NFTs had no valid reasons to exist, other than to provide money laundering opportunities and to con rubes out of their cash. There's plenty to not like about crypto and at the top of that list is NFTs.

▲

jfengel a day ago | parent | next [-]

Some artists right at the beginning liked the idea that an NFT contract could let them keep some fraction of the rights. That way, if the work later sold for a large sum, they could earn some money off of it.

But they were quickly disillusioned. The space instantly filled with crap art sold by scammers. Developers, of course, knew that would happen, but artists don't always have that same instinct for the way the worst possible use of a technology will overwhelm all others.

	▲	georgemcbay 17 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> Some artists right at the beginning liked the idea that an NFT contract could let them keep some fraction of the rights. NFTs never provided a single thing that a normal paper contract couldn't. They provided neither enhanced practical protections vs copying nor any enhanced intellectual property legal protections. Any artists who thought NFTs accomplished anything at all other than a brief wave of hype were misinformed.

▲

dpoloncsak a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Non-fungible Tokens by themselves did nothing wrong

▲

horsawlarway a day ago | parent | next [-]

But they also did very little that was useful.

For most items, we aren't struggling to track ownership - We're struggling to enforce it.

▲

estimator7292 20 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Same vibes as "guns don't kill people"

	▲	akimbostrawman 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		So... you agree? Because last time I checked we punish and sentence people for using guns to kill and not the guns themselves. Same applies to any other non human "thing", unless you are maybe Amish or part of some other type of dogmatic religious group.

▲

dieselgate 21 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I was previously a long term dev contractor for a stock photography company. NFTs have function in the ownership of digital assets, though I do not personally advocate for them (the company or the use of NFTs).

▲

pstuart 15 hours ago | parent [-]

Per a cursory question on the Goog I got: 95% of collections are now considered worthless.

I worked at a blockchain startup back in the day and despite the PTSD of working with insane people, I appreciate the concept of the blockchain. I've yet to see any mainstream value in it. Sure bitcoin is worth a lot but it's not because of the inherent value of blockchain finance, it's because there's too much money out there and everybody loves a fat bubble asset.

	▲	Ekaros 9 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I never got what would blockchain do better except maybe distribution. And even there raise questions of efficiency of having data copied in a lot of places. Correcting data is also always fun question. Your keys are stolen, now your house is not yours anymore as record is immutable. Oh it is not actually immutable if someone says it is not (replace it with new record )? What was the point again...