-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
A 10-second video clip just sold for $6.6 million
- Thread starter Deleted member 431
- Start date
Art (as a sales industry) is just money laundering. Blockchain tech simply allows this to be moved online.
Isn't blockchaining like mining for crypto? Where does a video clip play into this? Is it like a limitless CAPTCHA or something?
I'm thinking about commissions where the digital artist gives the client a NFT copy and then possibly selling prints of the same illustration. This could be an amazing thing for digital artists. I personally have little interest in this as I just simply prefer the physical object but that may simple be my 'old man yelling at clouds' stance in life.
My understanding is that since this is on the blockchain, you can easily tell who the actual owner of the piece is.
Especially when replicas didn't demolish the trading card or artwork/photo collection market either, or rather didn't dampen the demand.
Like yeah, you can download a picture of the mona lisa and go to your local print shop (or even buy a replica premade on amazon) and "own" the artwork that way, but its not the one sitting in the Louvre. The same concept applies here we've just spent a good 10-20 years of digital content ownership not working that way.
I guess Wu Tang was ahead of the times when they produced only one copy of an album.
I must not be evolved in my thinking, but I don't really value digital goods enough to pay a lot of money for "exclusive" digital bits.
I must not be evolved in my thinking, but I don't really value digital goods enough to pay a lot of money for "exclusive" digital bits.
So, it turns out this is disastrously bad for the environment. A lot of artists on my Twitter feed for initially very excited about it, but are no longer pursuing the idea, because it releases a stupid amount of CO2 due to electricity consumption.
The Problem with Crypto Art
The Problem with Crypto Art
Aww, the tweet I refernced earlier was a pointer to this article. Yeah, the environmental impacts of this are horrendous, all for a buck.
Yeah... Reportedly, Grimes just sold $6 million worth of digital art that way.
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/22338031/1128719691.jpg)
OP
OP
Makes a lot of sense when you describe it like that, thank you. Quite fascinating.
It never fails. There's always some new thing out there to help people that are stupid and have too much money.
I have created a series of NFT collectible photos of my body parts. Try to collect all the parts and make me rich, please.
To be fair, and the article points this out, that the way most blockchain systems today are constructed is the problem, but blockchain can still possibly be energy efficient. It does beg the question of whether or not artists should be supporting this practice until they can be sure of its ethical and environmental fallout.
I thought we all understood stuff like this is just money laundering? The only news here is that they're including digital items now.
i've started seeing the art twitter conflicts, and there's definitely a fissure growing. while there are people who are walking away from it due to energy concerns, there's a contingent that are finally able to make money doing their digital art for the first time ever and don't want to give that up
So In these threads we've gotten to the point that anything of value is 100% laundering. Folks anytime you deal with value you'll get crime. It's not absolute.
hey there's this movie called idiot-ocracy that you'll probably love
it's kind of underground though, you've probably never heard of it
"High art" is just a tax evasion racket for rich folks.
see below
the "picture" is not what is worth, but being "the original"
Block chain is the process of tracing digital items. Bitcoin are mined sequentially by solving a complicated math problem. Each Bitcoin that is mined creates an updated blockchain, which is a record of all transactions of Bitcoin up to that point, and while that one Bitcoin remains the latest one mined, it is the blockchain that validates everything. The blockchain isn't updated until the next person mines a Bitcoin, at which point it passes to them.
The blockchain is literally a "show me the receipts" proof of valid Bitcoin. In this case I'm not sure how they are controlling the blockchain, but it'll only be updated each time this art is sold. Any duplicates won't have this blockchain with them and will be classed as duplicates.
This information is just starting to filter out to the community, I think a lot of people aren't aware of it yet.
I mean the application is that digital content, say a digital image or video, be can be owned - its owner can be pinpointed and declared outright. It's probably going to be a game changer for copyright infringement right?
This is crazy to me too
Wonder how much this would go for...
cryptoart is the nerdiest fucking shit and i feel like im getting smellier just for learning what it is
plus it's needlessly horrible for the environment all so you can prove to other smelly nerds that you are the true owner of a PNG
basically my opinion on cryptoart amounts to: just fuck off
plus it's needlessly horrible for the environment all so you can prove to other smelly nerds that you are the true owner of a PNG
basically my opinion on cryptoart amounts to: just fuck off
