instead?
@@trouncerrredits what many "owners" of those blockchains wont tell you that they own all the nodes and have defacto full controll and centralization over that blockchain which gives them literally no advantage over traditional databases except of it being a buzzword... Edit: but yes, an actual decentralized blockchain by itself *could* benefit us but that seems unrralistic as the most popular blockchains don't even fullfill their original purpose. Edit2: There is almost always some kind of third party, you can't avoid that, so the best thing you could do is give your users the option to choose their third party or build a system that may establish itself through trust...
If NFT art has real value, my “save as image” should be the same value as the minted one. If not, the real value is only a series of number that people are buying in the casino’s game
@@yungmetr0135 But aren't people just buying a receipt? The actual art or media isn't stored on the block chain. It's just a receipt that says you own an on a link that could then be tampered with? Edit: sorry replied to the wrong comment lol
@@yungmetr0135 I mean those weren't designed to be scarce, they were just scarce because noone wanted to make it anymore because it's useless and people like preserving history(Also they're physical meaning they actually can't be duplicated). NFTs aren't gonna preserve shit since it can't even hold a goddamn digital image, they're just tools to manipulate the masses and pander to artists to make more cryptoshit so they can make more money on idiots
This is worrying. I was in a twitch stream last night and the streamer started to test the idea of nft’s for the channel and the thousands of shee…..followers blew a gasket, lapping the idea up like it was the best idea ever. I fear the “masses” are going to fall for this hook, line and sinker.
I guess we know how this ponzi scheme tech took off. Parasocial relationship, idol worshipping, and "I'm not like other billionaires, I know memes". I think this chapter of the history book would be very depressing for the future generations as they have to read how manipulative and/or narcissistic these cryptobros are that they'd probably develop a second white guilt except it's now for the people that has a cryptobro ancestor
There are applications for NFTs that involve representation of actual scarse items in a digital form (a deed, a loan, an authenticity certificate, etc), but everything is just a blockchain with a new sign. This, the thing about making the NFT its own valuable object, is a bad scam
Hey, this video isn't about actual ethereum applications, smart contracts and actually unique tokens that track or certify something usefull. It's about DRM for worthless digital thingies, which is what the public understands the NFT term to mean in practice.
Dan Olson (Folding Ideas) just made a 2 hour long video that effectively 1) reveals all the ways in which NFTs are horrific in both their design and intended outcome 2) identifies the ideological basis of Cryptocurrencies and the occurrence of NFT's as a mutation of blockchain technology It's honestly a beast of a documentary
I've never been so engaged just watching someone talk for two hours. I feel like he could have gone on for another two and I still would have watched it all.
@@leonardorestrepo5196 100% He expounds about how if crypto were fully adopted it would be terrible for the vast majority of society in an interview with The Financial Diet. I highly recommend it if you haven't watched it yet.
@@popcornfan9364 I watched that vid (and subscribed immediately after)! Ignoring how obviously tired from the whole project dan was, you can tell how deeply he dived into both the technology and the culture around crypto. There's so much he left out of the original video, and all of it was pretty damning
The NFT craze will always remind me of the CSGO gambling ban and the emergence of fake CSGO skins, VGO skins, which were supposed to be introduce to games later on, but mostly used as a workaround for gambling sites
The phrase "tangible utilitarian function' is what I've been missing when explaining why the eay NFT's are pointless. If anyone else can use it for what it's actually capable of, then what you are buying is perception. Nothing.
Hot take: NFTs don't exist. At least, they don't exist in how they're described. What can an NFT do? They can provide a chain of transactions for a given claim of ownership over something. What can't an NFT do? They can't prevent duplication, they can't provide proof of ownership in a legal contractual sense (on their own), and they can't provide a chain-of-origination. All of those last things require other legal instruments such as physical contracts and leases/titles/deeds/licenses/etc. If the legal system does not respect them, then without a such thing as some crypto-police to break down your door and destroy your Ctrl, C, and V keys, they must not represent a non-fungible asset. They're a glorified receipt with a "Trust me bro" note on the top.
@@andrew-qw5ez The ledger only shows a history of swap transactions, but it can't prove that the original creator of the NFT owned the copyrighted goods. You need copyright registrations to definitively prove that.
Yeah NFTs are incredibly fungible. They are just unique serial numbers, do you known what else has unique serial numbers? Dollar notes. And they are the most fungible thing in the universe. Any one issuing these things, can just issue more. There is nothing guarenteeing uniqueness beyond the serial numbers, so exactly like dollar notes.
@@lennysmileyface As I said just like dollar bills. They are unique by having a serial number.. But the people issuing them are not restricted from issuing more with new serial numbers.
my friend, given what you've said here, I'm interested to know what you think of NFT-ing land? I have a friend who's trying to make waves in the NFT/crypto world, and he recently NFT'd a business's property. Apparently its the first in Canada. I don't care to rack my brain trying to get on board with this but he definitely believes in it to the point of pushing through these arge ventures beyond NFT artwork and digital assets. Basically he's NFT'd the physical deed to the land on the blockchain (forgive me if I've explained that poorly). This seems like the next step that makes the concept more legitimate according to you. What do you think of that?
Excellent video! When you purchase an NFT, it allows you to decode a location in the blockchain that contains a hyperlink to a photo. You don't own the photo, nor do you own the hyperlink. You own the key that allows you to decode the hyperlink.
The only real useful application for NFT’s that I’ve come across is the creation, sale and transfer of digital IP. Think, I am a cartoonist and someone wants to commission me to draw their D&D OC to life. I do it and can now create a universal provenance as part of copyright. The Use of said IP can be tracked if the new owner ever sells. The only value linked to the single NFT is the actual value of the art. Something similar can be applied to individual ownership of other media like songs as an anti piracy measure. Since scarcity doesn’t really exist in the digital world, NFT’s could stand in as tokens for actual ownership. Though with all of this the ideas that access to the content by the user cannot be revoked by the provider once the NFT is bought. I might actually be a nice way to fight against the “You will own nothing and be happy” future that our corporate overlords have planned for us. But what we are seeing now is a speculative boom that will inevitably crash. Artificially scarcity is just that: artificial. Once everyone has realized that the NFT has no intrinsic value unless the asset it is linked to actual has some value. The market will cool. I am sure of it.
Beyond their value, I also love how entire people with productive careers and vocations give up their hand-trade or technical expertise founded on craft and artisanal traditions to chase NFTs.
when I think of nft's I think of the Cyanide & Happiness tweet "We don't do nft's If you see a Cyanide & Happiness nft, that wasn't us If you bought a Cyanide & Happiness nft, you got scammed, also lol" someone commented that they didn't need to say "also lol" and yada yada "nft bros losing money is funnier than any of our comics."
We're already at that unavoidable point, if not getting close. Look at the USPS wanting to do NFTs (despite being a publicly-owned service) & even RUclips themselves hinting at it. I don't know what YT's plans are but I don't want it to effect pre-existing services or my content creation abilities. And that's despite all the backlash people are giving RUclips, which isn't surprising to see them ignore the public after they removed dislikes.
The amusing thing is that the example you posited about how things could get worse does not, in any way, require NFTs. That's how utterly shit and pointless NFTs are, even in the worst case scenarios for their exploitation, the question "wouldn't this be cheaper and easier to do with a centralized database?" remains prevalent!
i think nfts are bullshit, but this is actually an argument nft believers use. some of them dont care if you screen shot, youre just taking a picture of the mona lisa, which is worthless because anyone can do that. and in their heads they own the original mona lisa youre taking a picture of. that is how a lot of them view it
@@Shroomzee yea makes no sense to me like the person who took the screen shot of someone else's NFT gives a sh!t that the other person owns some code for it lol. Its literally the exact same picture. Unlike taking a picture of the mona lisa which is clearly not the same as having the original painting.
The thing is, you can remove NFTs from all case uses and you can still do all those things, meaning NFTs arent bringing anything new but rather leeching from both new and old existing tech. And if you want to serialize something just give it an id. Do NFTs have a case use where you must use NFTs or it wont work without them? Maybe, idk of any but that begs the question, could it be done without NFTs? You see, being the first tech doesnt mean it has to be the only tech (emphasis on ONLY), ask Myspace, msn messenger, whatsapp, Twitter, etc, etc. And im pretty sure those big names werent the First ones in their industry, and that shows you that the first tech can be replaced so easily in the end that the public dont even remember them. NFTs as a tech still is nothing but an speculative tool trying to find a purpose where it can excel, problem is the competition is still better and/or have a better reputation/service.
5:46 Imagine the inverse. Having a 1000 DPS weapon in a game with characters that max out at, say, 500 HP. Imagine it was a multiplayer game. Either the NFT weapons are banned in multiplayer, or it just becomes a battle of instakills
Not to mention the market would be absolutely immediately flooded with items that have all of their stats set to 999999999, because why wouldn't someone make anything other than the best possible item if they were going to sell it? There'd be absolutely no point otherwise.
lmao that's not even remotely close to how it would be implemented and the videos analysis is so incredible basic. Imagine a NFT based game system where the systems in game and balancing are keeping in mind cross game nft items. These items are created by the devs with balancing in mind and only nfts that they have created would have usage in that system. So your scenario isn't actually one that any developer would pursue. You can still dislike that type of system and hope it doesn't become the norm, but at least think a little deeper on it.
@@christopherjohnson9167 If i remenber crypto and NFT are things against centralization right? You are basically saying devs should do new weapons, and ban players weapons. Nowadays there something called DLC and mod, a DLC generaly adds new things such weapoms, armor etc, a mod does the same but in a mod balacing is not the central theme.
@@christopherjohnson9167 So essentially we are completely deviating from the original point and just saying that developers could have weapons interchangable between games. But, I don't see why? Unless the weapons are between a yearly series like COD or FIFA, every game is going to have different artsyles, different time periods, and even different senses of scale. One game may be about giants fighting each other in the far future, think TF2, while another may be human combat in the past, think any of the shooters with a historical setting. So the option for games a developer could exchange nft weapons with is incredibly limited. Something from Overwatch won't fit into Battlefield. And then, the options are even lowered. Like I said once again, even if developers do have visually similar enough games to exchange nfts with, the combat mechanics need to be nearly the exact same, else the weapon would be either horribly underlowered, or the best mechanic in the game. As well, the special abilities the weapon needs to function as a weapon may not translate well into a different game. What you are suggesting needs a complete overhaul of the mechanics of gaming just for the potential for nfts to be anything more than a scam. It would be ridiculous, so why do you still support it?
You make an excellent point, as if we didn't have enough ways for them to that. I wonder if that is why Elon Musk supports NFTs and cryptocurrencies so much.
The weirdest thing to me is that NFTs started as a way for artists to get paid for their work and for it not to get stolen and resold (from what I’ve read and been told at least), yet art theft is a very big problem in the NFT community as the only thing making it valuable is the line of code saying it is
Exactly. Unless the artist themselves immediately creates it as an NFT, someone else will do it and claim it as their own. But art theft is nothing new. NFTs just exacerbate the problem
What's funny ina way is this : nft Bros are ok stealing from artists, dead or alive. But boy do they cry oceans of salty tears when someone scams the nfts off them
![[DRAGON BALL LEGENDS REVEALS ＆ STUFF] LEGENDS FESTIVAL 2024 Special Edition Part 1](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/mV5bGIswTtQ/mqdefault.jpg)
I feel like the phrase "Your NFT isn't even worth right clicking on." will become an insult, and I'm here for it.
This ^^^
YES.
i'll start using it (;
I am going to immediately steal that insult
I don't think anyone will be able to right click on an NFT in the future. The places where the NFTs are displayed will likely disable the right click feature over NFTs - it's not hard. If anyone copies the NFT using a program like snippet, this can obviously be found to be an illicit copy because it has no unique identifiers like a token ID which is generated when a valid copy is made and is then imbedded in the NFTs file. It's almost impossible to make a fraudulent copy with token id because when the unique item is created, a record of that goes public on the blockchain ledger.
“Buying NTFs is like having a husband or wife that cheats on you every day, but it’s cool because you have marriage papers so they’re still technically yours” - Benjamin Franklin
Very true
😂😂😂👍
🤣🤣🤣
yess 😂😂😂
tu analogía es muy convincente y acertada y te amo, extraño de internet 🤣👌
I find it interseting that NFTs are usually not even the data itself, but a link to a place that contains that data. Images are large, URLs to image hosting sites are not, and blockchains can't store megabytes worth of data in a transaction, which is how most of this goes down, with a token containig an adress to somewhere being traded around. The interesting problem then is that while that link can't change since it is forever part of the blockchain, what is hosted there can be, or the domain can just lapse. The ammount of times that both has happened combined with the anonymity of these marketplaces should be evidence enough that this is just an investment scheme and a breeding ground for scammers and fraudsters.
THIS.
Huh, that's news to me. I always assumed that there was some identifier related to the work itself, like a low resolution copy embedded into the NFT, which would be the only reason to sell jpgs the way everyone has been.
If it's just a url, it's even more useless to try attaching an NFT to a digital good.
Wow. That's genuinely completely useless.
@@scienceface8884 more like a certificate of authenticity.
@@scienceface8884 Some NFTs are actually attached to the token in their entirety, but since the data limit is so low, we are talking things like 32x32 pixels with 8 bit colour. That's why I say usually they don't contain the data and not always. Some people take the token's history as validation since anyone could in theory make a token with the same link even, and that also happens. The non-fungibility of the token means that you can't copy it, but you can copy its content.
Right, and this is also one reason that purchasing an NFT does not mean you "own" the underlying asset in any way, shape, or form. You own the right to enter into certain blockchain transactions related to the token - and literally nothing more.
Feel free to disagree, but I feel digital scarcity is horrible. Wasn't the Internet built to share everything? Nothing is off limits? Everyone can access everything?
it was. they want to take that away, to monetize "everything".
@@iCore7Gaming Dude I think I just found the solution to that!
_its called MONEY_
@@knowledgehusk Human selfishness it's a natural instinct
There is literally mountains of information that isn't readily available on the internet
@@knowledgehusk no, the point is that the copies / sharing are still easy to create and spread. Fans / supporters can directly support artists if they choose. Kind of like the whole free on RUclips patreon subscribers you’ve got here. Except if someone supports a lot of channels, they can receive neat art that can also serve as a ticket to performance etc and additionally have all the artists they support organized on their wallets.
To go a bit further - Is it objectionable for someone to create guides to video games and accept donations from fans? Is it objectionable if that person awards supporters with tokens of appreciation / pass to closer access / other content?
The tragedy is all the financial pieces already occur outside of NFTs, except RUclips takes the Lionshare of revenues, not creators. NFTs simply provide an option / alternate structure. Literally no one will require you to engage with NFTs at all
As far as I know, NFTs do two things:
1)Rob idiots of their money through the power of pseudo-crypto
2)Allow millionaires and billionaires to launder money or dodge taxes
Working as intended
As far as 2) is concerned, it’s SUPER weird how NFTs took off JUST after a global crackdown on physical artworks being used in that way was announced… 👀
Anyone can dodge taxes you just have to be smart about it
@@thefrozongamer5071 yeah by using NFTs.... seems like they're useful after all. especially if u want to stop funding a corrupt government.
@@philcorrigan5641 So few people talk about this, but when hoity toity Christie's started selling a $69 mil Beeple NFT soon after, it was so obvious! It's just another way for the rich to get away w/ shady shıt in plain sight.
I think everyone is so desperate not to be like that guy in 2004 who thought touchscreen phones were dead on arrival that we’re willing to buy into any wacky notion that comes up because “Hey, maybe this time?”
this is literally it. and yeah, maybe it really is this time. but it wont be 99.9% of the time so.... sucks to suck i guess
literally, and also all the people who didnt buy bitcoin when it was new and crazy cheap
@@Zones33 I like your thinking. I actually know some Welsh entrepreneurs who are gonna try and do that reality late next year or early 2023. Let's wish them luck
you are absolutely right
I will say that I was that guy in 2007 who thought the iPhone was dead on arrival. Though, I am willing to admit when I am wrong.
I thought the reason people pay such ridiculous sums for NFTs was because of FOMO. The same reason every startup in the late '90s that involved the internet or some vague application of "interactive technology" made a million dollars. The same reason 10 years later every service-as-an-app and x-sharing service had a multimillion dollar IPO. The same reason everyone now is vaguely integrating "crypto" and "the blockchain".
In short, a bubble.
For the longest time, I thought a "blockchain" was some kind of blocking technique from a fighting game, like Street Fighter or Tekken. Like, push this certain combo of buttons within a certain time and you can block someone's entire combo.
Exactly. People buy it a cause they don't understand what it is or does(or because they've been sold a lie about what it does or is) but they know it's connected to the block chain and they missed out on bitcoin so they're afraid of missing out on the next big crypto thing but don't realize that NFTs are nothing like crypto.
@@scordova98 what i know is i’ve made 10k off of trading nfts idc
@@travhatestrav1729
The video already mentioned that. As long as you can pass off the hot potato in time before it blows, you're safe. The last poor sap in the end is ruined.
There's a lot to profit from failures, even if an entire market drops, if you know well about what is going on, you will still profit. It's just an endless cycle of smart people creating trends to take the money from those that follow trends.
Debunked; NFTs absolutely do have a purpose: they are an excellent money laundering tool for individuals with lots and lots of dirty money!
Crypto is the money laundering. NFTs create the volume that generates the appearance of demand and growth for crypto.
Screw it tho. People are dumb af
NFTs are proof we are living in an era of validation and dopamine addiction. " - Master Oogway
Literally every mammal ever has lived with dopamine addiction. It's called evolution
@@exMuteKid yeah that doesn't mean anything. You would think that we would be able to get over it considering how smart we are, but apparently we're just retarded animals at the end of the day. Not worth destroying the environment over though
@@orsonzedd can't believe the human mind hasn't been able to get over the chemicals that power the human mind
@@themanwhospeaks8010 Wow! Who would've thunk it! 🤯
"NFTs are pretty good martial artists." - Master Oogway
The "hot potato" analogy nails it.
Speculation (gambling) is not investing - sure you COULD be that person that makes money off of it. But by the time it gets out to the mainstream, the system is usually set and it exists to make someone else money.
@@tycooperaow yeah buddy, because earth makes new land everyday right. jesus.
@@tycooperaow hey I just took a screenshot of your ugly mug. Where do you guys play hot potato at and sell those monkey NFTs? I think I can get AT least a dollar for yours.
@@tycooperaow The token is me saying I have the original. Im the first and only person to screen shot your ugly mug. anyone else who screen shots my screen shot...is a scammer! now give me money!!
@@tycooperaow *pets you on the head*
I see what you're trying to do here, but its not going to work. NFTs can, and will only be "worth something" if you can CONVINCE people to BELIEVE it has worth.
Let me explain...why is a babe ruth baseball card expensive? its because EVERYONE collectively AGREED it to be of high value. why did do think its worth a small fortune? idk,? beats me, I don't even like sports....BUT If literally *anyone* were to find an old card like that regardless if they like sports or not, that individual could sell it for money.
Now... imagine one day the world said stops and everyone thinks to themselves *"ya know what???! baseball cards are just squares of cardboard...complete junk."*
BAM just like that...Like magic, the card turns to trash in the blink of eye... All because its what EVERYONE agrees.
This whole "worth" nonsense you're talking about is hilarious because you *know* that WITHOUT absolutely everyone "being on board with the idea that your monkey pixel is an asset"... it becomes just like that baseball card when everyone decides it's cardboard trash. yall clowns just don't want to to admit to yourselves that no one is going to buy your stupid monkey photos online.
@@tycooperaow real estate is a fake market genius. You need to start extending your arguments and ideas to their conclusion.
Apparently this will be in the heart of the metaverse. Companies selling clothing for your avatar as NFTs. Imagine how much Nike will save it they can sell sneakers without having to manufacture them.
They have already eliminated labor costs, so purging materials solves it all.
I won't buy anything from that lizard
Especially useless digitals items
@@hollyc5417 go outside. it's honestly not that bad
@@hollyc5417 Wow I just realized people are already so used to buying virtual items (or even just the chance of getting virtual items), with this scheme in the future people will be convinced that it's normal for digital items to have limited quantities. (and probably be just as hard to convince that an item really can be duplicated, if the company willed it). It'll be just a fundamental part of reality for them
The NFT anthem:
This is 10% cope, 20% cringe, 15% concentrated power of shill. 5% moron, 50% shame, and 100% reason not to invest into memes.
Love this, the right percentages for everything lol
Lmao how does this math actually work, what a legend
@@caydenleach7281 probably because fort minor used a calculator when they wrote remember the name
It's crazy all the people getting upset, or hyped, over a digital barcode/serial number...
@@CaliMeatWagon That is very reductive. A digital bar code reader doesn't need the electricity consumption of a *small country* to operate. A digital bar code reader isn't an attempt by the right wing to turn the internet into an Ayn Randian paradise. Where everything on the internet is given artificial scarcity so that crypto bros can bet on them and everyone is constantly trying to grift everyone else in an endless orgy of scam pitches. And that is not being hyperbolic. That is exactly what the crypto bro say that they want. Verbally. Repeatedly. Everywhere. That is exactly the world the diamond hand true beleivers shout that they want from this everywhere you find them. They think that sounds wonderful and that anyone who doesn't agree is an idiot.
Whenever rich people spend so much money on something seemingly pointless, there is one place we should always check, taxation.
Finally someone gets it
@@bruno-nz5qj if you weren't already semi rich you're not making more money
@@Buxtonphil the speculative art Market is a scam
@@Buxtonphil okay so it's not a scam but it is basically a tool for rich people to escape taxation processes and to make the money look clean
Yeah and money laundering ...
Fun fact! That fictional marketplace that you described towards the end of the video with artificial scarcity and reselling and limited times actually does exist and it's on Roblox. They do this predatory marketing but not even towards adults it's literally towards children
People don't buy limiteds to sell later (most people) they buy them to flex as accounts have a RAP value that kinda shows what you're account is worth.
@@DabaronDaVinci Not entirely true, most people do actually trade till they get the item as their goal item to get. After that they usually just trade it off later and work up to another item. I only see developers and youtubers keeping their limiteds as it's usually their signature look on their avatar (e.g. stickmasterluke and his dominus).
It often turns into, say, a stock market gambling sort of system. Although with children being on the site spending money on popular items. These popular items are often hundreds of thousands of real life dollars (converted into the form of "Robux" for spending).
Child exploitation aside, its funny how roblox did all of this without some crazy blockchain technology.
They had this shit working in like 2007 and its still a better implementation than anything a hypothetical NFT marketplace could pull off.
Roblox has a lot of issues with how its monetized and how much of a cut they take from people's content.
ROBLOX already has NFTs in the form of limited minted items and it’s ridiculous how expensive they are, on a platform for CHILDREN. People have lost hundreds to thousands of dollars on these items- and there’s even graphs that track the price over time, allowing minted items to be speculated on. There is a video by “People Make Games” that goes into the numerous problems with Roblox, these NFTs being a big one.
mmm nft stock markets since 2012.
@@somerandompersonidk2272
Since even before.
You mean limiteds?
@@Fandom_Junkie yes
But everyone turns a blind eye to it because if you hate boblox then u mega cringe!!!1 ratio!111 canceled!!
NFTs are essentially adding a "scarcity" parameter to something that is infinitely replicable. It is very silly.
I mean, movies are technically “infinitely replicable” too. All digital things are. I could sit there and make a bajillion copies of shrek and spend almost no time, effort, or money while doing it. I could make enough copies to essentially provide one to everyone in the world for free. But I’m not allowed to do that. The scarcity of shrek is controlled by the company that made it, through copyright and IP laws. Even though their product can be reproduced infinitely, they still treat it like it’s a scarce item. Otherwise, shrek would be worthless and would have never been made. No one bats an eye when movie companies give their films artificial scarcity. Just kind of ironic to me that everyone’s up in arms about it with NFTs
The picture in itself is pointless, its about the file it is atached too, because said file is what you actualy buy and hope to resell. The picture is just for idiots who don't understand whats actualy going on in the blockchain to give them a secure feeling.
Very silly indeed.
That is the best definition so far !
But not silly, DUMB AS FUCK !
@@hohrhamikaiolaf464 They're stickers, essentially. But here it's just the sticker art with no actual physical sticker to stick on something else. It's difficult to imagine something more worthless.
@@Chapterhouse In fact, movies and music would be the only place where NFT's could have some sense. Scarcity in a controlled environment do not need NFT. If I rule Roblox or GTA... why should I implement some stupid super complicated protocol to hold accountability of what every user can or cannot use? Makes no sense. The only sense I can imagine is that Sony and all major music or movie holders AGREE to validate some given NFT standar, so they say... hey... if someone has THIS NFT property, I am not suing whoever is reproducing the content. So, they all sell the same kind of NFT's and all kind of services can appear to serve that music or movies to those NFT holders. Reason? Suposedly a Movie has more value if I buy it from Google Play but I know I can resell it or play it in the future in any other platform. So music or movies market can charge you more... except that... if you can put your NFTs in the market... they are going to loose a huge amount of money in the future.
Anyway... any NFT market that makes sense will always start with the market agents agreeing on the standard and then the NFT, and not the other way around.
The problem with NFTs is that the whole business around them is entirely a speculative bubble. Because the only reason to purchase one of the chimp NFTs is to sell it later on. It has no real value.
Now NFTs *can* have value, but only under specific circumstances. If someone is the creator of a meme or a digital artwork they could sell the NFT to someone who genuinely wants to say that they own that image.
But people would only want to buy something like that if it is important, beautiful, relevant to our culture. There is no actual market for a bunch of bad artwork, same-y pictures of a chimpanzee or superhero.
So when people realize that no one actually wants to spend over a million on a .jpeg, the whole thing will crash.
even the meme thing is arguable. Especially because the nft gives you no rights to the image besides claiming you paid a high price for it. I like the idea where NFTs for actual art afford the creator a share of the sales whenever it changes hands, that's a cool modernization of the concept of comissions imo, and that's as far as I think it can go if it's gonna be something viable. Other than that, it's just a bunch of people betting on their jpeg to become more valuable, which is as much as a lie as the fact that that artwork is unique in any way.
So those were the first iteration of NFTs but the space has evolved. I don’t like Axie personally but you can use their NFTs in game and even “breed” them to make new NFTs. NFT land will always be popular just for the prospect of being able to build on it. And projects like Wilder World are developing NFTs that can be staked for $WILD coins. The space will continue to evolve to satisfy more and more needs until it’s everywhere imo.
@@tfat00 The way you describe it, it's still just a dumb idea for dumb people. Enjoy your pricey jpgs.
That people even ARE spending on this stuff says a lot about how ridiculous culture is getting...
@@flowermaze___ well a lot of the people who are spending huge amounts are people who are now millionaires because they’ve been in the space for 5-10years. Luckily we live in a free market world so if you want to spend a million bucks on a watch that tells time or a shoe that sits on a shelf or a jpeg that makes you money then we are all free to do so.
NFT are the diamonds of the internet. That is, they have artificially inflated prices
Diamonds are at least hard and shiny.
@@martinsriber7760 I mean some nfts look good so ig thats the equivalent
If you hate NFTs for having artificially inflated prices then you're really gonna hate the fiat currency you use lmao
@@Emerald_Forge All NFTs are infinitely reproducible, industrial diamonds are of a lower quality and cost money and resources to produce
Diamonds also have a myriad of utilitarian uses, too. We've had the technology to make large artificial diamonds that are almost identical to their naturally made counterparts for many decades. Yet people with a lot of money will gladly shell out $60,000 for a gold necklace covered in natural diamonds and sapphires for their Wife's anniversary.
as a digital artist over the internet having to ever know and share an existence with crypto bros and their NFTs has worsened the experience
Digital artist, dude sak dik
@@oldmanmillennial1980 You're only proving his point lol. So insufferable
@@oldmanmillennial1980 FOH.
"why pay artists with a tried and tested method when you can participate in a ponzi scheme?"
you people really like saying "it's the future, it's inevitable" because you know that the more you shove it in people's faces, the more likely they invest in your crappy bored ape wannabe
I love how the entire internet is arguing with itself most of the time but we have all united to hate on nfts.
And also metaverse😂
Never realized NFTs had been conceived of so long ago. I just thought they crawled out of whatever hole they came from a few weeks ago.
Is it cold under the rock where you live?
Usually ever single idea is originated about a decade to two before any actual attempted implementation. Digital Currency was theorized as far back as the 70s and 60s, long before "Crypto" was a thing.
I feel like it's an unwritten rule that NFT art can't look appealing to the eye
It depends on what someone likes
That's because people who can do art do actual fucking art.
You might be right. It's hard not to think about something awful.
Well, there are some examples of actual talented artists who put time and effort into their work turning their art into NFTs, and as much as I hate them for selling out I won't deny that they have talent.
But the NFTs you think of first when you hear the word (the apes, the lions, etc.) are literally randomly generated by an algorithm. That's how they make so many NFTs in so little time; they have a randomized selection of parts placed onto a template.
Of course, because they're random, they don't follow the traditional rules of what makes art appealing, meaning you often end up with ugly combinations with elements that clash.
even I hate NFT, there's some of it pretty good.
but still, can't justify the value for me.
A randomly generated gun NFT being able to go from different games, would be a logistical nightmare for devs.
Perhaps but it could also bring players from other games into their game so now you built an audience. Actually NFT projects are already doing that for example if you minted a NFT another project will advertise their NFT in the discord of your NFT if the creators are OK with it.
@@InteresanteSnap yeah but how is that NFT gun even gonna be able to be inported to other games without breaking the game or ruining it for the people that can't buy the NFT's?
@@InteresanteSnap first that either that NFT contain all of the weapon data which is unlikely or the other games contain all the weapon data that you just need a NFT key but then i will just gonna force activate it anyway because it's already in the game and i own it
Oh no not for devs. For game designers, yes. Every game would start competing to have the most insane weapons, so your classic style shooter would get fucked when someone brings in a hand gun that shoots nukes.
@@neasper You're right for the game you have in mind. But NFT native games will understand that there could be a balancing issue. Another thing is even though something is an NFT it doesn't have to be artificially limited it can be minted infinitely or there can be a collaboration between developers to give you a different kind of item that may pay homage to what you original NFT is. Basically the only limitation is your imagination. Everything I say is possible it depends what people want in the end of the day but NFTs gives the people more of a vote if you will.
I’m a digital artist and Senior Illustrator at CIA (Cleveland Institute of Art, graduate now) and I frequently get told that I should go into NFTs. Thing is, I don’t even really know what that is because it’s so weird and vague. But to me it looks like a quick way or attempt to make fast money, which isn’t really why I do my art so it’s kind of hard to get on board with.
I kinda like my art to speak for itself and I like the work for it
I share the same exact mindset with you.
Your a REAL artist basically.
The real artist 💯
THANK YOU
Being told to get into NFTs and to dip your toes into it is alot more annoying than I thought it would be
Yea they make fat stacks, and it's tempting
But for my art, that's not what I want. I want to make money from my art, but not in such a low effort way.
If you want a simple, easy to understand explanation, you should watch Josh Strife Haye’s video. The condensed explanation is that an NFT is a receipt you own for a spot on the queue.
It doesn’t matter what the item is, a song, a video, a book or even a page; you don’t own that item nor the copyright nor the ability to say you own X. What you do own is a code that says you bought a spot on a queue that was sold in relation to an item by someone who may or may not be the owner of said item.
Something noticeable to point out is that if you want to collect royalties or anything special to promote these things as “a passive income for artists,” you then have to add a script or something else to the purchase otherwise you will only receive the funds from selling this receipt once.
If they have a use, it's pissing off the colllectors by screenshotting them.
Right click, download image
@Renard Roux Rebelle tbh, that term was new to me ten minutes ago, and I've been laughing since
have you been to "the NFT bay"? All the NFT's you could ever want to download...
@Renard Roux Rebelle hey, slow down the slur usage
5his is a Christian server goddammit
mfw ive been stealing memes for generations & screenshotting NFTs is a drop in the bucket
Gamers are finally recovering from the loot box apocalypse and now NFTs are here. It's getting too damn expensive to be a gamer already.
@@tycooperaow I hope this video leads to many more people understanding them, I see so many fall for it
@@tycooperaow which is, hardly anything
@@googleplusisgone9435 and what little they can do, can already be done using an SQL database, albeit without the public ledger thing.
Seriously that public ledger is the only good part about NFTs, and for like 90 percent of all use cases, youre still better off with a regular database.
The downfall of gaming
Video games haven't changed from $60 since 1998...
That's ~23 years that the price has remained stable despite inflation.
$60 today is only worth $35 in 1998.
$60 of 1998 money would be $102.
the current NFT fad has a very real point. to redistribute wealth, up... while also programming people even deeper into digital addiction. depends which project we're talking about. also, the initial money wave was astro turfed. people buying from themselves. trail points to off shore crypto casino money.
It's basically a digital casino.
@@coldbirdie3384 correct, most "day traders" are just new release shart coin gambling addicts.
The core of NFTs is simple greed. I'm glad to see a lot of people seeing through the BS and shunning them entirely.
... >....>...> noise and light. feelings and night. no one knows who
You just hear about all of the people who were skeptical of the internet or iPhones but being a young person myself, I wonder what are some new technologies that everyone thought was the "next big thing" but ended up being a total flop
Google Glasses immediately spring to mind.
Only one way to find out
NFTs stand for "no fucking thanks".
No fucking thank unless you want to get scam
Not Fucking Tangible.
No Fucking Taste
Nigerian Fun Times
Nut For Tortilla
Thing is, even the artificial scarcity and reselling can already be created without NFT's. They're simply numbers in a database table.
Same thing with your money in the bank
exactly, at least with NFT as long as you store your private keys properly, you will be the one to own the digital asset.
@@landono6 "Owning" an NFT is not the same as owning the asset.
NFTs are decentralized. You don't legally own anything except the NFT token. Whatever data it points to is just a representation of where the token is on the queue.
no, nft is pure art like my nft song: ruclips.net/video/rL0x-4h5uro/видео.html
If you get “stuck” (no one wants to buy it) with a cs:go skin, you have a cool skin to use in game
If you get “stuck” with an NFT, you have nothing
So if no one wants to buy your baseball card, what do you have? Nothing/A useless baseball card?
@@chattanoogatalks6301 well, not complete useless, you could use it as a beermat for example
@@chattanoogatalks6301 Atleast i can physically touch my baseball card not so much for NFTs.
Unless the cool skin you buy is an NFT lol
The best part about those skins, is that you can actually buy it and has VALUE since it is EARNED or passed through a lot of users
Great... they've introduced incentive to AVOID trying to reach a post-scarcity future, the dream of so many speculative science fictions.
"In the year 2820... we were approaching a glorious post-scarcity paradigm... but then companies figured out that they could make more money if they kept things scarce, even artificially so."
This channel, KnowledgeHub in general shows what REALLY is possible. Holograms are sort of possible (I myself saw a hologram in a Robotics Exposition show, but it was just a spinning propeller with lights on it that made a picture) ... Flying cars are a bad idea too... It is like everything I wanted from 2021+ was a lie (I am a 2000s kid, now 23 year old)
So who's the good guys in the new story, the space pirates decommodifying everything if the companies won't? 🏴☠️
You need not wait for 2820.
De Beers: First time?
This is literally why diamonds are "valuable."
If you want to spend an evening doing a deep dive trawl through the depths of NFTs, Folding Ideas has a magnificent 2 hour plus documentary on NFTs, their background and the community surrounding them that I can highly recommend.
Nah
@@MrGhjkl63 Your loss man, I enjoyed it a lot, gave a good background in they developed and the CULTure of those buying and selling them.
@@dominictemple I love that video
I will be looking that video up. Even though I am not stepping into nft, I want to learn more about it. I keep on hearing about nft in my business course. Anyway, thank you.
That 'culture' consists of people trying to make you the last one paying too much, or those who try to be like the former, but end up being the latter.
The sad part is they are pointless for now, and it'll be worse when they aren't. NFT bros envision a metaverse future where you can't create and freely share stuff online. They salivate at the thought of ol Zuck coming in and making it impossible to throw up free artwork on your meta wall you found on the net.
Hater
@@FelixCepedaChannel Better than the alternative
Dude read anything Punk 6529 (top NFT thought leaders) has ever written about fighting for the open metaverse. You're tilting at strawmen here
@@misterb.s.8745 "I know this sounds dumb, but it's deep"... Nah the punk 6529 Twitter thread was just dumb. He's spouting off ideas that have been around since currency was a thing like they're new, just because they use crypto.
@@TheUnRemarkableGamer his most recent tweet is literally "no to the corporateverse" but go off about how we love zucc apparently? Being disingenuous is a sure sign that you're not gonna make it, sorry.
I mean, I mostly agree but I think the "point" of NFTs is obvious: to grift the gullible, socially illiterate and economically precarious into willingly handing over what money hasn't already been taken from them by banks, gambling or 'live-service,' loot box games. The fact that people are lonely enough they actually "find community" in getting scammed and poor-shamed by con artists on the internet actually makes me deeply angry and sad at the same time.
A fool and his money is soon parted.
@@exeggcutertimur6091unless they have enough of it to avoid consequences.
the funny thing about nfts is that in reality, you don't even own the image or video or whatever because they're just links to where the real image or video is stored for example google drive, Mediafire, an FTP server any other kind or server(remember is just a link) meaning that If the owner of that server decide to delete the content or change the domain you essentially become the owner or a dead link
THIS!
@Connor Magides neither do you
Hater
@@FelixCepedaChannel nah I've been through the NFT ringer. Whitelist grinding, flipping, holding, etc. It truly is pointless, and save for a small handful of utility projects, they only serve to make flippers and sellers money right now. Truly sad.
The link in the token is not important at all since there is no guarentee it's even unique, also there are decentralized ways to ensure the link stays up.
The problem of NFTs is not the link but the fact that it has no value beyond the one people are willing to give them. Right now the only entity who give them value is generally the issuer, for example with in-game skins or exclusive access to some "club". In this sense it's not much different from a membership card, the only entity that cares about it is the one who gave it to you and it's value is whatever perk the issuer gives you for owning it.
NFTs are really just an ID with a traceable ownership, the metadata in it is mostly worthless. The traceable ownership is the most important. Basically I can know that a NFT is legit because it traces back to the artist/company who created it. What the consequences of owning a "legit" token are however is up for people to decide, they have no intrinsic value, much like a writen contract or fiat currency is worthless without a government backing it's legitimacy.
The whole 'hot potato' analogy reminds me of the housing bubble. The salesmen making the loans knew the loans were going to end up worthless, so they sold them to the bank. The bank sold those mortgages to bigger banks. And the megabanks just hoped to sell off their assets to unsuspecting investors.
Every single time I read and hear the phrase “late capitalism” I want to rip my brain out of my skull, but the fact that there’s a market for NFTs is very much a sign of late capitalism imo
Same, I hate that phrase too, but sometimes I find myself agreeing with those people when it comes to the subject of NFTs.
I've found that there is a market for EVERYTHING! Skins for Minecraft Bedrock edition, Analytics software, Roblox is a mess too, everything the video shows... I also wanna tear some when I see what long-term capitalism can do!
If this is late capitalism what will it be in 50 years? Later capitalism?
@@OscarUnrated I believe the term for our stage of capitalism in 50 years will be climate and ecological catastrophe :)
@@OscarUnrated socialism
Hey look its 2023 and everyone forgot about NFT’s as soon as the free money dried up. Shocking
I've come to the conclusion that this is the latest incarnation of the "Art" industry. No one in their right mind would pay $12,000 to buy a canvas of an orange dot slightly off-centre on a black field in an art gallery unless they are very bored and have a vast amount of disposable income. Combine that mentality with the latest "investment" trends, and this is what we get... 😑
At least with art scarcity works unlike nfts where you can just copy paste the image
@@Константинос-х1у That is a good point. To be fair, I do respect the work and time put into most of those pieces, but I still believe all of them are very much overpriced.
I had a conversation with a gallery owner two years ago who explained to me which paintings she sold the most: Nude figure paintings and very detailed landscapes or still lives (to the point of photographic accuracy) were by far the most popular. Every other work remains on the wall for years.
I actually watched a video recently about NFTs in the "Art Industry" that basically came to a similar conclusion. More or less, because popular art has become dominated by neo-modernist-abstraction, while the market has also become dominated by price gouging galleries/collectors artificially inflating the market to make a quick buck, as well as the rapid rise of "digital art", NFTs are *clearly* the next logical step down the line of "progress".
@@richarddickjohnson516 The people I feel the worst for are the Artists. The vast majority are young women who have just graduated from University, and it's actually comparable to the Modeling industry in how new people are treated. Creativity is only rewarded if you learn to exploit other creative people, in that world. It makes me sick.
two words: Money Laundering.
Knowledge is a freely reproduceable resource, meaning you can teach without loosing what you just teached. All digital media works in the same way and it is fine the way it is. All things should be like this in a perfect world but not everything can. We need to go up, not down.
@@tycooperaow I think that's the general direction he's headed with this. 🏴☠️
Human stupidity and greed knows no bound
@@tycooperaow You missed the point so hard I just intellectual damage. Never before have I seen such a poor rebuttal lol. "Oh yeah? You want a post-scarcity society? Well we don't currently live in one haha 😎 got him!"
It’s an unforgeable deed. That’s it. The hype is absolutely overblown and the vast majority of what is happening now is a scam. But the technology isn’t useless.
Agreed. Unfortunately we'll probably have to wait for at least a few years after the NFT art fad ends and most of the bitter taste to be out of people's mouths for those actual uses to be capitalized on when .
well if you look at the story of the guy who invented the shopping mall... and you're a wicked optimist
The problem with those uses is this: unless some authority recognizes it, it is meaningless.
The deed to my house has value because the government recognizes that I possess this deed. So I am entitled to summon armed people if someone tries to encroach upon my land. The copyright on my work of art matters because it empowers me (if I have enough money to pay a lawyer, filing fees, etc) to wield the power of the government upon those who infringe upon my copyright.
Private property and intellectual property exist only because people with guns will eventually be mobilized against those who encroach upon those rights. Until someone with power and authority starts caring about these "unforgettable deeds", they are merely bits on a blockchain.
@@GeneralBolas Correct. Mostly. There needs to be a central database that is trusted to store NFT logs to indicate “this NFT exists and represents this property.” After that, it is proof of ownership. From there, normal laws regarding property rights apply.
GeneralBolas historically this is so incorrect. Just look at money, was it meaningless before governments started to recognize it? Were things like gold somehow only accepted for transactions only after the government gave their thumbs up? Furthermore, why does it need to be the government to be such authority? How is bitcoin not only a thing, but actually considered an actual currency instead of speculative investment before it became popular? Furthermore, why does it need to be the government the authority? If Elon musk announced a new currency in which you can buy tesla cars with, doesn't it have the same (or at least similar) amount of validity as any other currency? Heck, considering currencies like the Argentinian peso, it'd probably be MUCH more valid and accepted.
I've literally been watching videos on what these things are and I'm still none the wiser as to why so many people are into them. What's to be proud of owning something that isn't physical and can be copied and shared by everyone? If this is the future, count me out!
Digital art on its own is something one can be proud of but the hole idea of nft's are more so a book list where each action is written down on it where you buy a serial code that points to one line in that list
Most people are into NFT's for the potential profit, its just a money making/laundering scheme IMO. I'm sure there are the few that legit want to "own" that image, but I doubt it is very many because it's just too absurd. Then again, I have been surprised by people's stupidity in the past so we will see.
NFTs are just for people trying to invest in them like stocks
None of the main videos you see are actually here tell you what they are. Just made to get some of that ad-sense before nft hype dies.
It's a pyramid scheme. NFTs are the new MLMs.
This is exactly what I've been trying to tell people since this whole thing began. Speculative markets are terrible and will cause major pain to some people when it all crashes
Did we forget about 2008???? 1920???? For fuck sake people need to go to school for once in their life
@@jazes8423 mainly because we are social beings sure some stuff may make us care less for instance why do you care why he cares? and many wanna prevent their friends and family being the ones holding the hot potato at the end of the game
ditch speculation, get productive. Make shit with your hands, join a craftsman's guild, build a co-op garden, keep chickens, learn the violin, get HVAC training, work with lumber. We're turning our economical classes into another beast, soon it will be the investment class that speculates off of the productive class and what they produce. That already exists in the form of commodities, etc. but it is going to get WORSE, and fast if people don't knock this shit off. Speculators are like those small parasitic fish on the bellies of sharks.
@@appalachiabrauchfrau well said man
Aged like wine
"NFTs are pointless"
"Ah yes, the floor here is made out if floor"
Update: Dappgambl reported that 95% of NFT's are now worthless
It's crazy that people try to find any way to validate these things, "you could own the original copy of the piece" (paraphrased) this has literally been done by artists for YEARS as part of commissioned work lol. Good vidjeo.
None of those arguments really mean anything, or aren't novel.(ie the supposed application isn't something that has just now become possible because of this, and possibly isn't easier than the alternative either) It's chanted with such confidence, yet if you think about it for even a second it falls apart.
Yeah except commissioned work just wasn't really resold, nor had much reason to be. Plus NFTs allow selling and then trading non-commissioned artwork, which again wasn't really a thing before - closest was buying a full-res JPEG for personal use. What validates these things, is that it takes real art trading - something that was around for hundreds of years and is also based on paying too much money for generally useless items that everyone can have a cheap copy of - and puts it into digital form. I have no idea why people can grasp one concept, but not the other.
@@Ignas359 because it's not real art trading lol. It's trading a url.
@@Ignas359 you got the right idea.
@@shiningpecan6978 By that logic, everything on the internet is just a worthless URL.
Only humans could take something that’s infinite and free and implement scarcity in it so they can keep their oh so precious status symbols and hierarchies.
Agree
Bingo: people want to feel important. Some people are genuine losers who will never be important in any way. So they join this pathetic NFT cult to feel important.
Selling an nft for millions is like a 21st century person laughing into a gen Z humor
I dunno the colorful old men around the old man is pretty fuckin funny
what?
What does this even mean? The majority of Gen Z were born in the 21st century...
This aged quite well.
The macroeconomics of the NFT market theoretically works… but the perceived usability of them beyond being a luxury item to show your wealth cuts off the demand of SO many people.
Most of them are worth nothing and eventually will be worth nothing.
The NFT market works in the sense that people are buying and selling them for real money. When the hype fades and NFT prices crash, that will also be an indication that the NFT market is working. Markets can go in either direction.
not koreans tho 😅
It’s not “percieved usability” there IS NO USABILITY. And no, the market doesn’t work in theory, it’s a text book example of what’s known in economics as a “greater fool’s” market.
Works like this: I sell someone dumb like you something valueless because I trick you into seeing it’s value. Now, in order to make this pay off you have to convince someone even dumber than you that it’s worth even more. This cycle continues until anyone in the buyer’s market responds to the listing of the item’s price with “well no one is that stupid,” necessitating a sale at a loss, or more likely no sale at all making you what people like me call the “bag holder”. I handed you an empty bag with a “$” on it and bolted with the cash. Leaving you thinking you’re rich with nothing but air.
So it's like scratching off a lottery ticket 99 percent lose?.
When I first heard of it I just decided to avoid it, period. Sounds like a scam from top to bottom, or too easily exploited to scam people.
I was given the opportunity to work with some nft guys on a game dev project and I bailed on day one.
Every single idea those crypto guys were throwing out was either illegal gambling, or intentionally creating a power vacuum wherein the most wealthy players were the only ones who could succeed.
Always trust your intuition lol. I cant believe this nft crap got so big.
@@deadturret4049 A sucker is born every minute, as attributed to Barnum.
Most applications of NFT's require an agreed protocol that make them virtually identical to a centralized minting platform.
and at thaz point you'd probably ask yourself "why the fck am i even using a slow ass environmental damage inducing blockchain for this when i could just use any other database system?"
@@Akab or "why shouldn't I just keep my money in my bank account, where the 'mint' actually has some amount of accountability"?
Does the benefit come in when you want to agree upon protocols that the actual centralized minting platforms won't accommodate whatever that might be? Is it blockchain > a database system? No third-party?
Seems like it's just a way to have digital signatures without a third-party but blockchain instead?
@@trouncerrredits what many "owners" of those blockchains wont tell you that they own all the nodes and have defacto full controll and centralization over that blockchain which gives them literally no advantage over traditional databases except of it being a buzzword...
Edit: but yes, an actual decentralized blockchain by itself *could* benefit us but that seems unrralistic as the most popular blockchains don't even fullfill their original purpose.
Edit2: There is almost always some kind of third party, you can't avoid that, so the best thing you could do is give your users the option to choose their third party or build a system that may establish itself through trust...
If NFT art has real value, my “save as image” should be the same value as the minted one. If not, the real value is only a series of number that people are buying in the casino’s game
that's exactly what it is, people are buying the series of numbers, a lot of people don't get that though lol
@@yungmetr0135 But aren't people just buying a receipt? The actual art or media isn't stored on the block chain. It's just a receipt that says you own an on a link that could then be tampered with?
Edit: sorry replied to the wrong comment lol
@@PAllen74 yes. exactly.
Does it matter? There are coins or stamps that go for exorbitant prices too
@@yungmetr0135 I mean those weren't designed to be scarce, they were just scarce because noone wanted to make it anymore because it's useless and people like preserving history(Also they're physical meaning they actually can't be duplicated). NFTs aren't gonna preserve shit since it can't even hold a goddamn digital image, they're just tools to manipulate the masses and pander to artists to make more cryptoshit so they can make more money on idiots
Idk if you've found out but you didn't present a hypothetical. You literally just defined what makes nfts "valuable". The receipt.
The virgin NFTS and rare-online buyers
the chads Commissioners and fun-drawers
This is worrying.
I was in a twitch stream last night and the streamer started to test the idea of nft’s for the channel and the thousands of shee…..followers blew a gasket, lapping the idea up like it was the best idea ever.
I fear the “masses” are going to fall for this hook, line and sinker.
I guess we know how this ponzi scheme tech took off. Parasocial relationship, idol worshipping, and "I'm not like other billionaires, I know memes".
I think this chapter of the history book would be very depressing for the future generations as they have to read how manipulative and/or narcissistic these cryptobros are that they'd probably develop a second white guilt except it's now for the people that has a cryptobro ancestor
@@jbrown8601 even if it means selling something that is basically worthless 👍
There are applications for NFTs that involve representation of actual scarse items in a digital form (a deed, a loan, an authenticity certificate, etc), but everything is just a blockchain with a new sign.
This, the thing about making the NFT its own valuable object, is a bad scam
Nail on the head mate
It's scary how far down I had to scroll to find this comment.
Hey, this video isn't about actual ethereum applications, smart contracts and actually unique tokens that track or certify something usefull. It's about DRM for worthless digital thingies, which is what the public understands the NFT term to mean in practice.
Don't expect the NPCs to understand this.
Finally, a sensible comment.
Dan Olson (Folding Ideas) just made a 2 hour long video that effectively
1) reveals all the ways in which NFTs are horrific in both their design and intended outcome
2) identifies the ideological basis of Cryptocurrencies and the occurrence of NFT's as a mutation of blockchain technology
It's honestly a beast of a documentary
Josh Strife Hayes' video is also pretty good, he boils it down to the basics
I've never been so engaged just watching someone talk for two hours. I feel like he could have gone on for another two and I still would have watched it all.
@@popcornfan9364 right? It's just such an indictment of the whole darn system
@@leonardorestrepo5196 100% He expounds about how if crypto were fully adopted it would be terrible for the vast majority of society in an interview with The Financial Diet. I highly recommend it if you haven't watched it yet.
@@popcornfan9364 I watched that vid (and subscribed immediately after)! Ignoring how obviously tired from the whole project dan was, you can tell how deeply he dived into both the technology and the culture around crypto. There's so much he left out of the original video, and all of it was pretty damning
The NFT craze will always remind me of the CSGO gambling ban and the emergence of fake CSGO skins, VGO skins, which were supposed to be introduce to games later on, but mostly used as a workaround for gambling sites
My, oh my, this aged like fine wine. Even better, it aged like fine whisky. Cope harder, cryptobros.
The phrase "tangible utilitarian function' is what I've been missing when explaining why the eay NFT's are pointless. If anyone else can use it for what it's actually capable of, then what you are buying is perception. Nothing.
I called nfts digital beanie babies in a Walmart and some dude tried to fight me over it.
Hot take: NFTs don't exist. At least, they don't exist in how they're described. What can an NFT do? They can provide a chain of transactions for a given claim of ownership over something. What can't an NFT do? They can't prevent duplication, they can't provide proof of ownership in a legal contractual sense (on their own), and they can't provide a chain-of-origination. All of those last things require other legal instruments such as physical contracts and leases/titles/deeds/licenses/etc. If the legal system does not respect them, then without a such thing as some crypto-police to break down your door and destroy your Ctrl, C, and V keys, they must not represent a non-fungible asset. They're a glorified receipt with a "Trust me bro" note on the top.
you can prove to anyone that u own it by showing them the ledger
@@andrew-qw5ez The ledger only shows a history of swap transactions, but it can't prove that the original creator of the NFT owned the copyrighted goods. You need copyright registrations to definitively prove that.
Yeah NFTs are incredibly fungible. They are just unique serial numbers, do you known what else has unique serial numbers? Dollar notes. And they are the most fungible thing in the universe. Any one issuing these things, can just issue more. There is nothing guarenteeing uniqueness beyond the serial numbers, so exactly like dollar notes.
@@lennysmileyface As I said just like dollar bills. They are unique by having a serial number.. But the people issuing them are not restricted from issuing more with new serial numbers.
my friend, given what you've said here, I'm interested to know what you think of NFT-ing land? I have a friend who's trying to make waves in the NFT/crypto world, and he recently NFT'd a business's property. Apparently its the first in Canada. I don't care to rack my brain trying to get on board with this but he definitely believes in it to the point of pushing through these arge ventures beyond NFT artwork and digital assets. Basically he's NFT'd the physical deed to the land on the blockchain (forgive me if I've explained that poorly). This seems like the next step that makes the concept more legitimate according to you. What do you think of that?
Online gamers with exclusive items: wow, they actually re-discovered the technology
NFTs: The money launderer's wet dream.
[allan please insert image of randy marsh]
NFTs are the end goal of capitalism: to make a profit by selling nothing.
“So you wanna use a weapon in multiple games”
You know we called this skylanders a couple years ago buddy.
Yup, it works in all future games and no where else.
"NFT's are pointless"
The atmosphere is made of air
But at least the air in the atmosphere does something useful
*art NFT's
@@Kilometers_KPH Something useful? Bruh it is the most important shit to us, except for dead folks.
@@caesar5588 for alive people*
Excellent video! When you purchase an NFT, it allows you to decode a location in the blockchain that contains a hyperlink to a photo. You don't own the photo, nor do you own the hyperlink. You own the key that allows you to decode the hyperlink.
NFT can be defeated by RollerCoaster Tycoon 3 Park Inspector from Undertale, no?
The only real useful application for NFT’s that I’ve come across is the creation, sale and transfer of digital IP.
Think, I am a cartoonist and someone wants to commission me to draw their D&D OC to life. I do it and can now create a universal provenance as part of copyright. The Use of said IP can be tracked if the new owner ever sells. The only value linked to the single NFT is the actual value of the art.
Something similar can be applied to individual ownership of other media like songs as an anti piracy measure. Since scarcity doesn’t really exist in the digital world, NFT’s could stand in as tokens for actual ownership.
Though with all of this the ideas that access to the content by the user cannot be revoked by the provider once the NFT is bought. I might actually be a nice way to fight against the “You will own nothing and be happy” future that our corporate overlords have planned for us.
But what we are seeing now is a speculative boom that will inevitably crash. Artificially scarcity is just that: artificial. Once everyone has realized that the NFT has no intrinsic value unless the asset it is linked to actual has some value. The market will cool. I am sure of it.
it just dawned on me that its 12: 36 and i should probably go to bed
I predict that the NFT bubble will last about as long as the BeenieBaby bubble lasted.
Beyond their value, I also love how entire people with productive careers and vocations give up their hand-trade or technical expertise founded on craft and artisanal traditions to chase NFTs.
cuz it can be a fun profitable side hustle, I don't think people are giving up their careers for it tho as you claim.
Gary vee getting ready to send a strongly worded comment on how nft's are the future
working as a game developer, switching assets to different games will never work.
This aged like fine wine.
Blockchain in general feels like a piece of performance art but things got out of hand
Roblox actually does exactly what you said with the intentional limiting of items with limited edition items with limited amounts.
when I think of nft's I think of the Cyanide & Happiness tweet
"We don't do nft's
If you see a Cyanide & Happiness nft, that wasn't us
If you bought a Cyanide & Happiness nft, you got scammed, also lol"
someone commented that they didn't need to say "also lol" and yada yada
"nft bros losing money is funnier than any of our comics."
Absolutely aged well
Patrick: is mayonnaise an NFT?
Squidward: no Patrick mayonnaise is not an NFT
Patrick: *raises hand*
Squidward: horseradish isnt an NFT either
We're already at that unavoidable point, if not getting close. Look at the USPS wanting to do NFTs (despite being a publicly-owned service) & even RUclips themselves hinting at it. I don't know what YT's plans are but I don't want it to effect pre-existing services or my content creation abilities.
And that's despite all the backlash people are giving RUclips, which isn't surprising to see them ignore the public after they removed dislikes.
Usps already released nfts on veve app.
@@Emilioh888 I know. Unless you're talking about them having done so before the infamous tweet from their podcast, right?
The "hot potato" analogy is what FINALLY made everything click for me. I had a decent understanding before, but that solidified what I knew.
1:37 I'd rather drive the declaration of independence to work like a flying carpet than drive a pt cruiser.
The amusing thing is that the example you posited about how things could get worse does not, in any way, require NFTs. That's how utterly shit and pointless NFTs are, even in the worst case scenarios for their exploitation, the question "wouldn't this be cheaper and easier to do with a centralized database?" remains prevalent!
Hater
or...you just copy and download the image and literally own it without this fake blockchain nonsense...
@@lennysmileyface see what happens...and tell me if its the same as an NFT from your jail-cell. ;)
@@lennysmileyface Trading & minting crypto is less expensive? Did you come from another universe?
People saying that screenshoting NFTs is stealing prob also think taking a photo of the Mona Lisa is also stealing 😂😂💀
i think nfts are bullshit, but this is actually an argument nft believers use. some of them dont care if you screen shot, youre just taking a picture of the mona lisa, which is worthless because anyone can do that. and in their heads they own the original mona lisa youre taking a picture of. that is how a lot of them view it
@@Shroomzee yea makes no sense to me like the person who took the screen shot of someone else's NFT gives a sh!t that the other person owns some code for it lol. Its literally the exact same picture. Unlike taking a picture of the mona lisa which is clearly not the same as having the original painting.
I like screenshoting NFTs them minting new NFTs with that screen shot.
8:24 seamless perfect segway i honestly didn’t realise it was an ad at first
8:12 This just makes me happy.
Imagine an Ed, Edd, n Eddy episode where Eddy gets the neighbor kids to pay real money for a receipt for imaginary artwork, that's NFTs.
Why does that sound like an actual plot.
@@Swagpion because Eddy's a scam artist
What do NFT collectors think:
A trip to ISS = Worthless
Some random JPG that has a price for over a million dollars = Money
Common sense is enough to judge those stupid art and decide what value they have.
Your explanation confirms any doubts left.
THANK YOU! You spoke exactly what I was thinking so eloquently.
The thing is, you can remove NFTs from all case uses and you can still do all those things, meaning NFTs arent bringing anything new but rather leeching from both new and old existing tech. And if you want to serialize something just give it an id.
Do NFTs have a case use where you must use NFTs or it wont work without them? Maybe, idk of any but that begs the question, could it be done without NFTs?
You see, being the first tech doesnt mean it has to be the only tech (emphasis on ONLY), ask Myspace, msn messenger, whatsapp, Twitter, etc, etc. And im pretty sure those big names werent the First ones in their industry, and that shows you that the first tech can be replaced so easily in the end that the public dont even remember them.
NFTs as a tech still is nothing but an speculative tool trying to find a purpose where it can excel, problem is the competition is still better and/or have a better reputation/service.
5:46
Imagine the inverse. Having a 1000 DPS weapon in a game with characters that max out at, say, 500 HP. Imagine it was a multiplayer game. Either the NFT weapons are banned in multiplayer, or it just becomes a battle of instakills
Not to mention the market would be absolutely immediately flooded with items that have all of their stats set to 999999999, because why wouldn't someone make anything other than the best possible item if they were going to sell it? There'd be absolutely no point otherwise.
lmao that's not even remotely close to how it would be implemented and the videos analysis is so incredible basic. Imagine a NFT based game system where the systems in game and balancing are keeping in mind cross game nft items. These items are created by the devs with balancing in mind and only nfts that they have created would have usage in that system. So your scenario isn't actually one that any developer would pursue. You can still dislike that type of system and hope it doesn't become the norm, but at least think a little deeper on it.
@@christopherjohnson9167 If i remenber crypto and NFT are things against centralization right? You are basically saying devs should do new weapons, and ban players weapons. Nowadays there something called DLC and mod, a DLC generaly adds new things such weapoms, armor etc, a mod does the same but in a mod balacing is not the central theme.
@@heitorpedrodegodoi5646 these would be systems that a developer designs into a game or series of games from the start.
@@christopherjohnson9167 So essentially we are completely deviating from the original point and just saying that developers could have weapons interchangable between games. But, I don't see why? Unless the weapons are between a yearly series like COD or FIFA, every game is going to have different artsyles, different time periods, and even different senses of scale. One game may be about giants fighting each other in the far future, think TF2, while another may be human combat in the past, think any of the shooters with a historical setting. So the option for games a developer could exchange nft weapons with is incredibly limited. Something from Overwatch won't fit into Battlefield. And then, the options are even lowered. Like I said once again, even if developers do have visually similar enough games to exchange nfts with, the combat mechanics need to be nearly the exact same, else the weapon would be either horribly underlowered, or the best mechanic in the game. As well, the special abilities the weapon needs to function as a weapon may not translate well into a different game. What you are suggesting needs a complete overhaul of the mechanics of gaming just for the potential for nfts to be anything more than a scam. It would be ridiculous, so why do you still support it?
Great video. I always wondered why anybody would care about a digital asset that can be easily copied.
They're not pointless, they have a point, for rich people to launder their money and avoid paying taxes.
You make an excellent point, as if we didn't have enough ways for them to that. I wonder if that is why Elon Musk supports NFTs and cryptocurrencies so much.
@@john.d.rockefeller2538 nah Elon wants a currency backed by itself so he can go play space pirates by himself
The weirdest thing to me is that NFTs started as a way for artists to get paid for their work and for it not to get stolen and resold (from what I’ve read and been told at least), yet art theft is a very big problem in the NFT community as the only thing making it valuable is the line of code saying it is
Exactly. Unless the artist themselves immediately creates it as an NFT, someone else will do it and claim it as their own. But art theft is nothing new. NFTs just exacerbate the problem
What's funny ina way is this : nft Bros are ok stealing from artists, dead or alive. But boy do they cry oceans of salty tears when someone scams the nfts off them
KnowledgeHub, CGP Grey and Folding Ideas are the three peaks of what good education can look like
Dude you were right about EVERYTHING on this topic