You're viewing a single thread.
NFTs were just star registries. Pay a fee, and you can claim to own a certain star.
NFT was SUPPOSED to just be a cheap and safe non-editable contact type thing that you can make with someone so that there can be no dispute as it's fixed and unique. Then it turned into monkeys and that's all it's known for now.
Yeah but it's kind of a problem looking for a solution.
As in, we don't need NFTs to keep track of who owns what vehicle because we have the department of transport (DMV?) to do that and it works well enough.
NFTs / blockchains are just a very slow, very inefficient distributed database. They're only potentially useful in the case where there is no central authority. In almost every use case where someone suggests using blockchain, you can just say "no, just use a normal database"
If you could replace certain expensive and time cosuming bureaucracy that would save time and money and fight corruption and identity theft I think that would be well worth it.
Would it really replace the bureaucratic aspect though?
You'd still need the government department to manage the regulations around what vehicles can be registered, and the practical aspects of transfers.
Really it's just replacing the technology that department is using to store their data.
You are saying there is no use for non fungible tokens but there is and you will eventually see it in the real world(not collectibles) it just takes a while for new tech to be adopted by old industries afraid of change for the better(mainly more secure)
... for example?
NfTs were supposed to very boring, like selling a house with a smart contract eliminating much of what a title company and other middlemen do reducing fees and paperwork(already been happening for the last 3 years). Or gaining control of your own health records instead of a third party for-profit company. This could allow you to be the only person who gives insurance companies or health providers or courts permission to view your records and no one is making money off the transaction as they normally do right now in some companies database.
I don't think a smart contract can really eliminate what a "title company" does.
Can it check for encumbrances like a mortgage? Obtain pay out values for said mortgage?
Can it transfer money from buyer to vendor?
Can it calculate what portion of annual taxes need to be paid and by whom?
The actual storage of the title is a small component of what a title company does.
Smart contacts are exactly for that. They can automate various processes, including payments, data recording, asset transfers, all as long as the pre-defined conditions are met. There will still be things third parties need to do but not everything. Especially proof of ownership or fractional ownership with complex conditions. Very expensive ot just not possible using third parties.
It was always a bad idea though.
That's like saying receipts are a bad idea.
Um, no.
Um, yes. At the most basic, NFTs are receipts.
In some ways, but receipts are generally given for useful things you buy. Not proof that you threw useless crypto at an even more useless entry in a star registry.
I agree. You don't buy a receipt. The NFT itself is not valuable. What the NFTs are linked to is what is of value. All the NFT does is show who owns whatever it represents.
You can link NFTs to green energy certificates. It's the certificates that are valuable, all the NFT does is show who owns the certificate.
The monkey jpegs are not what made bored apes interesting, it was the marketing and "additional features" that was valuable (to some people).
What the NFTs are linked to is what is of value
No they're not, they're entries in a star registry.
All the NFT does is show who owns whatever it represents.
No it doesn't. Just like a receipt doesn't show who owns something, an NFT doesn't either. It just shows who spent money on something.