Just shaking my head after reading this. Truly.
These people are buying what, exactly?
The wisdom in the saying "there's a sucker born every minute" was relevant over 100 years ago, and it's still very much relevant today.
I think I'll stick to investing in what I know.
P.T. Barnum would have loved today's technology.
I know how to fix these for people. Just PM me the login info for your crypto wallet and I'll fix it right up.
What's that clicking noise...
Wow.
Before throwing too many stones - the classic car world puts a lot of value on provenance. Like a car that raced at Le Mans or was owned by someone famous is worth more than an identical sibling. That's putting value in something completely virtual or can only be proven with documentation.
But yeah, I don't really get the NFT thing either.
In reply to Keith Tanner :
The provenance thing is a great comparison. But yeah... Artificial scarcity. The car that raced at LeMans exists exactly once and cannot be perfectly duplicated, unlike a digital file, let alone as cheaply.
Seems like every form of digital security is eventually compromised. I have to confess that part of me would love to see that here. It's an off the cuff thing, and I don't know that I could defend that stance, but there's something about this that feels... wrong.
I'm more worried about crypto currency than nft's.
I don't have to participate in nft's but crypto currency directly draws money away from equities, metals, etc. so I can't avoid being impacted.
Fun fact...more greenhouse gas is released mining Bitcoins than American Airlines releases.
There was not one paragraph in that story that made sense to me.
Bitcoin and crypto currency's are also a prime enablers of the ransomware attacks on cities, hospitals, etc.
People by easily replicated digital assets all the time, software. Setting up a system and claiming it's the only copy... well...
Governments could build a case for banning bitcoins on electrical use alone. Then there is the aspect of money laundering.
Come to think of it, why are they still legal?
Streetwiseguy said:There was not one paragraph in that story that made sense to me.
I was in the same boat. Then I went and did a little research and, uh, I really don't feel bad for these people at all.
Snowdoggie (Forum Supporter) said:Governments could build a case for banning bitcoins on electrical use alone. Then there is the aspect of money laundering.
Come to think of it, why are they still legal?
Eh, aside from the electricity aspect, they're not really different than any fiat currency. Backed by nothing but the desire of the people, once lost gone forever.
And for the money laundering part, does that mean no one should be allowed to start a business either? It's far easier to start an LLC and launder money through it than transferring through banks and exchanges around the world laundering money as bitcoin. Not to mention cheaper.
RevRico said:Snowdoggie (Forum Supporter) said:Governments could build a case for banning bitcoins on electrical use alone. Then there is the aspect of money laundering.
Come to think of it, why are they still legal?
Eh, aside from the electricity aspect, they're not really different than any fiat currency. Backed by nothing but the desire of the people, once lost gone forever.
And for the money laundering part, does that mean no one should be allowed to start a business either? It's far easier to start an LLC and launder money through it than transferring through banks and exchanges around the world laundering money as bitcoin. Not to mention cheaper.
But they burn a lot of juice. You really can't get around that.
Snowdoggie (Forum Supporter) said:But they burn a lot of juice. You really can't get around that.
Considering the hobby that folks on this forum share, I'm VERY leery of viewpoints that the government should decide what is and is not a worthwhile area in which to use energy.
I hadn't seen the "NFT" thing until recently, but I kind of understand what the intent is. They're trying to use crypto tech to create a digital equivalent to a "one of one" artwork on a canvas. Not saying I think it's a good idea or that I'd ever buy one, I just see what they're trying to do.
Just wait till they start putting charging stations for electric cars everywhere. Add large term bitcoin mining and the fact that everybody wants juice to run their households, factories, and offices and watch demand go up. Either the government can decide for you, and with electric car charging stations they kind of already are, or the marketplace can decide for you when your electric bill goes through the roof.
codrus (Forum Supporter) said:Snowdoggie (Forum Supporter) said:But they burn a lot of juice. You really can't get around that.
Considering the hobby that folks on this forum share, I'm VERY leery of viewpoints that the government should decide what is and is not a worthwhile area in which to use energy.
I didn't say I was in favor of the government deciding, I am just saying that the government could build a case for banning bitcoin mining. If electric bills start shooting up, people will start calling their congresscritters and who knows what will happen after that.
Streetwiseguy said:There was not one paragraph in that story that made sense to me.
Streetwiseguy said:There was not one paragraph in that story that made sense to me.
I'm glad I'm not the only one.
So this is like buying a piece of art hanging in somebody else's house, with zero guarantee of the transaction being legitimate, and there is no recourse for you (or repercussions for them) if they won't let you see it or transaction was in fact fraudulent?...
.
Where do I sign up??
All I got out of that was, "NFT = non-fungible tokens"
Otherwise... the whole idea of crypto-currencies seems flawed at this time. I'm sure it'll get figured out eventually, but I'm not sure it'll happen within my lifetime.
I'm conflicted.
I want to mock, as I don't understand any of this, yet they don't appear to be spending any time on my lawn.
I think I will take a nap.
Even in the days of an economy based upon the exchange of gold, silver, and copper there were ways to swindle people.
Both governments and private individuals did this.
Governments adding silver to the gold coins, lead to the silver coins, shaving the edges off officially minted coins. There is nothing new under the sun.
My grandpa, who would have been 118 years old today, told me that when he was a boy the storekeepers would weigh gold coins and deduct from the value the amount that had been shaved off. More than likely the customer had accepted those coins from someone else for full face value so lost out.
Its an easy click away to an online inflation calculator to find out that today's "dollar" has the purchasing power that 4 cents had in 1912 - the last year before incorporation of the Federal Reserve Bank , the beginning of the end of the gold standard, and the start of inflation. When Nixon disconnected gold from the dollar in the 1973 Bretton-Woods conference the hockey stick inflection point started on the inflation curve.
As Robert Heinlein said in "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" > "TANSTAAFL" - There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.
Cooter said:I'm conflicted.
I want to mock, as I don't understand any of this, yet they don't appear to be spending any time on my lawn.
I think I will take a nap.
I don't understand them either, but as it appears you can create a NFT without any rights whatsoever to the thing it represents, I'm thinking about going to the next step and taking this to the next level with Non Believable Tokens. Why sell a token based on one of Elon Musk's tweets when you can sell one based on the Brooklyn Bridge or the Hope Diamonds? People aren't aiming high enough here.
Listening to NFT articles on NPR last week where they discussed people buying various gifs and sound files for more than what I paid for my house, my thought was "there is clearly too much money in the the world for people to be able to spend it on that."
The super rich are literally just looking for things to dump their money in to. It's absurd.
MadScientistMatt said:Cooter said:I'm conflicted.
I want to mock, as I don't understand any of this, yet they don't appear to be spending any time on my lawn.
I think I will take a nap.I don't understand them either, but as it appears you can create a NFT without any rights whatsoever to the thing it represents, I'm thinking about going to the next step and taking this to the next level with Non Believable Tokens. Why sell a token based on one of Elon Musk's tweets when you can sell one based on the Brooklyn Bridge or the Hope Diamonds? People aren't aiming high enough here.
John Cleese is doing exactly that - selling an NFT of (for?) the Brooklyn Bridge. Or a terrible drawing of it. It's comedy, he knows exactly how ridiculous it all is.
You'll need to log in to post.
