I'll preface this by saying that I'm not a crypto fan, but I felt that NFTs were at least a promising use case for blockchain (* in addition to money, to avoid derailing this discussion).
They solve a real world problem of ownership of digital assets in an interesting way. We need a solution here and NFTs proposed an "open" one. I wish we keep exploring this space.
Concur, NFTs are only good for digital assets, which was the driving rationale behind Ethereum in the first place (a distributed place to capture digital assets so that one party could not unilaterally decide to modify or delete them).
NFTs are a very easy target these days but, cryptobros aside, I do think that there are potentially some interesting uses for the technology. Of course, I don't think that those will ever be fully realised -again, because of the cryptobros- but I think that the world in which it is would be interesting to explore.
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
NFTs, and crypto as a whole, have a lot of interesting use cases. Unfortunately, the way crypto works currently, any sort of utility gets drowned out in a sea of pump and dump schemes and speculative mania.
I'm sure we can discuss this at length... but regardless of how you view NFTs as a representation of ownership, my main point is that enough people use the NFT ecosystem on these chains to the point that it gives these chains importance.
We're absolutely dying to make the NFT concept revolutionary. But most of the uses so far are really pedestrian and don't actually require a decentralized blockchain with expensive and immensely wasteful transactions. They could just be hosted by centralized e-commerce platforms, which allow authors of digital assets to enroll.
I'm not saying that Everydays or CryptoPunk #7804 NFTs aren't valuable. They probably are, as historic firsts. But I don't think they prove the existence of a long tail of long-term value of similar tokens.
In my opinion, an NFT actually becomes useful when it represents a right that is decoupled from one specific asset. More like a tradable auth role. In effect, a tradable identity. That would actually merit decentralization, such that any provider that respects that role could use it to authorize access to some asset or experience. Even still, this could be centralized, but I think it's a step closer to enabling something truly novel, rather than simply trying to reproduce mutual exclusive ownership of a physical object.
Agreed. I think the real use for NFT is tradable identities/roles, which grant access to digital or physical experiences that span organizations. Remains to be seen whether someone builds a killer app/experience around that. So far, people are only interested in mundane simulation of physical scarcity.
I find the idea of NFT interesting. Right now, the way it operates it feels like a giant MLM scam ( and in a sense, that is exactly what it is ). Still, I can see potential future if it is accepted as a way to keep track of 'digital collectables'.
They solve a real world problem of ownership of digital assets in an interesting way. We need a solution here and NFTs proposed an "open" one. I wish we keep exploring this space.
reply