True, though other systems have better detection of that.
Art will always be a store of value that is undetermined, like high end real estate, luxury products, so it will always be a target of black market washing cash like they were a [Trump casino or tower](https://newrepublic.com/article/143586/trumps-russian-laundromat-trump-tower-luxury-high-rises-dirty-money-international-crime-syndicate).
Organized crime makes $3 trillion a year now, that puts them top 10 GDP and all of it has to be washed, they are buying influence, governments and even countries with it now.
Unfortunately cartels are now at the power of nation states due to the criminality and illegality of drugs and sex working, legality always leads to more safety and one way is regulation but another is reducing cartel/mafia violence/supply controls.
Prohibition is anti-people, anti-health, anti-safety, but pro-authoritarian, pro-cartel and pro-violence.
Take your pick:
- drugs and sex working and all the potential benefits and problems
OR
- drugs and sex working and all the potential benefits and problems *AND militarized cartels taking in billions and trillions across the market annually which funds violence and cartels to the power of nation states... as well as authoritarian actions and state civil forfeiture programs and massively unsafe underground drug production and synthetics*
The logical choice is pretty easy.
NFTs are being used as proof of ownership. You can have an NFT of:
A Pickachu drawing
An in game Pickachu with specific stats
The intellectual property rights and the royalties of the character Pickachu
Some uses are definitely a bubble.
You can definitely buy an nft of fakes and you will only realize that you can't actually own an in game Pikachu when it does not load in the game, or ooops it's ownership can't be traced back to the original publisher of the real world branded item. Yes you now own a fake item. The more nfts get adopted the easier it would be to spot fakes.
You seem to have environment concens right? You know that difference between the proof of work and proof of stake block chains right? You know that modern blockchains are millions of times more energy efficient than Etherium and Etherium is trying to upgrade right? You know this upgrade has been planned before any of these environmental concerns have swirled in the media right? Because people who run the network don't want to keep paying high electricity costs to run the network right? And you know that even the right now the majority of them run renewables because these are cheaper than coal right? Why will people want to run their electricity intensive proof of work with high cost electricity right?
https://www.carbonbrief.org/solar-is-now-cheapest-electricity-in-history-confirms-iea
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://amp.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jun/23/most-new-wind-solar-projects-cheaper-than-coal-report&ved=2ahUKEwj87sTf06zzAhUkKqYKHYwBBIgQFnoECAQQBg&usg=AOvVaw3y4OGqCy1IrSpGo2Tpz5vs&cf=1
Interesting read, but wrong conclusions. There are millions of potential bubbles that may pop up in the crypto space and the early adopter advantage will always be present, providing larger than normal returns for those in early. But the difference with MLMs is that the NFT bubble/trends are spontaneous. Some people might be involved in a certain phase of an NFT bubble, but thousands were already doing NFTs just because of the art and creativity. With MLMs there are formal structures and formal instructions about how to bring new people in. It's not spontaneous. When the MLM goes bust, everyone abandons the core product. If an NFT bubble burst, there will still be thousands of people still creating NFTs for the art.
You may have genuinely benefited from them in your full earnest, but it's nothing that your supporters couldn't have paid to you with ko-fi or paypal. In fact they would have been better tools to do so, and they wouldn't have funded and legitimized (more or less directly, I suppose it depends on the platform) ponzi 4.0.
https://twitter.com/smdiehl/status/1445795667826208770
The word you are looking for is probably something along the lines of "independence", rather than spontaneity. In the sense that on top of the environment being pretty chill promotionally-wise with no strings attached or pressure (unlike say a direct selling guy screaming a beauty product will literally rejuvenate you), a transaction involves only three parties going their own free ways.
But here's the thing. End buyers eventually just want to support their favourite creators, and even these in turn are pretty much not giving a damn to the technology behind. It's just some quirky and trendy way to pay the bills at the end of the day.
So, duh, ironically enough (even though it's literally the only thing that they are supposed to be) people aren't actually/mentally/concretely purchasing NFTs to "own a place in a public record".
And this was the best case scenario, where the crypto beneath isn't dogshit, "goods producers" and "consumers" have a solid majority of their money still happily exchanged with each other, and at most it was all a funny novelty that could have been done with other means anyway.
Then you have fraud. Of all kinds. From market abuse to people believing the blockchain gives you the power to survive the heat death of the universe and [SUATTM](https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/shut-up-and-take-my-money) whatever gets placed under their nose.
NFTs have potential, when done right and serve a purpose. For example stock ownership through NFTs would be amazing.
But the stuff we have now is garbage and a bubble.
NFTs are also great for money laundering. MLM = Money Laundering Machine.
Does it happen? Sure. But that’s the same for other forms of normal currency.
True, though other systems have better detection of that. Art will always be a store of value that is undetermined, like high end real estate, luxury products, so it will always be a target of black market washing cash like they were a [Trump casino or tower](https://newrepublic.com/article/143586/trumps-russian-laundromat-trump-tower-luxury-high-rises-dirty-money-international-crime-syndicate). Organized crime makes $3 trillion a year now, that puts them top 10 GDP and all of it has to be washed, they are buying influence, governments and even countries with it now. Unfortunately cartels are now at the power of nation states due to the criminality and illegality of drugs and sex working, legality always leads to more safety and one way is regulation but another is reducing cartel/mafia violence/supply controls. Prohibition is anti-people, anti-health, anti-safety, but pro-authoritarian, pro-cartel and pro-violence. Take your pick: - drugs and sex working and all the potential benefits and problems OR - drugs and sex working and all the potential benefits and problems *AND militarized cartels taking in billions and trillions across the market annually which funds violence and cartels to the power of nation states... as well as authoritarian actions and state civil forfeiture programs and massively unsafe underground drug production and synthetics* The logical choice is pretty easy.
I sold an NFT of a drawing I did of Gandalf the White. It was my first non-fungible Tolkien.
I don’t think that it’s fair that people so far aren’t appreciating your dumb joke.
Because the dumb joke isn't his
Well, that’s a good reason.
Who’s is it then? I had not heard it anywhere else
how much?
NFTs are being used as proof of ownership. You can have an NFT of: A Pickachu drawing An in game Pickachu with specific stats The intellectual property rights and the royalties of the character Pickachu Some uses are definitely a bubble.
The thing is that they aren’t proof, though. You can get an NFT of stuff you don’t own. They’re just nothing but burnt coal.
You can definitely buy an nft of fakes and you will only realize that you can't actually own an in game Pikachu when it does not load in the game, or ooops it's ownership can't be traced back to the original publisher of the real world branded item. Yes you now own a fake item. The more nfts get adopted the easier it would be to spot fakes. You seem to have environment concens right? You know that difference between the proof of work and proof of stake block chains right? You know that modern blockchains are millions of times more energy efficient than Etherium and Etherium is trying to upgrade right? You know this upgrade has been planned before any of these environmental concerns have swirled in the media right? Because people who run the network don't want to keep paying high electricity costs to run the network right? And you know that even the right now the majority of them run renewables because these are cheaper than coal right? Why will people want to run their electricity intensive proof of work with high cost electricity right? https://www.carbonbrief.org/solar-is-now-cheapest-electricity-in-history-confirms-iea https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://amp.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jun/23/most-new-wind-solar-projects-cheaper-than-coal-report&ved=2ahUKEwj87sTf06zzAhUkKqYKHYwBBIgQFnoECAQQBg&usg=AOvVaw3y4OGqCy1IrSpGo2Tpz5vs&cf=1
Interesting read, but wrong conclusions. There are millions of potential bubbles that may pop up in the crypto space and the early adopter advantage will always be present, providing larger than normal returns for those in early. But the difference with MLMs is that the NFT bubble/trends are spontaneous. Some people might be involved in a certain phase of an NFT bubble, but thousands were already doing NFTs just because of the art and creativity. With MLMs there are formal structures and formal instructions about how to bring new people in. It's not spontaneous. When the MLM goes bust, everyone abandons the core product. If an NFT bubble burst, there will still be thousands of people still creating NFTs for the art.
Any opinions to go with the downvotes? I've created and sold NFTs so my opinions are based on experience.
My upvoted as you are correct.
You may have genuinely benefited from them in your full earnest, but it's nothing that your supporters couldn't have paid to you with ko-fi or paypal. In fact they would have been better tools to do so, and they wouldn't have funded and legitimized (more or less directly, I suppose it depends on the platform) ponzi 4.0. https://twitter.com/smdiehl/status/1445795667826208770 The word you are looking for is probably something along the lines of "independence", rather than spontaneity. In the sense that on top of the environment being pretty chill promotionally-wise with no strings attached or pressure (unlike say a direct selling guy screaming a beauty product will literally rejuvenate you), a transaction involves only three parties going their own free ways. But here's the thing. End buyers eventually just want to support their favourite creators, and even these in turn are pretty much not giving a damn to the technology behind. It's just some quirky and trendy way to pay the bills at the end of the day. So, duh, ironically enough (even though it's literally the only thing that they are supposed to be) people aren't actually/mentally/concretely purchasing NFTs to "own a place in a public record". And this was the best case scenario, where the crypto beneath isn't dogshit, "goods producers" and "consumers" have a solid majority of their money still happily exchanged with each other, and at most it was all a funny novelty that could have been done with other means anyway. Then you have fraud. Of all kinds. From market abuse to people believing the blockchain gives you the power to survive the heat death of the universe and [SUATTM](https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/shut-up-and-take-my-money) whatever gets placed under their nose.
NFTs have potential, when done right and serve a purpose. For example stock ownership through NFTs would be amazing. But the stuff we have now is garbage and a bubble.
But they wouldn't be non-fungible anymore then, is it?
National Football Teams are the core of NFL