> That's almost 80% of your peak concurrent users on Second Life in your first point.
Which is still miniscule if you think of the number of users you need to have that many people online at once (it's a lot more). And Second Life is hardly massively popular. Like you say the effort -> reward is way off.
> If I'm understanding you correctly, you're referring to the thing with Twitter Blue that people can mint a copy of a picture from a different NFT collection cheaply, and Twitter Blue will still show it as a verified NFT because it doesn't distinguish between official collections or not, just that "it's an NFT that was minted". People can click the PFP and see that it belongs to a fake collection. Or Twitter Blue can be changed so it will display a checkmark for official collections or something over the icon, just like OpenSea does it.
Right so poor UX and centralized authorities again.
> But they don't have to actively get permission to make derivative works, which was the main point. And a lot of these being CC0 means they're pretty much effectively public domain anyway, so yeah, there's no copyright to defend.
Well not if you own a BAYC image or anything not CC0.
And the point about your game is exactly what I mean the effort to actually enforce the license you bought is not trivial and really only available to companies. So why buy the thing in the first place?
> Which is still miniscule if you think of the number of users you need to have that many people online at once (it's a lot more). And Second Life is hardly massively popular. Like you say the effort -> reward is way off.
Yeah, it's not there yet. I've said as much. It might in the future. It could even be those same communities you've said if they grow their communities and add NFTs to match.
You couldn't buy bitcoin at an ATM or buy it from an exchange or to DeFi applications or have smart contract support (which required a different coin, Ethereum, but still that wouldn't have existed without bitcoin) or use it to pay your taxes or as legal tender in some countries or all sorts of shit when it first was created. The financial incentive wasn't there until the community and ecosystem grew to the point that it became desirable to do so.
Some of the people buying these things today believe (possibly incorrectly) that it's equivalent to buying a bitcoin before it could do these things, and positioning themselves to benefit once those things exist (I've literally seen a tweet that building for the metaverse is the equivalent of buying a $1 bitcoin). There are builders and coders actively working to try to make that a reality as much as possible. Will it succeed to the extent these NFT buyers are predicting? Most likely not. But will there be a much bigger community and ecosystem in five years than there is today, I'm relatively certain there will be.
> Right so poor UX and centralized authorities again.
I don't think most people care about decentralization or good UX as you think. Yes that's a selling point a lot of people make about Web 3, but it doesn't seem to matter that much. And I don't think we're ever getting to the point where everything is on the blockchain, because it just requires too much data and resources. So people are going to have to accept some form of centralization. Less centralization than Web 2 perhaps, but some centralization nonetheless.
I can see benefits to some decentralization without having to go whole hog and make everything decentralized.
> Well not if you own a BAYC image or anything not CC0.
What's your point? Yeah some people don't have the copyrights to their NFTs and those people can't legally make new things with them and/or games will need to get permission to include them in their games, just like the rest of the world works for everything right now. I've said from the beginning not every NFT will be integrated into every application (at least not legally).
> And the point about your game is exactly what I mean the effort to actually enforce the license you bought is not trivial and really only available to companies. So why buy the thing in the first place?
On integration with a game or app they can check that an NFT belongs to a specific collection and not the fake collection. Or not, depending on how they do it. It's just data and code, how do we keep track of real or fake digital items for anything else? I can right-click save a picture of a digital video game cover also, but without a verification code it won't unlock a downloadable copy in my Nintendo Switch.
Which is still miniscule if you think of the number of users you need to have that many people online at once (it's a lot more). And Second Life is hardly massively popular. Like you say the effort -> reward is way off.
> If I'm understanding you correctly, you're referring to the thing with Twitter Blue that people can mint a copy of a picture from a different NFT collection cheaply, and Twitter Blue will still show it as a verified NFT because it doesn't distinguish between official collections or not, just that "it's an NFT that was minted". People can click the PFP and see that it belongs to a fake collection. Or Twitter Blue can be changed so it will display a checkmark for official collections or something over the icon, just like OpenSea does it.
Right so poor UX and centralized authorities again.
> But they don't have to actively get permission to make derivative works, which was the main point. And a lot of these being CC0 means they're pretty much effectively public domain anyway, so yeah, there's no copyright to defend.
Well not if you own a BAYC image or anything not CC0.
And the point about your game is exactly what I mean the effort to actually enforce the license you bought is not trivial and really only available to companies. So why buy the thing in the first place?
reply