Current Events > more NFT stupidity to laugh at

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://twitter.com/JackShawhan/status/1457951413368016899?s=20

---

https://twitter.com/Ace_Oberon/status/1457884756515778569

---

>_>

---

za bump

---

I'm trying to decipher this. A guy purchased an NFT. He does, in fact, own the NFT. But he made it his Twitter profile picture (nothing wrong with that). Some other guy is saying that the image is displayed on his monitor (obviously). The first guy feels ripped off because of it? He made it his profile picture to show it off. His does own the NFT.

So this whole thing is just a really dumb argument?

---

Nfts are just dumb, there's nothing to get.

---

AldousIsDead posted...

Nfts are just dumb, there's nothing to get.

They have value to some people. It's like any hobby. I don't care about baseball cards. Some people would pay top dollar for rare cards.

---

An NFT strategist lmfao. These people are dumb as fuck

Pepys Monster posted...

They have value to some people. It's like any hobby. I don't care about baseball cards. Some people would pay top dollar for rare cards.

no its really not like that its a scam

just like how "fine art" is a scam

---

Pepys Monster posted...

They have value to some people. It's like any hobby. I don't care about baseball cards. Some people would pay top dollar for rare cards.

You can physically own a baseball card, the same can't be said of NFTs.

I'd be more inclined to just let fools and their money be separated, but the constant cryptobro proselytizing grates on me terribly.

---

AceMos posted...

no its really not like that its a scam

just like how "fine art" is a scam

This may be hard to believe, but some people actually like "fine art."

---

Pepys Monster posted...

I'm trying to decipher this. A guy purchased an NFT. He does, in fact, own the NFT. But he made it his Twitter profile picture (nothing wrong with that). Some other guy is saying that the image is displayed on his monitor (obviously). The first guy feels ripped off because of it? He made it his profile picture to show it off. His does own the NFT.

So this whole thing is just a really dumb argument?

I think he thinks the NFT is the image itself. He also doesn't understand how images are transferred on the internet.

---

Most art was a grift even before NFTs. It's like people forgot most common people didn't respect the art community before this happened. It's all just try-hards trying to be in the mix of what's popular, where quality and logic aren't relevant. This isn't a huge shift of any kind.

---

Pepys Monster posted...

This may be hard to believe, but some people actually like "fine art."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dw5kme5Q_Yo

some ppl may like it but its still a scam

---

I still dont understand what NFT is >_>

---

Seems like just a shitpost? I don't think anyone is actually that stupid.

Nemu posted...

Seems like just a shitpost? I don't think anyone is actually that stupid.

Have you met your average cryptobro?

---

Zano posted...

I still dont understand what NFT is >_>

a token that says you own a specific version of a JPEG that thus gives it artificial value and speeds up climate change to boot

---

Zano posted...

I still dont understand what NFT is >_>

Since this is a video game board, I'll try to explain it in video game terms.

Think of it as a one of a kind Fortnite Skin. In the "real world" it's relatively meaningless.

But in the Fornite world, it could be seen as valuable.

It's the "blue check" on Twitter. In the real world it means nothing, but in the Twitterverse, it's a status symbol.

Now, whether or not you personally see it as valuable is a different story. But that can also be said about anything, fungible or not.

---

bigblu89 posted...

Think of it as a one of a kind Fortnite Skin. In the "real world" it's relatively meaningless.

wrong

it would be like a fortnite skin every one can get but yours was the "first"

---

i lost it at 1989

lmao

---

Zano posted...

I still dont understand what NFT is >_>

---

Zano posted...

I still dont understand what NFT is >_>

its a pyramid scheme.

you buy it in hopes of selling it to someone else for more money than you paid for it, and that person is also only buying it to sell it.

they have no use aside from being sold.

they arent like fine art, because fine art has a lot of people who buy it because they like it/want to show it off, and dont plan on selling it. literally everyone in the NFT markets is in it solely to make money, which is not a sustainable model at all.

---

Even if I think of an NFT like buying the MD5 hash of something, it still makes zero sense.
---

AceMos posted...

no its really not like that

It literally is though. You can google baseball cards and see the images on the screen. Hell you could even print them out on photo paper. But it's still not the actual card, it's just the image of a card.

---

You have people literally buying stake in tungsten cubes but only get the right to visit it once a year.

NFTs continue this whole syndrome of people not knowing what to do with blockchain or the smart contracts they keep babbling about.

Blockchain really does not seem to work outside of its more established uses as a ledger.
---

Zano posted...

I still dont understand what NFT is >_>

Hey, see this digital file? The one that can be copied to the point where everyone in the world could own the file? Well sir, were gonna sell you a token that says even if everyone in the world has a copy of the file, you sir are the proud owner of the token associated with the file. Prettt sweet, eh?

---

Starks posted...

You have people literally buying stake in tungsten cubes but only get the right to visit it once a year.

NFTs continue this whole syndrome of people not knowing what to do with blockchain or the smart contracts they keep babbling about.

Blockchain really does not seem to work outside of its more established uses as a ledger.

This is exactly why i am worried this will all pop because currently the only purpose blockchain serves is that of a ponzi scheme. You cannot buy anything with it. Even if by some miracle your vendor actually accepts bitcoin/dogecoin/eth it literally costs money to send someone money, so yes, while the idea of a traceable currency is actually good in terms of keeping track of who money passes through, it is still incredibly annoying to use.

Like lets say you want to send me $5, you have to go to the bank, go on an exchange, buy $5 worth of crypto, then generate an address to text to me, then a % is taken away, not just that, but since crypto prices are super volatile i also can potentially receive way less money or more than you intended to send. It is seriously stupid. I donot know why anyone would want to decentralize the currency and turn proof work(dollars) into digital tokens that can be manipulated through programming. Yeah, thats another thing people do not know, the whole crypto framework is like a program, technically allowing the developers and anyone who has access to the framework and understands this crap the ability to steal your money...not only can they steal your money but they can artificially create crypto and devalue your money.

The solution to central banking is not to have 1000+ digital central banks...

I find it hard to determine whether this tropoFarmer guy is satire or really that stupid. Either is plausible, given how ridiculously stupid this NFT shit is, though I could've sworn I've seen him getting schooled on something blockchain-related before.

---

Pepys Monster posted...

I'm trying to decipher this. A guy purchased an NFT. He does, in fact, own the NFT. But he made it his Twitter profile picture (nothing wrong with that). Some other guy is saying that the image is displayed on his monitor (obviously). The first guy feels ripped off because of it? He made it his profile picture to show it off. His does own the NFT.

So this whole thing is just a really dumb argument?

tropoFarmer is clearly having a laugh and a bunch of smarmy nerds are falling for it

---

sutree posted...

tropoFarmer is clearly having a laugh and a bunch of smarmy nerds are falling for it

So I looked up his twitter and he wrote regarding the exchange "trolling normies = engagement cheat code" but all it does is make him and NFTs look stupid.

---

Zano posted...

I still dont understand what NFT is >_>

It is basically just a fancy way to sell the abstract notion of "something that is unique". You are assigned a unique token that can't be replicated (due to cryptography) that proves you own a digital asset.

Now, anyone with a lick of intelligence would realize that literally every single object in the physical universe is unique, and having ownership of a single unique instance of a pencil is not worth more than the price of a pencil. But for whatever reason, when you transfer this concept to the digital world, people are willing to pay through the nose just to have ownership of a particular instance of "pencil" despite everyone else being able to use a copy that is, for all practical purposes, identical.

The main real use of an NFT is that it acts as a ledger that proves, pretty much indisputably, that you own an asset in the event of an intellectual property dispute. However, there were already other ways to prove you are the copyright owner of a digital work.

It's basically an attempt to resolve the issue of proving ownership of artwork, music, etc. in the digital world when anyone can make a copy. It allows artists to have auctions for high-dollar artwork similar to real auctions despite being in a space where literally everyone who has seen the artwork already has copied it to their computer. But some people expect that this will somehow magically mean that they have more access to the image or whatever than everyone else like they would if they displayed a painting in their home, and that's really just never going to happen in a digital space. And unscrupulous people have taken to selling literally just a single instance of a work, while still selling other instances of that work to other people, effectively making it completely meaningless.

---

TrollTrace posted...

This is exactly why i am worried this will all pop because currently the only purpose blockchain serves is that of a ponzi scheme. You cannot buy anything with it. Even if by some miracle your vendor actually accepts bitcoin/dogecoin/eth it literally costs money to send someone money, so yes, while the idea of a traceable currency is actually good in terms of keeping track of who money passes through, it is still incredibly annoying to use.

Like lets say you want to send me $5, you have to go to the bank, go on an exchange, buy $5 worth of crypto, then generate an address to text to me, then a % is taken away, not just that, but since crypto prices are super volatile i also can potentially receive way less money or more than you intended to send. It is seriously stupid. I donot know why anyone would want to decentralize the currency and turn proof work(dollars) into digital tokens that can be manipulated through programming. Yeah, thats another thing people do not know, the whole crypto framework is like a program, technically allowing the developers and anyone who has access to the framework and understands this crap the ability to steal your money...not only can they steal your money but they can artificially create crypto and devalue your money.

The solution to central banking is not to have 1000+ digital central banks...

Ditto on the bubble popping. Bitcoin and Ethereum could be the only ones to survive.

The random shitcoin with a whitepaper for a 1 month pump and dump won't.

I can imagine a future with official stablecoins or Bitcoin being more socially acceptable and accessible. Ffs though, it's a security that barely functions as a currency.

Whenever I look at the inner workings of all the latest buzz words like defi, how/when fees are applied, or a coin being XYZ network, it just turns me off. You'd think it's simple and elegant like a magnet torrents, but it's not.

---

bump

---

1337toothbrush posted...

sutree posted...

tropoFarmer is clearly having a laugh and a bunch of smarmy nerds are falling for it

So I looked up his twitter and he wrote regarding the exchange "trolling normies = engagement cheat code" but all it does is make him and NFTs look stupid.

Ah yes, the classic "i trol u" defense. Worst case, it's a lame excuse for getting your ass handed to you; best case, you intentionally acted like an idiot with no obvious "gotcha lololol" moment.

CyricZ posted...

https://twitter.com/Ace_Oberon/status/1457884756515778569

Topic won.

---

Zano posted...

I still dont understand what NFT is >_>

In the simplest terms, Blockchain tech is basically the folder of receipts parents kept in the basement and never did anything with, except it's in a library where where everyone that needs to see it can, and everyone is checking to make sure it's legit.

An NFT is basically someone selling you one of those receipts so you can say it's yours, and theoretically say you own said thing, but it doesn't stop anyone else from just going to the store and buying that same thing you bought the receipt for.

That is an extremely basic way of looking at it and still kinda wrong, but gets the concept across.

NFTs is what happens when stupid people meet greedy people who just happen to be smarter than the stupid people.

---

CyricZ posted...

https://twitter.com/Ace_Oberon/status/1457884756515778569

Oh my god, I was wrong - it was the blockchain all along!

Now I'll finally buy a monkey... (Yes, he'll finally buy a monkey)

Now I'll finally buy a monkey NFT!

---

Zano posted...

I still dont understand what NFT is >_>

Non fungible token. But let me backtrack to the "fungible" word. When it comes to money, money is generally fungible. You don't discriminate between which 20 US dollar bills are in your pocket. You just use them as you need them. However, things like airplane tickets, immunization records or vaccination cards, trading cards, they need to be nonfungible. You have to discriminate between them to maintain their value.

Now the blockchain's key innovation is the successful creation of e-currency by creating digital assets, which is distinct from regular digital files because you can copypaste the digital file while a digital asset on a blockchain, when it's moved from wallet to wallet, it's no longer at the original wallet as the network verified and recorded the transaction. But here's an issue with the setup, you can't discern between the currencies. The network will tell you you accumulated 10 BTC over the past 5 years, but it can't discern between the first BTC you purchased and the 3rd one you were gifted from crazy Uncle Cyril.

Enter: NFTs.

While ERC-20 is the standard Ethereum came up with to allow other projects to monetize and crowdfund their projects (all those scam coins use that official format) using tokens, ERC-721 is the format Ethereum designed to accommodate the innate lack of fungibility in cryptocurrencies. This means we can finally recreate the uniqueness of trading cards, and expand to property rights and deeds and what have you. We can create a digital asset counterpart to represent anything. But what's limiting the market right now is data. Until chainlink or some other oracle network onboards more data the blockchain, they're stuck playing around with making tokens on art, mostly. Though there are cool applications like one project, Linkpool, released an NFT to all their ICO (initial coin offering) investors. About 1K persons bought into their crowdsale, now one NFT of those sold for over a million dollars worth of ETH.

TL;DR; NFTs are nonfungible digital assets, separate from cryptocurrencies and where you can discriminate between each NFT individually unlike a cryptocurrencies. They'll be used quite a bit in the future and you're seeing the pre mainstream adoption phase build up right now. Expect Game consoles to release trophies and achievements as NFTs when they integrate blockchain tech. GameFAQs would benefit from this because then they could have reviewers link their NFT compilations with their reviews to guarantee they played the game and didn't halfbake their run unlike half the gaming journalists at big name sites.
---

NFTs make no sense that it is dumb!

---

Sad_Face posted...

Non fungible token. But let me backtrack to the "fungible" word. When it comes to money, money is generally fungible. You don't discriminate between which 20 US dollar bills are in your pocket. You just use them as you need them. However, things like airplane tickets, immunization records or vaccination cards, trading cards, they need to be nonfungible. You have to discriminate between them to maintain their value.

Now the blockchain's key innovation is the successful creation of e-currency by creating digital assets, which is distinct from regular digital files because you can copypaste the digital file while a digital asset on a blockchain, when it's moved from wallet to wallet, it's no longer at the original wallet as the network verified and recorded the transaction. But here's an issue with the setup, you can't discern between the currencies. The network will tell you you accumulated 10 BTC over the past 5 years, but it can't discern between the first BTC you purchased and the 3rd one you were gifted from crazy Uncle Cyril.

Enter: NFTs.

While ERC-20 is the standard Ethereum came up with to allow other projects to monetize and crowdfund their projects (all those scam coins use that official format) using tokens, ERC-721 is the format Ethereum designed to accommodate the innate lack of fungibility in cryptocurrencies. This means we can finally recreate the uniqueness of trading cards, and expand to property rights and deeds and what have you. We can create a digital asset counterpart to represent anything. But what's limiting the market right now is data. Until chainlink or some other oracle network onboards more data the blockchain, they're stuck playing around with making tokens on art, mostly. Though there are cool applications like one project, Linkpool, released an NFT to all their ICO (initial coin offering) investors. About 1K persons bought into their crowdsale, now one NFT of those sold for over a million dollars worth of ETH.

TL;DR; NFTs are nonfungible digital assets, separate from cryptocurrencies and where you can discriminate between each NFT individually unlike a cryptocurrencies. They'll be used quite a bit in the future and you're seeing the pre mainstream adoption phase build up right now. Expect Game consoles to release trophies and achievements as NFTs when they integrate blockchain tech. GameFAQs would benefit from this because then they could have reviewers link their NFT compilations with their reviews to guarantee they played the game and didn't halfbake their run unlike half the gaming journalists at big name sites.

Most of the issues with fungibility you're referencing are due to bad API design and event sourcing - to use your example of gamerscore- it's 100% fine if the individual points of your gamerscore are fungible. All's you need is an endpoint to get info about the events which are associated with X game. Likewise, who cares about the existence of an airline ticket, what you care about is the history of transaction events associated with an individual ticket. There's a decent amount of issues with that, but I promise you that NFTs are a solution looking for a problem, and most of the problem spaces being proposed have no benefit from non-fungibility.

---

warlock7735 posted...

Most of the issues with fungibility you're referencing are due to bad API design and event sourcing - to use your example of gamerscore- it's 100% fine if the individual points of your gamerscore are fungible. All's you need is an endpoint to get info about the events which are associated with X game. Likewise, who cares about the existence of an airline ticket, what you care about is the history of transaction events associated with an individual ticket. There's a decent amount of issues with that, but I promise you that NFTs are a solution looking for a problem, and most of the problem spaces being proposed have no benefit from non-fungibility.

Trophies can be replaced with regular tokens, sure. But things like an Amiibo, if they were to recreate it for blockchain tech, it would need to be an NFT. You want an NFT over a regular token for airplane tickets because then you could specify other constraints on the token. Instead creating different ERC-20 tokens for Coach, Economy, 1st Class, etc etc, you can have a single NFT that specifies what class you are in along with other data like destination + arrival time (I dunno if you really want this kind of info on the blockchain, but it could go on a permissioned and private blockchain).

The biggest boon of moving to an NFT, is that if you move to the current industry standards, an entire world of new use cases open up to you thanks to cross chain interoperability protocols.



A steam competitor could issue game licenses as NFTs, which would allow players to sell and trade games but you can offer incentives and specify parameters based on on how many addresses the NFT touched to incentivize buying a game new instead of buying second hand. On top of that, you could create a marketplace that pays the original creator a percentage fee for each sale of the NFT to allow creators to capitalize on the secondhand market. This already exists on Opensea.io for their art NFTs and sales on their platform.

Videogames and NFTs go hand in hand but in general NFTs are the evolution of assets the internet needs. It's a fool's errand to disregard its potential.

---

NFT's really only sound like it's worth a lot if the person selling it was already successful.

---

Pepys Monster posted...

I'm trying to decipher this. A guy purchased an NFT. He does, in fact, own the NFT. But he made it his Twitter profile picture (nothing wrong with that). Some other guy is saying that the image is displayed on his monitor (obviously). The first guy feels ripped off because of it? He made it his profile picture to show it off. His does own the NFT.

So this whole thing is just a really dumb argument?

He basically got dihydrogen monoxide'd into acting like a bigger moron.

---

Sad_Face posted...

A steam competitor could issue game licenses as NFTs, which would allow players to sell and trade games but you can offer incentives and specify parameters based on on how many addresses the NFT touched to incentivize buying a game new instead of buying second hand. On top of that, you could create a marketplace that pays the original creator a percentage fee for each sale of the NFT to allow creators to capitalize on the secondhand market. This already exists on Opensea.io for their art NFTs and sales on their platform.

This thing here that you're explaining? It's CD keys. The thing we largely abandoned a long time ago. Just saying.

Though the original creator getting a little is cool, this is basically just CD keys 1.5

Zano posted...

I still dont understand what NFT is >_>

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/w0Yy8ieRRjk

---

R_Jackal posted...

This thing here that you're explaining? It's CD keys. The thing we largely abandoned a long time ago. Just saying.

And why were they abandoned? Blockchain tech solves a considerable number of issues and allows for a number of new opportunities that weren't practical before.

---