Welcome to the loneliest thread ever… (or maybe not)
McGyver
Posts: 7,051
This forum is probably only a few hours old... hell, I just found it because a thread I posted in was moved, but I'm writing this for posterity... for the children of the future who stumble upon thi dusty thread at some future date.
My guess is my post will be the only one in this thread, maybe one or two others... but at most the entire forum will never gain more than a few dissentious threads which will be moved here to never be seen again... relegated here to die a sad an lonely death of neglect in anonymity.
So, children of the future... is there still ice cream?... have cockroaches taken over the earth?... how high did the sea levels rise when the polar ice caps melted?... And what of the noble polar bear? Are they your overlords now?...
Who cares, I can't hear your answers, I'm in the past you silly little gits... but sorry about the mess we left for you... if it's any consolation, we had a hell of a party... sorry you had to clean it up... you probably would have done the same though, you see back in the day NFTs we're all the rage... right up there with gender reveal parties... if you don't have those anymore, it was a kind of party where you revealed the gender of your unborn child by blowing up the party with an obscene amount of explosives and colored powder... it was fabulous.
I guess that probably doesn't make sense, but really not a lot of things humans do make sense... particularly NFTs which are probably why you are here reading this...
Do they still have NFTs in the future?
I'll wait a moment while you finish laughing...
Well, you see in my time NFTs were something that was supposed to help struggling artists... it kinda added a bit to the problem of global warming, but lots of people said that wasn't a big deal because they were very knowledgeable about stuff... not necessarily that stuff, but they knew how to say words like "Arbitrage", "DeFi Aggregator", "Instamine" and "Liquidity Pool"... which back in these times made people who said those words sound very believable... they'd always talk in acronyms, which made them seem even slicker... they'd toss out things like "IDX", "ICO", "HODL", "FUD" and one they loved to wave around... "FOMO"... that stood for "Fear Of Missing Out"...
In my time people were very concerned with FOMO, some because they thought it stood for Ferocious Omnipotent Mutant Octopuses, which was briefly a problem in 2020 (but what the hell wasn't?)... but others because they feared missing out on the ground floor of the next big trend... like when Apple computers first offered stock and people were confused by the idea of computers made out of apples, but others got it was gonna be a big thing and they bought the stock for peanuts (a form of currency in the 1990s)...
Nobody wanted to look like a big smelly idiot, so they weren't going to get left behind this time and they were constantly looking for the next Apple or Google or SilCorDyne... (ignore that last one if you are not in the future, you aren't supposed to know about that until at least 2024)...
Scientists warned that the cryptocurrency thing was going to add to the acceleration of global warming, but really nobody wanted to miss out on a sure thing... and the NFT side of the cryptomania was the surest of sure things... sure, it might make the world a little hotter, but if everyone could become billionaire, then everyone could afford personal air conditioned EVA suits to go to the Lamborghini dealership to buy their weekly fleet of Lamborghinis... and eventually the whole global warming thing would blow over and just disappear like a miracle...
I'm not making excuses, it's just that you probably came here because your polar bear overlords are making you write paper for school or something, so I'm just explaining how you got there...
Well, for the most part, at the moment NFTs haven't really done what they were intended to do (not the global warming thing), which was uplift the lowly and unempowered artists of the world... mostly right now it's just rich people getting richer and a few poor schmucks making a nice buck here and there, while most other people dump money into a FOMO cash funnel hoping to get a chunk of the pie...
I'm sure that eventually worked out and all the struggling artist finally struck it rich and that made all the wet angry polar bears worth it...
Okay stop laughing, I meant that sincerely... the artists finally got a break... right?
In our time and previously, artists were always exploited and taken advantage of and the folks with the slick suits and cool words promised that would finally change... they wouldn't lie about that?
No matter, I'm guessing it did and even though you probably have an angry polar bear prodding you to finish up your essay, it at least did for a while and the ice caps probably melted for some other reason...
Well... I'm kinda bored with this now, I'm going to go back to working on my time machine so I can see how this all turned out which is probably fine.
So cheers you silly gits, and sorry about all the heat and water!
EDITED SEVERAL DAYS LATER TO ADD... Well, it does look like some people have responded... who knows maybe I'll turn out to be wrong?
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
EDITED
Ignore this... it was a reply to a post from someone, but they deleted the post and then my post then made no sense... I was probably one of the funniest posts ever written, but without the set up post it couldn't be allowed to continue, so I had to delete it, which is rather sad because it was so funny I'm pretty sure it could have brought about world peace and cured several nasty diseases, but no it's gone and the world will just have to slog on sad and miserable with all its nasty diseases and funny smells.
Redacted
Yeah... Shuddering at the thought of being frozen for a century or five, to be thawed to a "better world"...
If people keep posting here, it won't be the loneliest thread ever.
Yes, someone should delete every post after the second and close the thread.
Hence the reason its a good ideea to screensnaps said post prior to responding, cause I feel we, as a generation, have lost something now,... yah... sad really.
I agree :-(
This April 2021 article by Anil Dash from the Atlantic seems worth a read, too. Apologies if this has been posted before.
NFTs Weren’t Supposed to End Like This
It begins, "When we invented non-fungible tokens, we were trying to protect artists. But tech-world opportunism has struck again."
Yes, I agree, @AlmightyQUEST . To me, the article speaks volumes to intent and the difficulty of making something work as intended. I would like to say more, but can't do that here.
Yeah, the whole thing struck me as a solution searching for a problem.
The thing is, I think there really IS a thing that this NFT sort of idea would be very useful for: Creating a decentralized virtual-world system akin to the one in Ready Player One, in which the ownership of virtual objects, such as chairs and flying cars, could be kept track of for when you need to rez them in the virtual world, with the ownership and the copy-permissions (i.e. if its a no-copy item where only one instance of it could be rezzed out at a given time, and if you rez a new copy, the previous one vanishes from where it was rezzed) kept track of via the blockchain. But that wasn't what they were trying to use this NFT thing for, they were trying to use it for stuff like virtual trading-cards being sold to virtual trading-card collectors. Which, of course, completely tanked.
And we're probably decades away from having a huge, vast, Ready Player One sort of virtual world being used by many millions of people, so this NFT thing is probably way too far ahead of its time.... and is trying to be used for something that isn't gonna get any traction whatsoever.
Interesting idea. Fortunately, nothing could ever go wrong with that. . .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summer_Wars
I highly recommkend that anime.
Well, that might be a good use for the NFT thing, soft of, but two major issues... One: the huge power consumption in the mining/minting of crypto/NFTs, but let's say they find a way to do that which is environmentally friendly or magical... you still have roadblock Two: Nobody wants you to own anything... sure you can sorta "own" an NFT (that's kind of a grey area too because terms may vary and it's often not clear what you actually "own"), but do you own your cell phone, your PlayStation or your Tesla?... not really if agree to a EULA... currently you probably own your actual furniture, unless it has a USB port and it's a "sMart sTool" or "iTable".
Sounds stupid, but the Internet of Things is full of crazy stupid "smart" crap like a smart-sofa that monitored your sitting habits, and a smart electric blanket (so presumably you fine tune the temperature or see if the cat is using it when you are not at home?), not to mention all sorts of smart appliances like juice makers and bread makers that not only do you not own, but you are required to purchase proprietary ingredients in special containers... as long as someone can stick a USB port on it and call it smart, it requires an EULA and then they can lock you into whatever terms they want. Plus you aren't generally allowed to fix the stuff yourself, so you usually have to send it back to the manufacturer for that or buy a new one... plus-plus for the manufacturer...
Don't just have a dumb old wooden stool that you only sit on when you can have one that links to the Internet and monitors how many times you sit or fart on, and also reminds you it needs a software update or spikes will come out of it to prevent unauthorized users from sitting on it because the security software wasn't updated, and then six months later it gets bricked anyway because the company was bought out by another company who is going to "totally reimagine the concept of smart stools" (two new colors) and "take stool to the next level!" (Never get explained, but the pictures of happy people imply it'll be great)... essentially just leaving you with a $500 stool you can only sit on without having your fart count recorded.
Nobody would want to sell virtual stuff you would actually own, because then you could modify it or resell it, the mantra is everything is intellectual property and as such it must remain under control somehow or armadillos will destroy the world (I was going to say "Armageddon" but predictive text kept insisting on "armadillos")...
You see the problem... once you get bored with your virtual bidet, are you just going to chuck it in the virtual storage locker or are you going to resell it?... lots of people would do that... or possibly maybe someone makes a vibrating attachment or an light show function that the original didn't have... maybe you'll want to add that... what if you do and then don't like it and then sell it, where technically it's better than the original product, thus competing with sales of the original item... That would be too much like real furniture or "RL Content" ("Real Life" or possibly "RR content" which stands for "Real Reality")...(cut me some slack I'm trying to invent new words or the English language will die)...
The idea of people having a virtual garage sale or selling aftermarket upgrades of their products is unthinkable to anyone who would get into that sort of thing... so, more then likely you would have some version of an End User License Agreement which would forbid you from reselling or modifying your content... and that wouldn't really be "owning" anymore, would it?
They'd probably rebrand the agreement to something stupid like "Non Fungible Asset Owner Obligation and Rights Contract" or stupider, and it would be touted as a new, more liberating and better form of EULA, but it wouldn't be, in fact most likely it would be worse and less "liberating".
Having said all of that, and that was a TLDR lot, that's not to say someone wouldn't make NFTish virtual assets... it's just they would probably take a good idea, make the good claims and execute it the bad way... (I mean "do it the bad way", not stuff it into a guillotine and yank the cord)...
NFTs aren't going away any time soon... they are the virtual equivalent of the Multi-Level Marketing racket... Some people at the bottom or middle will get rich, but most others won't, but touting those who did "succeed" will run the conveyor belt of new "adopters" that will take a shot at the grand prize, keeping the whole thing lucrative for the people at the top... even if NFTs tank, the allure of the profits they initially provided will enspire new takes on the idea... just look at NFT real estate and crap like that... it doesn't have to make sense, just boatloads of cash.
I'm pretty sure, probably pretty soon, someone will do exactly what you are suggesting, it'll probably get its own acronym like NFVA (Non Fungible Virtual Assets) or UVC (Unique Virtual Content) so the Cryptobros can talk it up to investors or dopes writing articles about it... but essentially it won't be what it will be promised to be or what some well meaning individual sets out to make it.
VR is breaking out, it's currently on the level the Atari 2600 was in the early 80s right now, but it won't be for long... well, as long as the people running the show don't eff it all up by all trying to jam their grubby little paws into the pie at the same time (honestly my opinion is currently the technology isn't as much of a problem as too many people trying to over-monetize every aspect of it before it actually catches on strongly enough)... The NFT thing will take a firm hold in virtual reality and morph into many varieties, it's a very foreseeable conclusion.
Sorry if I'm a buzzkill.
Well, I've seen at least one person, who was part of one of the Libertarian-offshoot parties (specifically, one of the founders of the Pirate Party) who was of the expectation that the new generation growing up now are going to totally reject that "you don't own anything virtual" thing altogether, and push through laws making virtual things, such as e-books and MP3 albums, that you paid for become YOUR property, not merely something they're licensing to you that you don't actually own... and that there'd be laws making it ILLEGAL to prevent the end-user from exporting their purchased, virtual goods from the online cloud-service they're on, and laws giving the end-user the right to format-shift their e-books and music albums out from whatever proprietary system those cloud-services have them in. He was also anticipating, and working towards the idea of, making DRM.... or as he termed it, Digitial Restricions Mechanisms... illegal as well, because they interfere with the end-users right to do what he pleases with the stuff HE PAID FOR. Analog Rights, he calls it. Basically, people would have the expectation to treat digital goods -- say, an e-book -- the same way they do the dead-tree equivalent -- that is, say, a paperback book they bought at a secondhand shop -- and that future generations won't accept it any other way.
There is also, independent of that, a growing movement to demand a Right To Repair, meaning that companies like Apple and John Deer would be prohibitted from forcing you to go through hoops to get your purchased, physical devices repaired, and you'd have a guaranteed RIGHT to get replacement parts for them from aftermarket parts makers.
So.... yeah, I don't see McGyver's darker future happening.
As a Gen Xer who sells ebooks, I'm annoyed that people who buy my books don't techinically own them. I'd be surprised we don't already have laws like this, except the politicians have already been "swayed" by the major industires pushing digital products.
I'm not sure who the person is you are referring to, but there are lots of people who believe individuals have the right to own what they buy, but the big problem is it doesn't matter how many are pro Right to Repair unless laws are passed to ensure compliance with that desire.
Many manufacturers routinely ignore complying with the existing Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act and generally the worst they see is a polite reminder or inconsequential fine.
So far in each of the 27 states considering right to repair laws, industry pressure has managed to shoot them down.
Big money and ridiculous arguments are working hard at keeping things the way they are.
Can it change? Yeah, of course... but that requires effort.
Average human beings are not generally notorious for being proactive or expending effort, you literally have to hand them the end product all tied up neatly with a bow and say "just sign here" and even then many just opt to act against their own self interest because they've decided they only want to hear sounds coming from a particular direction.
Even when people do get involved their efforts are often trampled over... just look at what happened with net neutrality... overwhelming numbers of people people made it very clear they wanted it to stay, but ISPs and Telcoms made it go away despite that.
Look into how that whole thing shook out and if that's not fodder for dark visions of the future, I don't know what is.
Yeah, that may have had certain ingredients present that allowed that to transpire that way, but there is nothing concrete in place to prevent that from occurring with other remaining laws or consumer protections a few years down the line... hell, if you look at the stuff legally transpiring now, it might happen sooner.
It would be nice if my dark future didn't occur, but it would be nicer if there were not so many interests with virtually unlimited resources actively trying to ensure that dark future is exactly what happens.
The best way to ensure this dark future doesn't occur is to stay informed, be aware of what's happening in the electronics industry world, be aware of what legislation is being considered, stay on top of trends and new technologies, pay attention to what actually rights you still have, look into information from consumer advocacy groups... and wherever and whenever, participate in meaningful ways to ensure that dark future doesn't happen.
My 2 cents, and many more 2 cents.
Like the past, I predict the future will have bleakness and awesomeness. Even though there has been lip service paid to the difference between an NFT, a blockchain, and a cryptocurrency, the discussion has generally linked all of the above - and the legal rights accompanying those.
Some related financial history
What is being called a blockchain is just a ledger of recorded transactions. There is nothing inherently good or evil, futuristic or traditional, legal or illegal about a ledger. All of those attributes are really about what the ledger records (including rights), who gets to review the ledger, and when. Blockchain ledgers have the advantage of being simultaneously observable by all members in real time - or kept concealed. In contrast, during the banking panics in 1933, nobody knew what the financial ledger of Bank of Bumficc really looked like until they could get an opportunity to send an auditor in person to review a physical book. In a panic, that sucks.
Any medium of exchange can be used to purchase and clear the transactions recorded in a ledger. It doesn't have to be a cryptocurrency. In ante-bellum New England, a private bank called Suffolk maintained a payments and clearing ledger for notes of other private banks that served as currency, so the US had hundreds of NON-FUNGIBLE bank notes circulating as currency. Think bank note currency is odd? Consider Bank of England notes in Around the World in 80 Days. The Suffolk system failed with the Panic of 1857 and New England experienced a deep recession. After the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency was created in 1863, federally sponsored clearinghouses maintained similar ledgers for all federlly chartered banks and used a single FUNGIBLE federal bank note for payments and clearing. The clearinghouses provided emergency clearinghouse certificates to OCC-regulated members to each other to avoid a repeat of the aftermath of the Suffolk system collapse. The Panics of 1893 and 1907 exposed the problems of the Clearinghouse system and a commission was formed, which resulted in... (wait for it)... the Federal Reserve, which to this day maintains the payments and clearing system for fungible Federal Reserve Notes (look closely at your dollar bills). The banking panics in 1933 exposed the vulnerability of the Federal Reserve System. So the US has had periods of fungible and non-fungible payments and clearing.
What is the point? A ledger isn't the problem or the solution. A currency (private bank notes, federally regulated bank notes, federal reserve system notes) isn't the problem or the solution. Instead, fraud is a problem in any system. Short term panic is a problem in any system. Flights to safety caused by uncertainty are problems in any system. The potential failure or conflicted priorities of the ledger-keeper and clearing institution is a problem in any system. Potential for fraud, short term panics, flights to safety, and conflicting priorities of central clearing institutions exist for all ledgers, all currencies, and all clearing systems. Simultanously observable ledgers like currently offered blockchains can increase transparency and reduce fraud (or kept concealed) in a way that the physical limitation of traditional account books could not.
You can record any rights you want, or not, in the ledger. In the South Pacific, for large transactions such as land, people used giant stones as the medium of exchange. It was extremely rare to actually move a stone between islands. The entire payment and clearing system relied on maintaining agreement of who owned which stones without moving them very often. Reportedly, when a stone being transported sank to the bottom of the ocean, the ledger keepers just agreed that that stone still existed, still marked new ownership of the transaction which caused the sinking, and was still capable of being used as the medium of exchange for future transactions. Is a no longer observable stone at the bottom of the ocean a crypto-stone?
Blockchains are just ledgers. Ownership of tokens (fungible and non-fungible) are just some of the classes of items whose ownership can be recorded in the ledgers. Cryptocurrencies (currently fungible but don't have to be) are just some examples of mediums of exchange which can be used for payment and clearing.
I predict that the hostility to finance in general, and Bitcoin, blockchains, and NFTs in paticular, will result in these names being abandoned. But like it or not, blockchain ledgers combined with 'smart contracts' are likely to be the future of some industries. Consider book publishing (article linked below). Authors, publishers, and distributors are still searching for means for authors to get royalties for used book sales, especially college textbooks. A ledger that records all of the subsequent purchasers of Finance 101 by David Ricardo, with royalties for future sales flowing to David Ricardo, is one way for property rights to be enforced - the opposite of fraud. There is no reason that these transactions can't be recordd in a blockchain and paid and cleared in US dollars, Euros, Yen, etc. instead of a cryptocurrency.
So, they won't call David Ricardo's Finance 101 an NFT, they will call it something else. And they won't call the ledger used to track changes in ownership and royalties rights a Blockchain, they will call it something else. And the means of payment won't be a cryptocurrency dependent on computer processing mining, it will be something else.
Whether there is a corresponding role for ledgers in art ownership that can benefit creators that there is in literature, I encourage everyone to consider for themselves. What rights and contract terms need to be recorded in the ledger to ensure that creators are compensated? And purchasers are not cheated? Whatever those answers are, stick it in the ledger. You are being just as 'futuristic' as pre-industrial Pacific Islanders and ante-bellum New Englanders.
And whatever people end up choosing to call these ledgers, and items being transacted in them, and whatever currency they choose to use to pay and clear, they will still have to cope with fraud, panic, flights to safety, and ill-defined missions of central banks. That is because those fundamental problems are caused by the human condition, not by NFTs.
https://hughhowey.com/nfts-for-authors/
Where did this "Smoke and mirrors" come from?
The blockchain is tracking just the transactions concerning the "casing" (NFT), it doesn't prove that one that minted the NFT actually owned the artwork or had any rights to the artwork, also it doesn't quarantee that the artwork can still be found behind the link next year, or even next month.
Minting NFT's and, transactions and mining crypto are all using massive amounts of energy and keeping the GPU's out of our hands - Yeah, what is there to be p****d about...?
Similarly, the ledger in BB&T bank of my personal balance does not prove that that is actually my credits in the federal reserve system. It is just one piece of evidence. Again, the ledger is just that, a ledger.
Another example. States maintain a record system of land ownership. The US has title insurance in part because those records are merely evidence, NOT PROOF, of land ownership. Firms that funded mortgages got together to create their own ledger, called MERS. Those firms then got trashed because transactions that they might record within their own database (ledger) were not always recorded in the state ledgers - and some states charged transaction fees on land transfer. Some people who had transaction recorded in MERS did not pay their state fees.
Well, it wasn't the ledger MERS that was the problem, it was failure to report the land transactions and pay the fees.
And guess what could happen in the absence of MERS - failure to report the transactions and pay the fees.
I offer no smoke and mirrors. Fraud is fraud. A ledger is a ledger. A ledger can record an accurate transaction in which all parties also comply with all laws outside the ledger, or a ledger can record fraudulent transactions, or a ledger can record accurate transactions but the parties may commit fraud outside the ledger.
Don't confuse the ledger for the fraud. Pens and paper are not the fraud. The meaning of what is written is accurate or fraudulent. Once written, the parties to the transaction comply or don't comply with corresponding laws.
https://safeguardproperties.com/alerts/kentucky-sues-mers-over-fees/
Fraud - Prior to Blockchains - No Guarantee that Your Financial Account Statements are Real
.............
SEC Charges Longtime Madoff Employee With Creating Fake Trades
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
2011-247
Washington, D.C., Nov. 21, 2011 – The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged a longtime Bernie Madoff employee with fraud for his role in creating fake trades to facilitate the massive Ponzi scheme
https://www.sec.gov/news/press/2011/2011-247.htm
What else is new... They should put those working on Wall St. in shackles and chains to work on a rock quarry, it would be for the benefit of all mankind.
I'm going to insert a reminder to keep away from politics, thank you.
Hopefully, my historical references are not interpreted as partisan. They are not meant as such. I am guessing that it is standard operating procedure for nearly every political party in nearly every country to publically condemn fraud, panic, etc. In the US, for example, there was bi-partisan condemnation of Bernie Madoff, and near universal agreement that he should be prosecuted. Similarly, prosecution for refusal to pay required land fees has not been partisan. The history of financial ledgers and of accurate and fraudulent records held by them seems on topic to me. The history of fungible and non-fungible currencies seems on topic to me. If anyone thinks I am being partisan by selective examples, the creation of the OCC occurred under a Republican President while the creation of the Federal Reserve occurred under a Democratic president, so I think I am being balanced in the US context. If not, call for an example of fraud under a party's watch, or an example of anti-fraud policies under a party's watch, and I will provide one.
Correction. People are bringing up the environmental impact of cryptocurrencies used for payment and clearing. That is not the ledger. There is no reason that NFTs need to be paid and cleared using a currency worse for the environement than transactions for anything else. They can be paid and cleared using dollars, yen, krona, euros, etc. There is no required link between cryptocurrencies and using blockchains to track and pay royalties for used books.
Distinguishing the ledgers and the currencies used for settlement and clearing
Recall that my first statement in this thread is about distinguishing blockchains (ledgers) from the crypto-currencies often used for payment. Payment could be done using the giant stone money of Pacific islands. Use of the recording technology but reliance on more traditional currencies is happening so it is not appropriate to assume that transactions recorded on blockchains are always paid and cleared in cryptocurrencies, or that the trend is in that direction. Here is an excerpt from a speech by a Federal Reserve official. Governor Brainard calls the blockchains 'distributed ledger technology.' Notice this section of the speech does not start off with an optimistic assessment of the future of cryptocurrencies.
Correction. The ledger is not the cryptocurrency mining.
a - There is an item to be recorded.
b - There is a ledger to record all of the transactions of the items to be recorded.
c - There is the currency used to pay and clear the transactions of the items.
The legitimate environmental complaints are for the currency used for payment and clearing (c), not for the ledger itself (b). The items to be recorded (a) could be anything, including an operating room. There are multiple medical services that need to coordinate for care of an individual person that will want access to the operating room. One application of distributed ledgers is to have a confidential database simultaneouusly observable by all medical service providers for all the operating rooms. I'm sorry, but anyone who asserts that the use of an electronic database to track stuff must be bad for the environment because electronic databases use electricity is wrong. What is the opportunity cost of the next best alternative? The traditional alternative is multiple paper copies, multiple attempts at reservations, multiple alerts for cancelations, etc. That is far worse for the environment than a single shared electronic database updated in real time and simultaneously observable by all parties. That is all a distributed ledger (blockchain) is. The ledger is not the currency used for the payment of the time slot. The ledger is not the operating room. It is the system of records.
Reminder, before anyone accuses me of being a defender of NFTs in their current form and as they are currently paid for and cleared by the crypto world.
This is what I said in my first post in this thread.
Every transaction (bidding, canceling a bid, transferring, selling, cancelling a sale, etc) on the (ETH) blockchain uses power, as of today about 105.48 kWh on average, equivalent to the power consumption of an average U.S. household over 3.56 days. So it's not just the currency that is cause for enviromental concern, it's the ETH blockchain.
Fun fact: Calculations have been made to see whether the traditional way of buying and selling art is more polluting than NFTs, it isn't.