(June 28, 2021; Fstoppers | Business)
My goal for this article is to open the discussion and expand deeper into the topic because it feels like many people see NFTs as black and white when it’s not that simple. Before we start, I think ethically, I should disclose that I have minted a few pieces of my own work, which would indicate I likely have a bias towards being "pro-NFT", but I’m going to try and approach things as unbiasedly as I possibly can, I just think it’s important to be transparent.
Read the rest from Fstoppers: The Ethics of NFTs: Why You Should Rethink Selling Photography Online
)
Experimental: Relevant replies to this post will be considered for a gratuity from @penny4thoughts after the post pays out.
I think the sentence best summarizes the uproars regarding the NFT energy crisis. Already, there are vast inefficient systems that drain power and harm the environment in an apparent way, like flying planes and jets, etc However, there are not many complaints regarding them because people have a global consensus on the essence of these inventions. NFT, on the other hand, is relatively new and seems even like a scam to many individuals; hence, the hullabaloo regards its energy usage.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Interesting essay. Thanks. I agree with the concluding/summary sentence in this paragraph:
I think he overlooks the fact, though, that the market is already doing this. Market competition will naturally replace blockchains that use energy inefficiently with those that use it efficiently, simply because inefficient chains will be less profitable for block producers.
He also glosses over the question of "compared to what"? Yes, Bitcoin uses a lot of power, but so does the banking system, and so do other aspects of our economy. He alludes to this point when he talks about the power consumption of YouTube and Instagram, but I think he needs to explore it more thoroughly. These calculations have been done, and even proof of work Bitcoin is usually found to be "greener" than the banking system.
On a positive note, it is good that he mentioned the ongoing mining shift to renewable energy and the fact that ethereum is switching to proof of stake.
This point, from a comment, is what I still struggle with for most NFTs that link to art, music, video, and photography.
On the other hand, I guess it's also possible to make copies of physical photos and artwork, so I guess we'll just have to see how the market works it out.
(P.S. No upvote necessary. Feel free to let the p4t rewards flow to other commenters. ; -)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
To this point directly, an author who does that creates a large supply of their work. It's certainly possible, and there may be good reason to do so. However, abundance will dictate value. It's in part the scarcity of an item that allows it to achieve a high value (if the work is in demand). There are plenty of NFTs out there that are part of a "limited collection"; I've often seen five or ten authentic copies of an item; never 1000... but somebody could choose to release that many, and if they market it properly, it could make sense to do so.
One issue I can imagine in that scenario is that a creator might try to deceive their audience by releasing the same content in various places, hoping to duplicate demand among various segments of the digital artifact appreciating population. However, in some sense that goes against a creators best interests. One would imagine that long term investment in creating a unique and reliable brand is more important to somebody serious about being successful in this work. That won't prevent one hit wonders from trying to game the system, but it doesn't seem like a problem in the larger scope of the NFT realm to me.
On this point more broadly (of being able to pass digital—unauthentic—copies around), I've come to the realization that there is a difference between owning a copy ("here, look at this on my phone!") and owning a legitimate unique digital artifact ("See, there it is right on the marketplace platform with my avatar and the proof of purchase.")
That distinction might not be important to a general audience, but I bet it is perhaps something more significant to a private collector, or a curator who can leverage that in more interesting ways (admittedly, my examples above don't illustrate the full value of having a truly unique digital item. Doesn't this create value by opening up curation of art to a wider segment of people? I'm not sure what the mechanisms would look like exactly, but a curator could presumably set themselves apart by obtaining an authentic collection of "originals"; indeed, I wonder if a collection could constitute an NFT on its own, which could then be sold as a unique item. In fact, I wonder about how physical galleries might embrace this phenomenon to create a physically and digitally integrated experience.
I suppose you could set up a curated gallery of copies, too. But the market should be able to weed out bad actors. I suppose if people decide they don't appreciate authenticity, we could see curated collections of copies of things, too. But I'm sure good ol' classic law suits will still have their place as well! = )
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Besides all that, I also expect that more innovative ways of designing NFTs and the contracts that manage their utility will pop up. To me, that's the more interesting possibility here, or at least the one I'll be more likely to engage with.
More interesting things will pop up: like the choral work you wrote about, or this video whose eventual content relied on real world results, or this collection of artifacts celebrating the advent of the world wide web, or this creative way to raise money for charity.
In the end, I don't think most of the utility of NFTs is simply from tagging a digital work to secures its authenticity. I think the whole fabric of where these things are distributed, who gets their hands on it, and the meaning behind any particular effort will drive their efficacy.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Yeah, I definitely agree that what we see now is just a starting point. I also think that NFTs will evolve to provide services that people haven't even imagined yet. Your second paragraph here does a good job making that point.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I wonder if a platform where users could collect / host NFTs to commodify their social profiles would find utility on social networks.
Instead of writing stuff about ourselves, what if artists and developers could create unique representations of interests & experiences that could be curated, collected, and displayed across networks?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Interesting. Sort of a virtual art gallery. I could even see a subscription-based curated service. It recognizes that there might be copies of all these things floating around the Internet, but there's something to be said for having them all in one place, and easily accessible.
Fansforever.io might be driving to something like what you have in mind (the site that Lindsay Lohan used for her NFT). Seems like they're moving pretty slowly (if at all), though.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Looks like there are some big names already headed in the direction I was talking about: https://docs.bitclout.com/bitclout-nfts
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Yes, sort of like that. But with the added utility of a kind of syndication of NTFs or collections. Not sure if syndication is the right idea, but something about distribution and utility, not just access to and fostering interactions around collections themselves.
Also, the following isn't exactly the framework I had in mind, but this popped into my Google news feed today (just after I wrote my previous comment in Chrome of course ::shudder::)...
https://cointelegraph.com/news/nifty-s-inc-launches-social-nft-platform-with-warner-bros-partnership
Both of those center the NFTs (with whatever extra benefit comes with it on that particular platform—i.e. engaging with celebs). I'm thinking more about USING NFTs to express something rather than engage with others ABOUT NFTs.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
In the heat of the moment, It may be easy for NFTs to be regarded as a Fad. Especially considering that mere images and other forms of artworks on blockchains are being sold for millions of dollars. However, history has it that new inventions gain true purpose after the hype dies down. So let see how the market plays out when the noise dips.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit