Pages:
Author

Topic: Are NFTs just marketing gimmicks with no added value? - page 2. (Read 316 times)

member
Activity: 182
Merit: 47
You are quite correct, although NFTs aren't even legal contracts or any contracts, they are just tokens on blockchain that have unique identifiers and that's it. The people behind them told that they give ownership, but ownership is not actually ownership without having any way to enforce it. Bitcoin is self-enforcing, the system doesn't need any outside help, but NFTs are not. You can put a link or even a file on blockchain, but it won't stop anyone from copying it, so it needs the help of actual legal courts, which is the opposite of what Bitcoin has achieved.

And if it needs help from the courts to enforce, then it's absolutely idiotic to use... blockchain[/i] in this transaction. The whole point of blockchain is to remove the government from the equation.

(...)
Can somebody who knows the NFT business tell me what I am missing?
NFTs are more than just marketing tricks, they provide a new way for artists and creators to own and sell their digital work, isn't that amazing?

Can you give any evidence to your claims here? How does an NFT give an artist a new way to sell their works that they didn't have before? In either case, the artist must create a usage contract for their work, and they must sign their own name to that, as well as that of the counterparty--just like they would do without the NFT being involved. So why have an NFT in the mix at all? What value does it add?

Quote
While some see them as overhyped, NFTs are evolving and could change how we handle digital ownership across various fields.

We are just still early and some people don't appreciate the use of this, there's still room for growth.

Can you explain how it will grow? What it will grow into? What they are evolving into? Any specifics?





sr. member
Activity: 2828
Merit: 357
Eloncoin.org - Mars, here we come!
NFTs, meme coins, smart contracts, altcoins, etc. are nothing but scams.

These are the buzzwords that scammers use to lure people in and trick them out of their money. Bitcoin is the only one that is not a scam.
Many people enter the crypto market only to find this out the hard way after they lose their money.

If the government was doing their job ethereum and all the rest of the shitcoins would be shut down to prevent these scams from happening.
Of course that is why bitcoin exists because governments are totally clueless, incompetent and corrupt.



Why do you think ethereum is a shitcoin?

A lot of altcoins are useless and most of the time end up dying
even if the projects are legit.  there are still chances that
altcoins are scams however not all of them are and ethereum is
a very bad example of what you would call a scam.

Bitcoin is superior to ethereum and all of altcoins but some of them
aren’t scam and actually provide some really unique features that
could be implemented in bitcoin in order to improve it more
legendary
Activity: 2338
Merit: 1354
(...)
Can somebody who knows the NFT business tell me what I am missing?
NFTs are more than just marketing tricks, they provide a new way for artists and creators to own and sell their digital work, isn't that amazing?
While some see them as overhyped, NFTs are evolving and could change how we handle digital ownership across various fields.

We are just still early and some people don't appreciate the use of this, there's still room for growth.
legendary
Activity: 3024
Merit: 2148

You might say that the difference is that the transaction can be done anonymously, but since NFTs are essentially legal contracts, and contracts require known identities to hold up in court, then it would seem as though an NFT itself doesn't add any value, since you need to add identity to the contract anyhow, at which point there's no added value to using an NFT.



You are quite correct, although NFTs aren't even legal contracts or any contracts, they are just tokens on blockchain that have unique identifiers and that's it. The people behind them told that they give ownership, but ownership is not actually ownership without having any way to enforce it. Bitcoin is self-enforcing, the system doesn't need any outside help, but NFTs are not. You can put a link or even a file on blockchain, but it won't stop anyone from copying it, so it needs the help of actual legal courts, which is the opposite of what Bitcoin has achieved.
hero member
Activity: 3024
Merit: 680
★Bitvest.io★ Play Plinko or Invest!
I struggled with the proper placement of this topic. This is clearly a Bitcoin-related (blockchain-related) topic, and I think belongs on Bitcointalk.org, generally speaking.
You're right about this but this is a section for mostly Bitcoin discussions and not NFT/altcoin blockchain discussions.

There's the right section for this, you can move it from here through "move topic" at the bottom of this page.

But there's no dedicated area of NFTs on this website, or something that would seem to cover that topic in a general way.
Altcoin discussion --> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=67.0

Service discussion (altcoins) --> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=198.0
member
Activity: 182
Merit: 47
Say you bought the Mona Lisa, your friends came over and saw it. They wouldnt know 100% if its real or not. But with NFTs you cannot fake ownership. So I guess I understand the value behind it. But I am not much of an NFT investor or traders. I have no idea how the floor price even works.

What? What are you talking about?

With an NFT you can fake ownership easier than ever before since a private key proves you are the owner of nothing whatsoever.

What proves you own the Mona Lisa is government documents saying you own the Mona Lisa. And not "some private key" owns the Mona Lisa, but some actual human person owns it.

Imagine somebody sells you a house using an NFT. Then somebody else moves in "your" house and calls the police telling them to throw you out of their house. Now you have to sue the person who sold you this NFT... except there's nobody to sue since you can't take a private key to court.

In short, buying tangible goods as an NFT is always a scam. Don't do it Smiley.

legendary
Activity: 3808
Merit: 1723
Up to 300% + 200 FS deposit bonuses
I heard of NFTs back in 2017 and assumed it was a big joke. Back then people were paying $50K for some monkey JPEGs. I was thinking they were crazy. Then those Bored Apes became worth millions and then I decided to learn more about NFTs. Its basically a collection of art but you cannot fake ownership like you would a prized painting.

Say you bought the Mona Lisa, your friends came over and saw it. They wouldnt know 100% if its real or not. But with NFTs you cannot fake ownership. So I guess I understand the value behind it. But I am not much of an NFT investor or traders. I have no idea how the floor price even works.
member
Activity: 182
Merit: 47
All of these things have as much value as people believe they have.

Something comes to my mind. Do you remember when youtube girls were welling stuff to their fanboys? It was their bath water, pieces of clothing, one even sold her farts in a jar and people were paying for that shit. It was worth something to them. Does it mean these things were valuable? To most of us they were shit but they were paying money for dirty underwear of some chick that doesn't even care about them.

Value is subjective and I think a picture of a monkey is worth 0, but some people think it's $100k...

I completely get that, and clearly the value of blockchain anything is based almost entirely on its brand name perception since the practical use is so limited. And there are billion dollar brands in the world like "Gucci" and "Real Madrid" and "Bitcoin" that make whatever object you place that brand on valuable just because the brand.

But NFTs are different because they usually pretend to be something they aren't. The reason is because insofar as you are selling a non-tangible item (e.g. a digital asset), then the only potential worth is the copyright protection on that item, which is buried in the contract for the NFT.

In other words, most people think they are buying a JPEG of a Monkey when buying an NFT that nobody else can buy but unless it's specified in the contract, the one who sold it to you could make one million more JPEGs just like it and sell them as a one-off.

And even if the contract for the NFT covers this, you have absolutely no recourse in enforcing your contract because there's no known counterparty to sue with the NFT itself. (And if there is one, then... why did you bother with an NFT in the first place since you could have just signed a plain old contract between two parties?)

So yes, value is subjective, but NFTs don't even guarantee you that subjective value.

full member
Activity: 1470
Merit: 135
★Bitvest.io★ Play Plinko or Invest!
NFT is like meme or shit coins the difference is that you are buying like a token that has a value it could be a picture or an virtual pet abd sometimes in the early years NFT become popular in a sense that it is used for defi games or crypto games where you will brough an NFT in that game then you will farm the coins that games has, honestly I quite earn a huge amount in doing crypto games, I know you know those popular crypto games but I will not mention it here, so for me the profitable NFT's are those in used for crypto games, but if you are talking about NFT like pictures or auto generated cartoon image then that's what I think is useless, lets take for example jake paul that brough a very huge amount of NFT but eventually its value is gone so a big lose, so I don't think collecting and keeping an NFT is not a good investment.
member
Activity: 260
Merit: 42
NO SHITCOIN INSIDE
Ordinals or inscriptions which is like the bitcoin version of NFTs can be of financial value for the miners.

Inscriptions can provide miners with an extra source of income to help with high operating costs during a bear market.
This may at times cause network congestion and higher fees for every user but I don't mind paying higher fees on occasion to help out the miners.

Other than that the NFTs on other chains are nothing more than legalized gambling.

legendary
Activity: 2744
Merit: 1174
All of these things have as much value as people believe they have.

Something comes to my mind. Do you remember when youtube girls were selling stuff to their fanboys? It was their bath water, pieces of clothing, one even sold her farts in a jar and people were paying for that shit. It was worth something to them. Does it mean these things were valuable? To most of us they were shit but they were paying money for dirty underwear of some chick that doesn't even care about them.

Value is subjective and I think a picture of a monkey is worth 0, but some people think it's $100k...
legendary
Activity: 2282
Merit: 2196
Signature Space For Rent
I was never a fan of NFT anyway. Till now, I hate NFT, and I think it's just a useless thing in the blockchain industry. It hasn't  added any value to the blockchain industry; it's just a waste of money. A few big mads made NFT popular. Even though I wasn't a fan of memes, it seems they are pumping hard, but still, I am not trading them. I have seen a lot of NFT projects just turn out to be scams. Sometimes something becomes a trend, and scammers take advantage of it to make money. There is no real value to NFT. 
full member
Activity: 882
Merit: 207
I have often wondered if NFTs actually serves the purpose behind its idea or it's just a hyped initiative that is yet to fulfil its purpose.
Still, I see huge amounts for pieces of art or content on the NFT platforms being sold or priced.

Although, I know much has not been done as regards making it more demanded or in use by the broader society of artist and content creators, because why put my art or content on display for audiences who don't buy into the decentralized idea or know much about Blockchain and how to access it, after paying huge gas fees?

NFT's very existence depends somehow on the success or failure of cryptocurrencies and the decentralized Blockchain network and I see it as one of those initiatives or projects just like ETFs project, which serves as somehow an advert of progress or in this context a marketing strategy not a gimmick, with as much added value as the individual who owns it has placed on it.
member
Activity: 182
Merit: 47
It is correct that NFTs are essentially legal contracts and that contracts require known identities to hold up in court. However, the value of NFTs lies in their ability to provide a decentralized, transparent, and tamper-proof record of ownership and provenance.

While NFTs may not offer any inherent value on their own, they provide a decentralized, transparent, and tamper-proof record of ownership and provenance that can increase the value and liquidity of digital assets.

Why would you care about something being decentralized if you are using your real name and identity? That defeats the whole purpose of blockchain, which is to resist government oversight into transactions.

And while "tamper proof" is physical impossibility, systems that are "tamper resistant" depend on the implementation, and blockchain doesn't help that problem one way or another, except perhaps to make the system somewhat more complex, adding to the risk of hacking.

Quote

They also enable new business models and use cases that are not possible with traditional digital content marketplaces.


What use cases? What business models?


tyz
legendary
Activity: 3360
Merit: 1533
Do NFTs have any valid reason to exist?

My short opinion: Yes and no, depending on the use case!

Can somebody who knows the NFT business tell me what I am missing?

It is correct that NFTs are essentially legal contracts and that contracts require known identities to hold up in court. However, the value of NFTs lies in their ability to provide a decentralized, transparent, and tamper-proof record of ownership and provenance.

While NFTs may not offer any inherent value on their own, they provide a decentralized, transparent, and tamper-proof record of ownership and provenance that can increase the value and liquidity of digital assets. They also enable new business models and use cases that are not possible with traditional digital content marketplaces.
member
Activity: 182
Merit: 47
Since it's about NFTs, I think you, op, should move the thread to altcoin discussion. NFTs have value of what they represent and of how people perceive it, plus the copyright, I suppose. I don't think they're completely useless, but I think they're risky and overrated. They can be a nice way to support creators and to spread digital art, so to me, it's not about financial innovation and is more about fundraising. And while NFTs are often compared to ICOs, I think the difference is that with NFTs you know exactly what you're getting, whereas with ICOs people were often unsure, confused, trying to understand what the project was actually promising, etc.

NFTs aren't altcoins though, they are completely different. Altcoins can potentially have value, whereas NFTs, in my opinion, don't serve any actual purpose (I started this thread hoping that somebody would disagree but so far no takers Smiley).

I suspect that most people actually do not know what they are getting with an NFT, because of your description here which is actually... misleading--even though I suspect that's what many people think of when they think of an NFT.

But yes, copyrights. You know who would need to go to court to bring damages in a copyright lawsuit? Actual human beings. A private key can't take another private key to court. A known person can't take a private key to court. A private key can't take a known person to court. It takes two known parties with real identities to go to court, and without the help of a functioning court system, the concept of "copyrights" is completely meaningless.

And if you have a contract between two known entities, then why especially do you need blockchain anywhere in this mix?

So my question here, put another way, is this:

Do NFTs have any valid reason to exist?


legendary
Activity: 2520
Merit: 1040
Catalog Websites
When it comes to blockchain-based NFTs, I'm trying to answer one question: why?
~
We both have the same question. Why?

It's just a junk of pixels that are put together to form a picture. I still remember somebody from I think Indonesia where he minted his own pictures as an NFT, and to my surprise, those pictures of him sold for ETH. I don't know the exact amount of ETH he got at that time, but at least he got a minimum of 10. Just imagine, anybody can just create their own JPEGs and JPGs and then sell it to anybody who thinks that it has a value.

Speaking of value, I guess I look at these JPEGs and JPGs as just pictures with no values at all, but as long as there is somebody that thinks that it has a value then he will definitely buy it. For me, these pictures are just worthless... or at least not worth an Ethereum or whatever, but no monetary value. Most of them are just scams trying to lure people to invest into their junk JPEGs.
legendary
Activity: 3150
Merit: 1392
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
Since it's about NFTs, I think you, op, should move the thread to altcoin discussion. NFTs have value of what they represent and of how people perceive it, plus the copyright, I suppose. I don't think they're completely useless, but I think they're risky and overrated. They can be a nice way to support creators and to spread digital art, so to me, it's not about financial innovation and is more about fundraising. And while NFTs are often compared to ICOs, I think the difference is that with NFTs you know exactly what you're getting, whereas with ICOs people were often unsure, confused, trying to understand what the project was actually promising, etc.
legendary
Activity: 4270
Merit: 4534
the meme/json junk thrust onto the bitcoin network are not even close to being genuine NFT. so lets not even call them that, but they are most definitely scam crap

as for nft in general. even the ones on the other networks are not true utility NFT. there will come in the future (a few generational changes of tokenisation) where by future tokens will offer more secure tokenisations.. but the current line up of NFT just dont meet all the expectations and value security/scarcity they promised to have

so in general, the current things terming themselves nft are mostly scams, or atleast over priced, over promised units, that dont truly provide the features/benefits/security/uniqueness they suppose to
legendary
Activity: 3122
Merit: 1102
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
NFTs, meme coins, smart contracts, altcoins, etc. are nothing but scams.
I don't agree with what you said, but I can still believe that those tools are used to scam investors who don't know anything about them. If those are all scams, the other coins
that belong to those categories will no longer be listed on centralized exchanges.

Don't generalize; I also can't deny that there are scammers, but the scam is not the literal meme, NFT, altcoins, or smart contracts. You are dead wrong here on this matter.

This is the very reason why if you are an investor, you should do your own due diligence in uncovering the project itself. NFT is useful if there is solid backing behind it. Like for example, those real artists that really want to distribute their works via NFT. But in any business over the net, there will always a scammer on the loose.

I still believe there are few valuable projects that you can venture with, or NFT that you can own. However, if you can't keep up with the development phase of the platform you are using, better not to involve yourself in this type of investment. Just go for tangible artworks, meaning physical art. But we all know, they are quite expensive if you are looking for known artists.

You can easily spot fly-by-night projects by checking the following aspects-
> team/individuals behind the project - anonymous/fake profiles
> no solid background
> generic content of the site
> plagiarised content of the site
> all talks, no tangible plans/achievements
> too-good-to-be-true promises
Pages:
Jump to: