So what you're saying is that the problem people are trying to solve with NFTs has nothing to do with NFTs, and relies heavily on the good will of the corporation in control to work?
Yeah, nah, I'll stay on the fence until there is at least a strong proof of concept for this.
Yes, but that's not the point
We're trying to find a use case for NFTs, a problem they solve. But there doesn't seem to be one, at least not one I could find in this thread
Could you elaborate? There are a lot of proposed NFT usecases that sound superficially useful (e.g. magically preventing secondary sales of event tickets), but don't actually solve any real problems when you think about it properly.
Exactly my point. Blockchain technology is useless here; it's a bad match for the problem of ownership.
I agree with you that NFTs work perfectly fine for their true purpose. In the same way that Bitcoin, a complete failure for its stated purpose, works great for its current purpose: enabling grifts, scams, frauds, and assorted light financial crime.
Yes my point is that the ideas aren’t viable even if they weren’t suggesting NFTs and that business models exist for similar things that work but wouldn’t for NFTs.
There's absolutely no reason to have NFTs involved there, or even for there to be a "there". You're accepting a false premise of artificial scarcity that is being pushed by dinosaurs. Humankind needs to just accept that information costs nothing to copy now.
This exact point has been my hesitation with NFTs in general. I think the immutable nature of NFTs is actually very incompatible with human nature; we make mistakes and a completely unforgiving system is only going to make life harder.
Yeah, nah, I'll stay on the fence until there is at least a strong proof of concept for this.
reply