zlacker

[return to "BBC cryptocurrency documentary pulled from air at last minute"]
1. WilTim+o2[view] [source] 2022-02-10 12:41:37
>>nemoni+(OP)
It's astonishing to me that people will just buy into any success story that involves crypto and NFTs. People don't question why poorly drawn pictures are being bought for thousands of dollars, don't question why there are hundreds of altcoins on the market and some "cryptocurrency experts" are supposedly "offering free tips" on investment. The whole space is rife with scams and embellishments and yet there are so many people just blindly buying into it, including the damn BBC!
◧◩
2. luckya+Y4[view] [source] 2022-02-10 13:00:07
>>WilTim+o2
Every person I've spoken to who's told me they're interested in crypto literally only care about it to make money, and have no interest in learning how it works. They all treat every last crypto-based use as investment like stocks, and not as a normal economic choice (e.g. "I want $3000 worth of bitcoin to buy a car" is not something people are doing, instead it's all "I want $3000 worth of bitcoin because the internet told me it'll be 3 million in a year").

NFTs also annoy me because it's literally the worst part of art industry - "buying" the "rights" to a piece of art so you can turn it for more cash later on, and not as an appreciation of the work. Bored Apes might be one of the few exceptions where people are doing it for "bragging rights", which is infinitely better because you're buying it to say you own it, much closer to normal art purchases.

◧◩◪
3. captai+l8[view] [source] 2022-02-10 13:24:02
>>luckya+Y4
Your not buying the rights, that's the most annoying thing about NFTs, that people don't get.
◧◩◪◨
4. naaski+at[view] [source] 2022-02-10 14:54:57
>>captai+l8
> Your not buying the rights, that's the most annoying thing about NFTs, that people don't get.

You are buying the rights, but they're rights that exist in a pseudo-legal system that has no enforcement and isn't recognized by any existing legal authority. Some kind of enforcement could exist one day though.

For instance, it's possible that your house in a "metaverse" might only display art for the NFTs that it verifies you own.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. captai+ZV[view] [source] 2022-02-10 16:38:23
>>naaski+at
No, you are not granted copyrights on the image attached to the NFT in all cases I've looked at, spoken to the people behind them and they also agreed.

Doesn't mean this can't be done, but in each case I've looked at, granting of rights (and which specific rights do we even mean?) is not happening.

Further more there is no obligation for anyone to do anything with the image linked to the NFT your the holder of.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. naaski+yZ[view] [source] 2022-02-10 16:51:44
>>captai+ZV
Copyright is a right defined in existing legal systems. I said the NFT defines a new type of right in a new pseudo-legal system.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. 6510+021[view] [source] 2022-02-10 17:00:49
>>naaski+yZ
mind blown! We could have as many opt-in legal systems as we want! Like a ball to go with the chain.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. spywar+Z41[view] [source] 2022-02-10 17:11:17
>>6510+021
A right isn't a legal system
[go to top]