Jump to content
IGNORED

NFTs and the Blockchain - What the hell is all this?


squirtle
 Share

Recommended Posts

Also, most of this is just CEO talk to keep investors happy, the same way people are 'trialling' Blockchain. This is what the EA CEO said before as a 2021 prediction:

 

Quote

"From the minute I get up in the morning, everything I do has an impact on my gaming life, both discrete and indiscrete. The amount of eggs I have in my internet-enabled fridge might mean my Sims are better off in my game. That length of distance I drive in my Tesla on the way to work might mean that I get more juice in Need for Speed. If I go to soccer practice in the afternoon, by virtue of internet-enabled soccer boots, that might give me juice or new cards in my FIFA product. This world where games and life start to blend I think really comes into play in the not-too-distant future, and almost certainly by 2021.”

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, footle said:

I’m with K. There might be a use, though not in games, but only when the speculation bubble passes. You could imagine a version of Getty Images, that doesn’t involve everyone always paying a fee to Getty: but you’d still need the Getty lawyers checking who’s just ignoring the smart contract and right click saving.

 

Would a blockchain work for low-value transactions? Not a rhetorical question, but presumably the cost of recording a transaction doesn't scale up and down with the amount of money changing hands, and the last I checked it takes dollars to tens of dollars worth of electricity each time you want to enter something on the record.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Alex W. said:

 

Would a blockchain work for low-value transactions? Not a rhetorical question, but presumably the cost of recording a transaction doesn't scale up and down with the amount of money changing hands, and the last I checked it takes dollars to tens of dollars worth of electricity each time you want to enter something on the record.

Yes, the cost doesn't scale because nothing is actually being transacted. All that is happening is a new branch of an existing reference number is being created. The energy cost comes from the fact that all* records of the blockchain have to be updated simultaneously and immediately. So if I am part of the same chain and you pass ownership of something to someone else, my chain will have to update to reflect that, despite me having nothing to do with it directly. Everyone on the chain has to update their record, resulting in potentially millions or billions of records being updated every time a transaction occurs and if millions of transactions are taking place every minute, that is a hell of a lot processing power required spread across the entire chain.

 

* My knowledge is very out of date so this may have changed to not need all to be updated simultaneously and immediately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Alex W. said:

 

Would a blockchain work for low-value transactions? Not a rhetorical question, but presumably the cost of recording a transaction doesn't scale up and down with the amount of money changing hands, and the last I checked it takes dollars to tens of dollars worth of electricity each time you want to enter something on the record.


who knows! Depends on what proof of stake might bring.


Whether it’d be cheaper than a simple database seems unlikely, simply because the number of operations goes up (environmentally it follows it pretty much can’t be cheaper, it might just be the cost isn’t on any one companies books).

 

question is is there a real benefit, that non-speculators could be persuaded to buy into, for low value transactions. you’ve maybe got resale rights to digital products, but how many large organsiations are really interested - in the games space - of cannabalising their own sales through enforcing artificial scarcity?

 

Are adobe going to stop selling creative cloud subs, in order to support a second hand market where they don’t get all the pie? If not, why would EA, Ubisoft etc. for the games themselves. 
 

At which point you really are back at the Diablo 3 Real Money Auction House, and that was shit - either you have shit drops 10 million times out of 10 million and one times (so your Skinner box is unsatisfying) or you have a real money auction house full of the same NFT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Alex W. said:

Would a blockchain work for low-value transactions? Not a rhetorical question, but presumably the cost of recording a transaction doesn't scale up and down with the amount of money changing hands, and the last I checked it takes dollars to tens of dollars worth of electricity each time you want to enter something on the record.

 

What? lol

 

I can pass you 0.005 ALGO right now if you set up a wallet. The fee is 0.001, which currently works out at $0.00197. All proven to be carbon-neutral/negative as well, which is a whole lot better than using a bank.

 

The transaction is finalised within seconds, too.

 

It's the same fee and speed if I want to send you 45,000,000 ALGO.

 

It's probably cost more in energy to make this post. Certainly it's costing a lot more when you combine the energy use of everyone reading it. That's before we get to the hosting of it, and the energy used in maintaining the forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, footle said:

question is is there a real benefit, that non-speculators could be persuaded to buy into, for low value transactions. you’ve maybe got resale rights to digital products, but how many large organsiations are really interested - in the games space - of cannabalising their own sales through enforcing artificial scarcity?

 

Are adobe going to stop selling creative cloud subs, in order to support a second hand market where they don’t get all the pie? If not, why would EA, Ubisoft etc. for the games themselves. 

 

"Imagine DRM, but this time the customers have rights!" is probably going to be a hard sell to the entertainment-industrial-military complex, yeah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Fallows said:

 

What? lol

 

I can pass you 0.005 ALGO right now if you set up a wallet. The fee is 0.001, which works out at $0.00197.

 

The transaction is finalised within seconds, too.

 

It's the same fee and speed if I want to send you 45,000,000 ALGO.

 

I was thinking if bitcoin and its alarming (and alarmingly volatile) average cost per transaction, but of course proof-of-stake chains like that are significantly more scalable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Nick R said:

Why is it that whenever I see a piece of NFT art, it always looks like it's from an artist who is trying (and failing) to draw like Jamie Hewlett?

 

Some of Beeple's stuff is quite nice, and also prohibitively expensive.

 

The rest of the good stuff no doubt gets lost in an ocean of bollocks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Alex W. said:

 

Would a blockchain work for low-value transactions? Not a rhetorical question, but presumably the cost of recording a transaction doesn't scale up and down with the amount of money changing hands, and the last I checked it takes dollars to tens of dollars worth of electricity each time you want to enter something on the record.

 

I think one of the main applications for DLTs / crypto is for low-value transactions. Conventional payment rails aren't really set up for very small payments, so one use case for cryptoassets is to act as a conduit for this kind of transaction. The nineties internet dream of the true micropayment, i.e. paying a couple of pennies for access to a paywalled article, rather than paying £8 for some horse armour. Obviously, you wouldn't use Bitcoin for this - I don't think anyone sane would use Bitcoin for anything beyond selling it to greater fools - but there are ways of doing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, therearerules said:

I have commissioned and paid for digital art. Shutterstock make a living selling it. Absolutely no NFTs required.

 

No, but it might make it cheaper, and it might help the company to automate bits of it. I don't think it's going to transform anything, but it could improve existing services.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, K said:

 

No, but it might make it cheaper, and it might help the company to automate bits of it. I don't think it's going to transform anything, but it could improve existing services.

How so? The cost to mint something is an additional cost for unique art commissions, with no reason to do so, and places which sell none-unique art won't use NFTs. I'm not sure which part you think needs to be automated or will be made cheaper here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Nick R said:

Why is it that whenever I see a piece of NFT art, it always looks like it's from an artist who is trying (and failing) to draw like Jamie Hewlett?

 

Because people who can draw are probably selling their actual art somewhere not a virtual bit of paper that might as well have a customer service number and "Use your clubcard next time and you could get a free monkey" at the bottom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, therearerules said:

How so? The cost to mint something is an additional cost for unique art commissions, with no reason to do so, and places which sell none-unique art won't use NFTs. I'm not sure which part you think needs to be automated or will be made cheaper here.

 

Well, it might not be that useful for buying commissioned artwork. But if you've created a photo or a design and someone else wants to use it commercially, I can envision that a DLT/NFT might make it easier to do that and to process the related permissions and payments. It could for example make for a relatively simple plug-in that allowed an individual to process payments for the use of their work without having to go through a larger company. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Mr. Gerbik said:

TL;DR summary:

 

 

 

 

 


The problem is to believe this, you have to either not understand anything about how NFTs and the associated technology works, or to understand it and pretend you don’t for sake of the stance you wish to take.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Capwn said:

There will be auctions in the future where you can buy the EXACT weapon used by a gaming guru in the last round of a major competition. 

 

edit or rather the exact RECEIPT of the exact same weapon :)


This is actually a genius idea for a games company to implement to make money - do you know of actual plans for this? If not, you should start shaping the idea yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NFTs could quite easily enable a second-hand/trade-in market for digital games. As a publisher you mint a batch of however many of them, creating scarcity, and each time one of those games is traded between individuals 10% of the transaction goes back to the publisher.

Thanks to the blockchain the transaction wouldn't even need a middleman like Ebay. We could trade these in our trading forum, with ownership passing over instantaneously. No more middleman fees, just a commission going back to the original owner.

As an indie developer you wouldn't even need a publisher. You're the sole custodian over your works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Nick R said:

Why is it that whenever I see a piece of NFT art, it always looks like it's from an artist who is trying (and failing) to draw like Jamie Hewlett?


Because these are exercises in automated speculation - they have almost nothing to do with ‘genuine’ art at all, beyond an arguably solid conceptual relationship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen some interesting theories about how using the blockchain and NFTs might benefit individuals or companies selling their work through the likes of the Unity Asset Store.

 

 

I haven't seen any theory floated about how they'll work in games that has been an improvement for players. Its all been some pay to win nightmare or creating digital scarcity to try and squeeze more from the "whales". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Fallows said:

NFTs could quite easily enable a second-hand/trade-in market for digital games. As a publisher you mint a batch of however many of them, creating scarcity, and each time one of those games is traded between individuals 10% of the transaction goes back to the publisher.

 

Setting aside that you don't need NFTs to enable second-hand sale of digital games - why the need for scarcity? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.