Fork me on GitHub
#clojure-uk
<
2022-01-26
>
dharrigan07:01:44

Good Morning!

dharrigan10:01:43

Anyone else watch that fasinating (but long) youtube docuvid on blockchain, bitcoin and ntf?

Conor11:01:18

Dan Olson's one? No, but I've heard it is very good

Conor11:01:54

I think we need to reclaim the term NFT. I propose either Nice, Finally Thursday or No Fucking Thanks

Aron11:01:05

I wish I could justify watching it 😄

Jordan Robinson11:01:24

maybe it could be one of those recursive acronyms like, NFTs (are) Fraudulent Transactions

dharrigan12:01:55

Yes, the Dan Olson one

dharrigan12:01:26

I found it very interesting

flefik12:01:34

NFTs aren’t that different from purchasing physical art though. Suppose you buy a Monet, the only thing that sets it apart is that it’s the original. With most high end art you don’t really get any exclusivity to view, and enjoy it yourself. For most artwork you can get a 15 quid print off of the artist’s website anyway, or commission someone to make a copy. I would never by an NFT myself, but I get the sentiment and acknowledge that lots of people would - and by extension there’s your extrinsic value. It’s okay that it just ties metadata to the owner, and not the actual bytes of the jpeg.

rickmoynihan13:01:23

I’ve not seen the video, but I disagree with: > NFTs aren’t that different from purchasing physical art though. If I buy a real work of art — I can hang it on my wall; it has been touched by the artists actual hand, it has physical properties in the oil paints that are not in a print. It also has a natural scarcity to it, which then means in addition to being a nice thing, it is an investment of some kind, it has some intrinsic value over the reproductions. When it comes to NFT’s you’re not buying the artwork, you’re buying a receipt or proof of purchase. I don’t know about you, but I wouldn’t hang a receipt on my wall. Worse the receipt is just some abstract thing in a blockchain; it’s not even something I can physically show someone. I mean sure I can flip open my phone and show a screen that says I own something; but that is just such a flippant thing, I see no social value in showing someone that. When you look at a piece of real art, there is at least (if you’re so inclined) some kind of real connection. Gazing at the Mona-Lisa in Le Louvre is fundamentally different to seeing a picture of something on someone elses phone. NFTs create an artificial scarcity of receipts, not items. Digital items are inherently copyable, and the copies are perfect. Anyone can actually coin an NFT, and you have no guarantee that the person who coined it isn’t going to coin another thing for the exact same thing. NFT’s have no legal basis that I’m aware of, and haven’t been proven in court. The people buying NFT’s often don’t even know what they’re really buying, or what it really means to own one… e.g. see: https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/technology/nft-group-spends-3m-on-dune-book-mistakingly-thinking-that-they-now-own-the-copyright/ar-AASRohx I agree with your point about extrinsic value and NFT’s as an “investment opportunity”. However it’s still a total con. Yes you can make money by buying them and selling them on to other suckers down the line…. but there a million other ways to make money too, you might as well go to a bookies and just gamble on something, as at least the rules are clear, the playing field is level (or at least rigged in well understood ways). Basically if you’re just wanting to make money by buying and selling things, I don’t see why we need to dress NFT’s up so we can do that. There is zero scarcity in coining unique NFTs for things. NFT’s are basically just a way to sell nothing as something, and therefore it’s a scam/con; and the bottom of the market will drop out of it. I’d rather buy and sell real things, which are backed up by real laws, and real scarcity.

flefik14:01:35

I mostly agree with you, except when it comes to ownership. Even with real art, “good enough” copies can be made for the enjoyment or consumption of it. In fact, if you purchase an item at Christies, the provenance of said item is of equal (or arguably greater) importance to its value than the artwork itself. NFTs are just that. A certificate of provenance. I don’t see any inherent value in NFTs, but neither would I purchase an original painting for any other reason than that others will buy it off my in the future. There are enough people who believe in the NFTs to make them “real”. I guess I don’t think they’re much more of a scam than paying for regular art.

Rachel Westmacott09:02:02

From an "All property is theft" perspective the whole thing is just nonsense. But yeah "There are enough people who believe in the NFTs to make them “real”." - just like any other form of money then.

rickmoynihan09:02:42

I absolutely agree with that @U0FR9C8RZ, but at least we all already have fiat money, which from birth we’re all essentially invested in. Why introduce another that doesn’t solve any of the problems it claims to; makes society the climate and indeed money/investment worse, and only serves to make the people who are in it before you richer through the propagation of lies? The crypto community is just worse than the worst of big finance. Returning to @UAEFFG05B’s point: > I don’t see any inherent value in NFTs, but neither would I purchase an original painting for any other reason than that others will buy it off my in the future. If you view art as purely an investment then I can see why you might think it is no different from speculating on an NFT. However for most people art is also a nice thing with some intrinsic value. For example a friend of mine recently bought some original drawings by Billy Connolly. Did he buy them because he thinks they’ll go up in value? No. He bought them because he likes Billy Connolly, likes the drawings, and thinks they may hold their value or go up, but even if they do depreciate he gets to enjoy having them on his wall, and showing them to people. Most of the art market is driven by these motivations, though there are certainly some in it only for investment, but it’s the presence of the former that make it a real market and very different to NFTs. My friend certainly wouldn’t be happy just hanging a receipt for them on his wall.

flefik09:02:38

I don’t just view art as an investment. I’d happily buy a painting by Billy Connolly, up to a point. Beyond a certain pricing point, it’s no longer about the enjoyment of the art, but only 2 reasons to purchase remain: either as an investment with the expectation of a pay-off; or for social reasons so that I could brag to my friends and enemies about how I have an original Billy Connolly. At that point, at least, (and for me), art and NFTs are identical.

flefik09:02:29

> Most of the art market is driven by these motivations, though there are certainly some in it only for investment, but it’s the presence of the former that make it a real market and very different to NFTs. I don’t think that’s completely right, especially not for the high end art market. What drives people to buy a Banksy, is to buy social credit or as investment, rather than have it hanging on your wall. Indeed, very many high end pieces of art are on loan to museums (to keep insurance low), completely depriving its owners of the enjoyment.

rickmoynihan10:02:43

> What drives people to buy a Banksy, is to buy social credit or as investment, rather than have it hanging on your wall Social credit = bragging rights… a motivation for buying many things. For me at least NFT’s have almost zero bragging rights… beyond claiming some understanding of the future of money etc… but any value there will diminish quickly. > Indeed, very many high end pieces of art are on loan to museums (to keep insurance low), completely depriving its owners of the enjoyment. Sure, and I’ve never doubted this market exists. However I’d imagine museums need to pay the owner for the privilege. i.e. the art work is generating an income, because of its intrinsic value, and the fact that millions of people a year will pay to see these exhibits. It’s hard to see such a market existing for NFTs; I mean why would want to loan a receipt?!!?

rickmoynihan10:02:39

I mean I guess a futures market could exist — but that’s very different; and again based on pure speculation, not intrinsic value.

dharrigan12:01:54

Have a look at the video and see if it changes your mind 🙂

flefik14:01:42

I will, thanks 🙂

thomas12:01:49

I was wondering if I should/could make an NFT... I know they are a bad idea (especially environmental impact), but I could use (even a little bit) of cash.

Conor14:01:18

I was wondering whether I should start selling drugs, I could also use the cash. (I really wouldn't bother. Nobody is actually buying NFTs beyond doing wash trading to make them appear valuable so that some sucker will let them cash out.)

thomas15:01:30

makes sense

Aron12:01:44

I've listened to 31 minutes from the video, it's 100% what I expected, very good, sadly I was giving lectures about this stuff some years ago so it's anything but new info. I am basically double checking the content and feeling smug instead of truly enjoying it, I hope you can feel sorry for me 😄

Aron12:01:27

I was tasked by my managers to evaluate blockchain tech. My conclusion after 6 months of intensive study was this: https://imgur.com/a/OxaJfxv

Aron12:01:03

As in, sure, it's a good thing, if what you want is an open system where everyone can freely join and cooperate, you can do one that works automatically, using blockchain, but no company actually wants that. The obstacles are mostly legal and ideological, but it's true anyway. It's just not worth it.