Skip Navigation

Posts
2
Comments
129
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Too bad Trump doesn't care. He isn't trying to make the population happy. It's about control over us and taking away our freedoms.

  • OP is on BLAST after reading this one comment.

  • Whew, I was worried as the infinite passanger on that bus that I'd be put into an infinite room.

  • The only issue is that if I have to travel to an infinite distance to the lobby, I'll never check out.

  • Let's say you have to move to the infinite room. How can someone check out of the hotel?

  • Ain't no party like a search party

  • Well, I'm just going to go extra woke, now. Go woke or go broke.

  • I don't understand how Trump is firing so many people and still spending a lot more money than previous presidents?

  • Link so I can apply?

  • Bittersweet...

  • Yelling at my kids to behave.

  • AOC is a gaffe machine

    I actually think she’s pretty well spoken. A lot of people clip her just to farm outrage, but honestly, we’ve seen (especially with Trump) that out-of-context clips don’t really shift public opinion much anymore, they just reinforce whatever people already believe.

  • Te be fair, it's not much of a concentration camp if people are just going to be alive in there all the time. /s

  • Right, I agree that not all NFTs are illegal just because one might infringe IP. But the broader issue is enforcement, blockchains, by design, don’t offer mechanisms to remove or suppress infringing or malicious content.

    And with legal documents like deeds, I get that stealing a key is like stealing a physical one. But the difference is that if someone steals my house key, I can rekey the lock. If they steal my private key, the blockchain can't "reassign" the NFT unless a centralized authority steps in, defeating the idea of decentralized, immutable ownership.

    Sure, you could update the legal system’s contract to point to a different NFT, but again, that requires a central entity with authority to override what's on-chain. So at that point, we’re counting on some central authority to fix blockchain’s problem of not having reversibility.

    So this goes back to the main question, if we need centralized enforcement and off-chain enforcement, anyway, what actual value does a blockchain add compared to an access-controlled database?

  • Firing volunteers to save money... What?

  • As far as I can tell it isn't possible to create a legal structure on a blockchain. Technical limitations inherent in blockchain prevent this from making it possible.

    • Lets say I mint an NFT of Mickey Mouse. I don't own that image since it is protected by copyright. First created doesn't mean ownership or authenticity. To be legally compliant, there would have to be some central authority to take down the offending IP on another contract, but blockchain doesn't offer an ability to do this.
    • Or lets say my house deed was on the blockchain and a hacker stole my secret pass phrase and took my deed. He doesn't have legal authority over my house.

    Sure we can mitigate these issues with a central authority which can roll-back transactions on the blockchain, but if we are using a central authority then there isn't any usefulness of blockchain over a traditional database.

  • Sure, you can establish a stronger tie between the token and the file by embedding the chain ID, contract address, and token number in the content or metadata, but there’s no way to enforce that tie at the blockchain level. Anyone can still mint a copy with different metadata on a different contract.

    As for legal documents, while storing them on-chain might help with transparency or timestamping, the blockchain itself has no legal jurisdiction. It doesn’t have legal authority, and documents stored this way are not inherently compliant with local laws, so they’re unenforceable unless recognized by a traditional legal system.

  • That’s true, the (chainID, contractAddress, tokenID) can be globally unique. But that doesn’t solve the original concern, it doesn’t prevent content duplication.

  • Exactly, and that’s the key issue. If we need a central authority, whether it’s a game distributor, marketplace, or platform to recognize and validate the “official” contract, then we’re back to a trust model similar to traditional databases.

    Take your example of game ownership. If the launcher only accepts NFTs from a specific contract, that launcher is acting as the central authority. At that point, the launcher can just manage ownership records in its own database. NFTs only add complexity without eliminating the need for trust in a central entity.

    And as we’ve seen with Magic Eden, even trusted platforms can make mistakes, leading to confusion or scams. So centralization is still required to resolve identity/authenticity, I don't believe NFTs offer any meaningful advantage over a traditional database.

    https://cointelegraph.com/news/magic-eden-to-refund-users-after-25-fake-nfts-sold-due-to-exploit