JPG File Sells for $69 Million, as ‘NFT Mania’ Gathers Pace

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

13 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

By people not securing their accounts. What doesn’t happen is people filling out quit claim deeds and filing them with the county registrar and taking ownership of your land without you ever noticing and without any recourse because the documents all appear legitimate. A stolen token account is much easier to prove.

And once proven what happens next? The central authority has to have the ability to modify, undo, or otherwise change any illicit transactions. Because if you have access to an account you can make an illicit transaction look legitimate before it is known that the account is compromised. What happens in this case is exactly the same as the scenario you describe but digitally.

 

Which means there needs to be an administrative system in place for lost passwords or accounts, and you still need user and administrative security just like in any standard consumer facing website or system be it amazon or Bank of America or your power company or whatever. There's always going to be compromised accounts! It's always going to happen! There are ways in which to make this process more secure to prevent fraud or otherwise illicit transactions from happening, (or remedying those which were already made) but that's not unique to NFTs. I'm not arguing against making titling more secure, but there's nothing unique about NFTs that makes it better suited to this task than established technology and security practices.

[Guest]

I’ll bet you $1 that something like NFTs will be the standard system for establishing title on land by the time your kids graduate high school

 

Nothing is perfect, but your transactional database idea is not at all a solution to the problem. At all! Something like NFTs have their own issues, but it does fix the major problem of people filing fraudulent or errant deed transfers that cause literally billions of dollars in stupid insurance products to be sold every year.

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

Just asserting that they can solve these problems doesn't mean they do. As a practical matter, the surrounding infrastructure is more important than the ledger, be it distributed or centralized.

 

As far as I see, there is no benefit to NFTs other than hype. Same for virtually all distributed ledger technology like Bitcoin. Like if you think the current processes are bad, how about the inability to reverse illicit transactions?

Quote

Once the transfer of an NFT, even a stolen NFT, is initiated by the holder or executed by a smart contract with a winning bid, it cannot be reversed by a third party or even by the sender. This immutability is an inherent part of the design of NFTs. 

 

So once the hackers seized the accounts for some of the NFTs on Nifty Gateway, and had they moved them out of Nifty Gateway’s wallets and into wallets whose keys they controlled, those NFT keys would have been unretrievable.

This is NOT a system you want to have tied to important physical assets and it's fucking insane to state otherwise.

[Ghost_MH]

1 minute ago, sblfilms said:

I’ll bet you $1 that something like NFTs will be the standard system for establishing title on land by the time your kids graduate high school

 

Nothing is perfect, but your transactional database idea is not at all a solution to the problem. At all! Something like NFTs have their own issues, but it does fix the major problem of people filing fraudulent or errant deed transfers that cause literally billions of dollars in stupid insurance products to be sold every year.

 

Proof of work blockchains like NFT will never be used for anything on a basis of policy. They are just far too energy intensive. Proof of stake? Sure, maybe, but that's more of an argument for decentralization than anything else. The same crimes happen, they just happen in a different place. You're talking about the difference between faking some documents and taking hold of someone's token. You'd still need a central authority to settle any disputes. Digital theft is far too rampant to make token ownership the be all, end all here. How would anyone go about proving that their token was used in a fraudulent way that isn't just a sidestep from proving registered documents were faked? If your token is stolen, how do you reverse the transaction while being unable to retrieve the token? This is a real problem with Bitcoin and NFT. Billions of dollars in Bitcoin lost to the ether, NFTs stolen by who knows with no means of getting them back. Sure, the current problem is cured, but it just introduces a completely new set of equally troubling problems.

 

This sounds an awful lot like how biometrics are the future of passwords when they just sidestep the issue of weak passwords and don't actually solve the password problem. Both just move the problem somewhere else. Facebook can't manage to keep their user databases free of compromises and we're expecting regular folks to keep their tokens safe? The only reason it's not more of a problem, and believe me, it's a very big problem even today, is because cryptocurrencies are mostly still in the realm of the tech literate.

[Guest]

“Nothing will ever replace my trusty horse and buggy” - the people of D1P

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

6 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

“Nothing will ever replace my trusty horse and buggy” - the people of D1P

[Ghost_MH]

16 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

“Nothing will ever replace my trusty horse and buggy” - the people of D1P

 

Nah, that's not true either. The actual future would be a combination of things, but the blockchain here would not be customer-facing. Think, a government managed proof of stake blockchain with tokens managed in a transactional databases managed by banks, insurance companies, the county registrar, DMV, whoever. In the end, it still looks the same for regular folks, but works differently on the backend.

 

The problem with fraudulent crypto transactions is that even if you can prove the fraud, if the tokens are forever lost, you can't reverse them. The only way to reverse them would be reversing ALL transactions and that's only realistically possible if the entire blockchain is managed by a single entity. Another way to do it would anathema to the entire idea of unique tokens. That is, just generating a new token to replace the stolen one. If you own an NFT and lose your token, the NFT is lost forever and nobody can do anything about it. That's not really a big deal when that token represents a JPG. It's a bit more of a big deal with that token represents millions of dollars worth of Bitcoin, but those are also just ones and zeros, so nothing was really lost, more like made unredeemable. It's a whole other issue when that token represents a house that didn't also just disappear and is very real and taking up space in the physical world and has people living in it.

 

When we're talking about money, this sucks, but it's not breaking society...

 

Tens of billions worth of Bitcoin have been locked by people who forgot their key. - The New York Times

WWW.NYTIMES.COM

 

This problem cannot come for physical goods unless the default solution is just to have the government claim ownership of everything in no-owners' land. That doesn't seem ideal, though.

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

8 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

That doesn't seem ideal, though.

Speak for yourself bub

[Guest]

Read up on title fraud and how it is accomplished then we can actually discuss how none of what you just said is a solution to the issue of title theft. Your proposed solution literally just digitizes the problem that already exists.

[Ghost_MH]

1 minute ago, sblfilms said:

Read up on title fraud and how it is accomplished then we can actually discuss how none of what you just said is a solution to the issue of title theft. Your proposed solution literally just digitizes the problem that already exists.

 

Yeah, but just moving everything into the blockchain just exchanges the current problems for a different set of equally troublesome problems. One problem isn't better or worse than the next problem, but there are some weird side effects here.

 

If I lose the title to my car I can go to the RMV (sue me, Massachusetts doesn't do your regular ass DMV) and buy a new title. If I lost the token representing the title to my car, it's lost forever and ownership of the car is also lost forever. The car will then need to be junked/crushed because how can ownership of it ever be proven again? What's the solution there? A central authority with a database of all tokens? Just shred the car? Have the government take ownership of the car and use it along with others like it to build a levy for the incoming sea level rise? Generate a new token, thus invalidating the entire premise of unique tokens for unique items? Which token would even be valid then? I guess you'd need another token to track the transaction of the physical car from one token to another without needing ownership of the originating token.

 

Want to tie your car's token to a biometric token? Good luck since your biometric token is just a digital representation of your squishy human parts. The worse part of biometrics is that losing that digital representation leaves you unable to change it in the future without some fun sounding surgery.

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

3 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

Yeah, but just moving everything into the blockchain just exchanges the current problems for a different set of equally troublesome problems. One problem isn't better or worse than the next problem, but there are some weird side effects here.

 

If I lose the title to my car I can go to the RMV (sue me, Massachusetts doesn't do your regular ass DMV) and buy a new title. If I lost the token representing the title to my car, it's lost forever and ownership of the car is also lost forever. The car will then need to be junked/crushed because how can ownership of it ever be proven again? What's the solution there? A central authority with a database of all tokens? Just shred the car? Have the government take ownership of the car and use it along with others like it to build a levy for the incoming sea level rise? Generate a new token, thus invalidating the entire premise of unique tokens for unique items? Which token would even be valid then? I guess you'd need another token to track the transaction of the physical car from one token to another without needing ownership of the originating token.

 

Want to tie your car's token to a biometric token? Good luck since your biometric token is just a digital representation of your squishy human parts. The worse part of biometrics is that losing that digital representation leaves you unable to change it in the future without some fun sounding surgery.

In short: blockchain/NFTs/whatever also do nothing with regard to title fraud or related crimes.

 

If there's something missing from this post more than "read up on this"

[Guest]

I don't know why you guys are stuck thinking that none of these issues can be addressed as this sort of technology matures. It is mostly all still in the proof-of-concept stage, but the ways in which this sort of thing can solve major problems of today is pretty obvious and it amuses me that you don't see it and instead fixate on potential pitfalls as if there are perfect systems. You both really would be at home in the pre-computer world when digitization of all sorts of legal documents was on the horizon and people couldn't conceptualize the benefits of moving beyond paper. I'm going to screenshot this thread and turn it info an NFT that I'll transfer to you in a decade when it turns out I was absolutely correct about where we were headed  

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

You're right we're just some idiot luddites who can't see the potential of this clearly glorious technology which is extremely useful with clearly communicated and obvious use cases that aren't already easily solved by existing technology to keep track of transactions

[Anathema-]

4 hours ago, sblfilms said:

That does not solve title theft. Solve that one.

 

Title locks. 

 

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, Anathema- said:

 

Title locks. 

 

 

Is just another type of title insurance  

 

 

13 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

You're right we're just some idiot luddites who can't see the potential of this clearly glorious technology which is extremely useful with clearly communicated and obvious use cases that aren't already easily solved by existing technology to keep track of transactions

You have shown NO example of how to solve with with existing technology. What is the existing technology solution to people filing fake or errant deeds on land?

[Ghost_MH]

20 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

I don't know why you guys are stuck thinking that none of these issues can be addressed as this sort of technology matures. It is mostly all still in the proof-of-concept stage, but the ways in which this sort of thing can solve major problems of today is pretty obvious and it amuses me that you don't see it and instead fixate on potential pitfalls as if there are perfect systems. You both really would be at home in the pre-computer world when digitization of all sorts of legal documents was on the horizon and people couldn't conceptualize the benefits of moving beyond paper. I'm going to screenshot this thread and turn it info an NFT that I'll transfer to you in a decade when it turns out I was absolutely correct about where we were headed  

 

I think what's lost in translation here is that you haven't explained why any of the real already in existence problems with blockchain wouldn't be a problem when trying to affix virtual tokens into physical goods. Like, I totally agree with you that the current problems goes away. I just don't see how a whole new set of problems, problems that already exist in a world where only the most tech savvy are using the technology, isn't just swapping one set of problems for a whole other set of problems that also consumes a huge amount of compute.

 

I'll make this simple. My mom owns a house. She stores the token for her property with her insurance company. Insurance company is irresponsible with their data and lose the token. What happens then when my mother wants to sell the house? My mother didn't trust the insurance company so she stores the token on her laptop. She gets hit with a "your computer has a virus" scam that steals her token. What does she do then? She stores her token at Iron Mountain, but gets social engineered into giving up access to her token. What does she do then?

 

I'm not giving you any theoretical examples. Those are so real ones that already happen today. There isn't even a way to reverse fraudulent blockchain transactions, so yes, we can catch those fraudulent transactions and then do what with them? Issue a change that the previous token was fraudulent and then issue a new token to replace the old one? Who keeps track of that change? It can't be the blockchain because then anyone can make similar changes.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

I think what's lost in translation here is that you haven't explained why any of the real already in existence problems with blockchain wouldn't be a problem when trying to affix virtual tokens into physical goods. Like, I totally agree with you that the current problems goes away. I just don't see how a whole new set of problems, problems that already exist in a world where only the most tech savvy are using the technology, isn't just swapping one set of problems for a whole other set of problems that also consumes a huge amount of compute.

 

I'll make this simple. My mom owns a house. She stores the token for her property with her insurance company. Insurance company is irresponsible with their data and lose the token. What happens then when my mother wants to sell the house? My mother didn't trust the insurance company so she stores the token on her laptop. She gets hit with a "your computer has a virus" scam that steals her token. What does she do then? She stores her token at Iron Mountain, but gets social engineered into giving up access to her token. What does she do then?

 

I'm not giving you any theoretical examples. Those are so real ones that already happen today. There isn't even a way to reverse fraudulent blockchain transactions, so yes, we can catch those fraudulent transactions and then do what with them? Issue a change that the previous token was fraudulent and then issue a new token to replace the old one? Who keeps track of that change? It can't be the blockchain because then anyone can make similar changes.

 

I don't know why you want to come up with these problems to a system that does not exist. Who knows how all of this will fit together? This stuff is a decade+ away. Even the legal system will have to adjust to digital provenance for physical assets. But it is coming, it does solve particular problems, and there will be new issues that need solutions that maybe haven't been invented at this point.

[Kal-El814]

 

[Ghost_MH]

1 minute ago, sblfilms said:

 

I don't know why you want to come up with these problems to a system that does not exist. Who knows how all of this will fit together? This stuff is a decade+ away. Even the legal system will have to adjust to digital provenance for physical assets. But it is coming, it does solve particular problems, and there will be new issues that need solutions that maybe haven't been invented at this point.

 

That explains it then. I don't know if your raise it, but all of this system already exists, so I'm not talking about problems in a system that doesn't exist. These are problems today that already happen.

 

What I suggested previously was the future is how financial institutions are already using blockchain.

 

JPMorgan and Citi are using blockchain technology, and other banks are considering allowing clients to hold crypto in bank accounts, Bank of America research finds | Currency News | Financial and Business News | Markets Insider

MARKETS.BUSINESSINSIDER.COM

---

BofA analysts found that 21% of banks they cover have incorporated blockchain technology into their businesses in some form.

 

That's the real future here. Using the blockchain as a sort of digital ledger without the need for a large and centrally managed database. Why this works best because the entire blockchain is controlled by a single entity, so things like roll backs can happen and the worry over overly compute heavy transactions don't really exist because we're trading server hosting smaller proof of stake nodes along the chain with entire datacenters housing databases tracking all of this stuff.

 

Like I said, proof of work crypto like NFT is a deadend technology. Half this country might not believe climate change is a thing, but future generations aren't going to be so happy to see all their electricity being wasted away on crypto.

 

Either way, in the end, how much of your family do you trust to forever keep a single file on their computer safe? Now remember that when I ask that companies like Facebook, RSA, Equifax, Yahoo, Blue Cross, JPMogan, LinkedIn, and others have failed that very same task.

 

I'm an IT pro with a secret security clearance working for a government contractor with a background in security. I don't trust myself with such a thing. My suggestion to anybody would be this. Get two secured USB drives like the ones from Apricorn and place them in two fire proof safes in two different buildings at least 20 miles from one another and then pray that works out for you. You so need to keep the combination to the safe and USB drive secured. Maybe you can trust those I'm an encrypted file in your Google Drive.

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

5 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

 

Is just another type of title insurance  

 

 

You have shown NO example of how to solve with with existing technology. What is the existing technology solution to people filing fake or errant deeds on land?

It's generally the same way that other industries deal with fraud and fraudulent transactions, and it's not really technical solutions that help (outside up keeping software updated and doing security testing). For example, physical mail gets generated and sent whenever changes to an account (a deed in this case I suppose) are made, longer time-frames to execute contracts or a greater role of reviewing transactions, multi factor authentication for account access, things of that nature. And that seems to be only part of the equation. There's also the constant vigilance on the legitimate deed owners part to ensure they aren't a victim of fraud by checking periodically with their credit reports and with the county accessors office (or similar agency)

 

Because NFTs are a type of database at heart, they should be able to do everything they do in order to be functionally useful. That is (as one example), if someone loses their token they should be able to somehow recover it. In a distributed system there is no moderator or administrator, and this is by design, there is no way to recover your token. So your plot of land belongs to whom? How can you prove it is yours without the token? How can you sell or transfer the land without the legitimate token?

 

With a centralized administration of a database, you can get access or your data back, there is a way to remedy your situation even if it is ugly or difficult. The system of record is controlled and not left in the wild.

 

You can't just handwaive this shit away as you have been! It's quite clear you're not understanding how these things would be used in the real world and are either wholly ignorant of how technical processes functionally work (and hide behind some bullshit futurism to gloss over problems) or you're just trolling.

 

This blockchain stuff is essentially a unifunctional distributed database to record transactions, it doesn't allow you to manage those transactions. It doesn't have an undo button making it beyond useless for anything of actual value.

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

That explains it then. I don't know if your raise it, but all of this system already exists, so I'm not talking about problems in a system that doesn't exist. These are problems today that already happen.

 

There absolutely is not a system in place to tokenize our land titles. I'm completely bewildered by how you are misunderstanding what I'm saying here, but you keep arguing against something I'm not even suggesting!

 

5 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

It's generally the same way that other industries deal with fraud and fraudulent transactions, and it's not really technical solutions that help (outside up keeping software updated and doing security testing). For example, physical mail gets generated and sent whenever changes to an account (a deed in this case I suppose) are made, longer time-frames to execute contracts or a greater role of reviewing transactions, multi factor authentication for account access, things of that nature. And that seems to be only part of the equation. There's also the constant vigilance on the legitimate deed owners part to ensure they aren't a victim of fraud by checking periodically with their credit reports and with the county accessors office (or similar agency)

 

Because NFTs are a type of database at heart, they should be able to do everything they do in order to be functionally useful. That is (as one example), if someone loses their token they should be able to somehow recover it. In a distributed system there is no moderator or administrator, and this is by design, there is no way to recover your token. So your plot of land belongs to whom? How can you prove it is yours without the token? How can you sell or transfer the land without the legitimate token?

 

With a centralized administration of a database, you can get access or your data back, there is a way to remedy your situation even if it is ugly or difficult. The system of record is controlled and not left in the wild.

 

You can't just handwaive this shit away as you have been! It's quite clear you're not understanding how these things would be used in the real world and are either wholly ignorant of how technical processes functionally work (and hide behind some bullshit futurism to gloss over problems) or you're just trolling.

 

This blockchain stuff is essentially a unifunctional distributed database to record transactions, it doesn't allow you to manage those transactions. It doesn't have an undo button making it beyond useless for anything of actual value.

 

I don't think NFTs as they currently exist are making their way into our lives, but the underlying notion of digital tokens that represent physical goods is undeniably the future of real estate transactions. I don't think any of you would bet the other side of that argument with real money because we all know it is true.

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

7 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

 

There absolutely is not a system in place to tokenize our land titles. I'm completely bewildered by how you are misunderstanding what I'm saying here, but you keep arguing against something I'm not even suggesting!

 

 

I don't think NFTs as they currently exist are making their way into our lives, but the underlying notion of digital tokens that represent physical goods is undeniably the future of real estate transactions. I don't think any of you would bet the other side of that argument with real money because we all know it is true.

Lol

[Guest]

1 minute ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

Lol

Much clarity!

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

The undeniability of digital tokens representing physical goods being the future of real estate is a stupid idea. Might there be some part? Maybe? Will it be the system of record for transactions? Lmao no. All blockchain products have the same issues as we've gone over here repeatedly and associating a token with a physical good doesn't change that!

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

The undeniability of digital tokens representing physical goods being the future of real estate is a stupid idea. Might there be some part? Maybe? Will it be the system of record for transactions? Lmao no. All blockchain products have the same issues as we've gone over here repeatedly and associating a token with a physical good doesn't change that!

 

How you use something actually matters. You lack imagination which is why you're so obsessed with technology as it is today! 

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

10 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

 

How you use something actually matters. You lack imagination which is why you're so obsessed with technology as it is today! 

It's ok to admit you don't know what you're talking about

[Guest]

Just now, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

It's ok to admit you don't know what you're talking about

Come to Houston and I’ll show you what the company my brothers and I started are working on. I’ve spent way more time than I can count on this. 
 

Again, you lack imagination. But that’s why some people work for the man and other people become the man  

[Ghost_MH]

1 hour ago, sblfilms said:

There absolutely is not a system in place to tokenize our land titles. I'm completely bewildered by how you are misunderstanding what I'm saying here, but you keep arguing against something I'm not even suggesting!

 

I don't think NFTs as they currently exist are making their way into our lives, but the underlying notion of digital tokens that represent physical goods is undeniably the future of real estate transactions. I don't think any of you would bet the other side of that argument with real money because we all know it is true.

 

That's literally what I said was the future. Twice. I have you multiple examples of how blockchain is the future, just not in the way you might be envisioning. I mean, completely doing away with the entire concept of ownership would also do away with title fraud, but that's probably not an equitable solution for you because it raises other problems. It's the same thing here.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Ghost_MH said:

I don't know if your raise it, but all of this system already exists, so I'm not talking about problems in a system that doesn't exist. 

How are you talking about the future when you explicitly say these systems already exist?

[Air_Delivery]

1 hour ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

That explains it then. I don't know if your raise it, but all of this system already exists, so I'm not talking about problems in a system that doesn't exist. These are problems today that already happen.

 

What I suggested previously was the future is how financial institutions are already using blockchain.

 

JPMorgan and Citi are using blockchain technology, and other banks are considering allowing clients to hold crypto in bank accounts, Bank of America research finds | Currency News | Financial and Business News | Markets Insider

MARKETS.BUSINESSINSIDER.COM

---

BofA analysts found that 21% of banks they cover have incorporated blockchain technology into their businesses in some form.

 

That's the real future here. Using the blockchain as a sort of digital ledger without the need for a large and centrally managed database. Why this works best because the entire blockchain is controlled by a single entity, so things like roll backs can happen and the worry over overly compute heavy transactions don't really exist because we're trading server hosting smaller proof of stake nodes along the chain with entire datacenters housing databases tracking all of this stuff.

 

Like I said, proof of work crypto like NFT is a deadend technology. Half this country might not believe climate change is a thing, but future generations aren't going to be so happy to see all their electricity being wasted away on crypto.

 

Either way, in the end, how much of your family do you trust to forever keep a single file on their computer safe? Now remember that when I ask that companies like Facebook, RSA, Equifax, Yahoo, Blue Cross, JPMogan, LinkedIn, and others have failed that very same task.

 

I'm an IT pro with a secret security clearance working for a government contractor with a background in security. I don't trust myself with such a thing. My suggestion to anybody would be this. Get two secured USB drives like the ones from Apricorn and place them in two fire proof safes in two different buildings at least 20 miles from one another and then pray that works out for you. You so need to keep the combination to the safe and USB drive secured. Maybe you can trust those I'm an encrypted file in your Google Drive.

I use M-DISCs in a fire safe

 

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

7 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

Come to Houston and I’ll show you what the company my brothers and I started are working on. I’ve spent way more time than I can count on this. 
 

Again, you lack imagination. But that’s why some people work for the man and other people become the man  

Do your brothers know that you don't know what you're talking about yet or nah

[Guest]

1 minute ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

Do your brothers know that you don't know what you're talking about yet or nah

They are the software engineers. They solve the problems, I get them money! 

[Ghost_MH]

30 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

How are you talking about the future when you explicitly say these systems already exist?

 

Because it's all very preliminary. Even being generous, we're looking at less than a third of financial institutions using the blockchain to manage internal transactions. I don't know of a one that has moved entirely to blockchain. I don't think anyone has moved all of their transactions to the blockchain, though there are some companies working on a blockchain standard for transferring money between banks. Banks are our best indication of the way the market is moving and how the tech is to be used in the future. They're wildly stubborn and crazy risk adverse. Banks can't leave to fate the chance of a faulty backup losing them a token representing billions of dollars. Hell, I know a Deutsche Bank office that was still using AS/400 within the just few years and that shit was discontinued nearly a decade ago. Even then, it was already ancient. They're more zealous with their own money and systems for tracking it than they are with yours.

 

Even then, at best you're suggesting that cryptocurrencies will inspire someone to create something that isn't cryptocurrency, but steals some underlying ideas that will go on to manage ownership of physical goods. Sure. Maybe. Probably. The key components of the blockchain and all cryptocurrency are non-fungible tokens that represent something else where the transactions of such are stored in a widely, peer-to-peer distributed database. Anything that doesn't have non-fungible tokens or a widely, peer-to-peer distributed database is something completely different. If we don't have non-fungible tokens, anyone can spoof any other transaction. If it's not a widely, peer-to-peer distributed database then it's no different than any other database technology as they currently exist.

 

Nobody can be trusted to keep a single file safe forever. I wouldn't trust Google to do it. I wouldn't trust Apple. I wouldn't trust Microsoft. I wouldn't trust the DoD. I don't trust Iron Mountain to do it for me and I don't know how many millions of dollars I've given them over the years to do just that. If you think you could keep a token safe forever, you are vastly overestimating yourself and your future luck. Everyone is a meteor strike away from losing anything they think is safe. There's an entire industry worth many billions trying to solve this problem and the best solution we have to date is lock up multiple copies in fire proof safes, miles apart.

[Kal-El814]

This whole conversation reminds me of tech that was developed at my previous company. They had fitness trackers and had hacked PDAs to collect data from them that could then be transferred to a computer. They built scales that could do this, glucometers, used (among other things) Apple Newtons so that the handwriting recognition would make data entry of things that couldn't be captured by trackers easier for the user.

 

The problem was this shit happened in the late 90's / dot com boom. The tech involved a shitload of cables, the fitness tracker would give Batman's utility belt size envy, you had to replace batteries all the time, carry around an Apple Newton, etc. The founder of the company has patents on all of this stuff.

 

The idea and the tech were ahead of their time and when companies like Fitbit came around they'd moved onto other things and the patents were specific enough that the founder couldn't go after them.

 

I don't think there's any doubt that at some point things like proof of ownership of physical goods will get more advanced than a physical slice of paper in an office somewhere or some bits of data, as  Ghost said, on redundant servers in different physical locations to guard against catastrophe. I don't think we have direct line of sight on what that's going to end up being right now, as NFTs / blockchain create more problems than they solve.

 

So do I think someone's going to invent the car to the current horse drawn carriage? Yeah, I do. But if I'm on my horse now, I don't see an NFT / public ledger in their current form being the equivalent of the automobile, anymore than you could look at my old company's enormous utility belt, Apple Newton, sync cables, etc. and a Fitbit and see the connective tissue.

[Jason]

LOL, disappearing records is definitely what you want for land titling.

 

 

People's Expensive NFTs Keep Vanishing. This Is Why

WWW.VICE.COM

---

“There was no history of my ever purchasing it, or ever owning it,” said one confused NFT buyer. “Now there’s nothing. My money’s gone.”