[HN Gopher] Why NFTs are bad: the short version
___________________________________________________________________
Why NFTs are bad: the short version
Author : NicoJuicy
Score : 22 points
Date : 2021-11-19 18:08 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (antsstyle.medium.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (antsstyle.medium.com)
| bitxbitxbitcoin wrote:
| Lesson: HN likes the long version.
| ilaksh wrote:
| Several good cryptocurrencies with low carbon footprint such as
| Algorand, and Ethereum soon transitioning.
|
| The obvious advantage for artists is cutting out the middlemen
| for distribution of their work by taking advantage of public
| financial facilities such as smart contracts for escrow etc. That
| does require collectors to honor the ownership records, but they
| need reliable mechanisms for tracking that and blockchains are an
| excellent mechanism, as well as a straightforward way to
| patronize the creators directly.
| djyaz1200 wrote:
| I'm not an NFT supporter but they might have utility. I'm
| certainly interested in a more robust debate about their
| potential than "get off my lawn". Further, it's silly to imply
| that the current system of tracking + transferring assets doesn't
| have any carbon footprint.
| sschueller wrote:
| "They are bad for the environment, as they rely on
| cryptocurrencies that cause huge amounts of carbon emissions.
| They will continue to rely on these systems for security reasons
| (despite claims to the contrary about moving to other systems)."
|
| Moot point. Some are already proof of Stake and ethereum will be
| switched to PoS.
|
| Might as well say storing your photos on the internet is bad for
| the environment and doesn't provide any benefits.
|
| There a plenty of reasons why NFTs can be bad but this ain't one
| that applies across the board.
| williamtrask wrote:
| Storing photos on the internet probably vides no benefits?
| Traster wrote:
| For me, that version was too short.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-11-19 23:01 UTC)