-
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.
Line Goes Up - The Problem with NFTs (Dan Olson)
- Thread starter theme park joe
- Start date
- Status
Or you could just answer the question as intended instead of just going on another crypto sales pitch.
Nothing of this has anything to do with exposure as an artist, or describing a comparison to established ways of exposure, or leading to any justification of your earlier point at all, really. Yes, NFT Marketplaces exist. That is not an answer.
But... don't you want to be a boss bitch?
I've dealt so much with scam artists and they all use the same techniques. When your pitch sounds exactly like the ones used by rent to own, MLM, or time shares, it isn't a sign to me that they need a new pitch. It's a sign that their product is inherently garbage and they need the manipulative snake oil tactics to survive
This might be the most offensive opinion stated in this thread so far.
It really is. And immediately let me know the poster was about to say a lot more things that would make me angry
What made you get first into this stuff? What were your initial opinions and first ventures? Everytime I hear about crypto/NFT my brain turns to mush because it seems so esoteric
Tell me you don't know anything about being an artists without, etc, etc.
Also how can you say with a straight face that putting 76k usd to stake is totally fair and accesible LOL
I think he's comparing the exposure you get having your NFT on Ethereum versus other less widely adopted chains and how the higher gas fees of Ethereum are outweighed by the much higher exposure. He's not comparing the exposure an artist gets from NFTs in general with traditional methods of exposure.
My history in poker was the path that lead me to crypto.
I used to play online poker pretty heavily back in the day. Online poker was crippled in 2011 by an event known as Black Friday. A lot of the online poker community gravitated to crypto over the years so that was my first exposure to it. There's a lot of overlap between poker and sportsbetting and offshore sportsbooks in the early 2010's began accepting Bitcoin deposits. I began betting heavily on MMA in the early 2010's so it was always on my radar when Bodog and Intertops began accepting them. I was initially a skeptic but I kept my eye on the space and jumped in when I felt I did enough research.
Most early adopters of crypto did not see it as an investment. They wanted a way to move money around without dealing with capital controls to engage in their socially unacceptable hobbies.
I've only read the last couple of pages so forgive me if I've missed the start of this, but wasn't your post in response to his? I'm not sure what answer it warrants if your assumption of the point he was trying to make was incorrect.
I see this take a lot in crypto discussion. Usually paired with "only Devs can understand!".
Some things are clear:
- The issues are not hard to see, problems of scalability and transaction costs are evident. Not to mention security and privacy.
- If you are smart enough to put together a blockchain in software, you also understand that it is broken by design.
- If you are trying to get people to invest into a technology you know is broken, that makes you suspect.
- The math is pretty interesting in itself, but none of the implementations are really about that. They are clearly only designed to make money for the early adopters, i.e.. the developers and their "in" groups/backers. Transaction costs will always prohibit it from being used for daily transactions, and that is by design. But at the same time it is being touted as a replacements for banks. Hurray for it being open on Sundays, but the gas costs for a cup of coffee is 70 dollars.
- This is shared by most in the field. The "devs" that really into crypto are usually lower level and personally invested.
32 ETH is roughly $76000 as of this moment. In what world is this 'egalitarian'? You're fucking bonkers.
The existence of other NFT marketplaces doesn't mean shit when the vast majority are on the Etherium blockchain and require you to buy into that ecosystem.
The question was: "Please explain what any of this has to do with "exposure as an artist", with giving proper examples, as a reply to "that's the cost of doing business if you want exposure as an artist.". Preferrably compared to far less expensive options, for example doing whatever you're going to imply, just without the involvement of Blockchain tech."
I do not see any substantial answer or examples to this in any of their replies, just more "But Etherium" ads.
Edit: Oh, I see now how it's been taken. Gotcha. Not what I was getting at, but it makes slightly more sense now.
Just get 76 thousand friends to give you 1$ each to help you buy some links to ugly ape pictures, and you're set.
You just need to stop that NGMI attitude, and aim for the moon.
Imagine saying, with a straight face, that a 75K minimum to stake is egalitarian.
A solution to a problem that didn't even need to exist, built by rich people for other rich people to ensure only the rich get richer.
Don't worry guys, you can "pool" your wealth together to overcome this and receive the tiniest drip of the reward for your contribution, while those with the required 32ETH will receive the full reward and grow their wealth faster than you, stake "that" ETH and slowly assume a higher percentage of the total staking nodes/rewards, thus lowering your percentage of the rewards and repeating this cycle ad nauseum.
Definitely fair to all involved.
Edit:Wait did Ethereum just essentially reinvent mutual funds?
A solution to a problem that didn't even need to exist, built by rich people for other rich people to ensure only the rich get richer.
Don't worry guys, you can "pool" your wealth together to overcome this and receive the tiniest drip of the reward for your contribution, while those with the required 32ETH will receive the full reward and grow their wealth faster than you, stake "that" ETH and slowly assume a higher percentage of the total staking nodes/rewards, thus lowering your percentage of the rewards and repeating this cycle ad nauseum.
Definitely fair to all involved.
Edit:Wait did Ethereum just essentially reinvent mutual funds?
Crypto as an entry point for online gambling further highlights how cancerous the whole thing is.
Why paint Dan as a wannabe? You're really clutching here lol.
Every single bit of this post is so absolutely laughable, not a single point raised in here even "corrects" any mistakes of the video, besides the absolute ridiculous "egalitarian" claim. Not to talk about the bizarre Red Letter Media comparison.
Eh, gambling sites and businesses that use crypto generally are very skeezy. Like, most of the crypto gambling sites are rigged. Like, not even trying to hide it rigged. So yeah, it has made it easier to gamble but you aren't gonna win lots because the "casino" was made to take people's crypto because they are too broke/don't have a credit card to play on PokerStars or whatever.
Also those sites generally have an "office" located somewhere in a tax haven that is basically an empty lot.
So that does fall under the entire scam portion.
Yeah, again, I think he was comparing the exposure an artist gets selling their NFT on an Ethereum based marketplace to, say, a Solana based one rather than comparing the exposure an artist gets from NFTs in general compared to traditional methods of exposure.
The stoned ape theory.
Human evolution only came about due to our ancestors tripping out on mushrooms.
Popular among those deep in that psychedelic drug culture.
yup, yup, got it :) Still not at all a fan of the "exposure" argument by itself, but the reply makes more sense in context to me now as well. Thanks for clearing this up!
It has a lot of the same vibes of multi level marketing type things.
Also, great excuse to post this gif
These sites are so shady. "Whales" "losing" 10x or 100x BTC without remorse, and big winners seemingly beating the house on luck propped by deep pockets. They're hiding in plain sight.
Just for some context, 76000 USD are 8 years of my current salary
And I make good money, relatively speaking
But yay equal opportunity for poorer countries
And I make good money, relatively speaking
But yay equal opportunity for poorer countries
Why is everyone hung up on 76k figure?
You can stake with less and earn the same interest rate. You just can't run a full validator node.
Seems extremely fair.
You can stake with less and earn the same interest rate. You just can't run a full validator node.
Seems extremely fair.
Because if you have the capital for it, you'd be better off as a shareholder and spreading your investment across a plurality of industries andhave a vote ina number of corporate governance policies.
How much influence and voting ability do you think you get for $75k, let alone a fraction of that spread around? Even for smaller companies that's a drop in the ocean, never mind a billion or trillion dollar company.
Oh this is an high roller investment thread now. I'll let myself out before the depression sets in <:)
What are you talking about? Who doesn't have several tends of thousands of dollars to chuck into a speculative bucket on the chance that its going to the moon? This is clearly a working class revolution that's empowering and enriching the disenfranchised, the buy in costs are just so low!
So, on the topic of the video
I think it's kind of hilarious and sad that every single ad i got watching the video was for a different crypto wallet.
I think it's kind of hilarious and sad that every single ad i got watching the video was for a different crypto wallet.
I repeatedly got an ad for a service called CoinMe, a very slick looking boppy, musical ad that made sure to remind me over and over that its function was "converting crypto to cash" while it flashed up the names of various major and minor coins
One might suspect that there is some FUD in the air around the ability to reliably turn your crypto into something you can actually spend on goods and services
- Status