Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

Exterior_of_last_Blockbuster_Video-scale
WWW.THEBLOCKCRYPTO.COM

BlockbusterDAO's plan is to raise $5 million by selling NFTs — and then purchase the defunct video rental company.
Quote

To achieve its goals, BlockbusterDAO intends to raise $5 million to purchase Blockbuster from Dish Network, an American television provider that bought the movie rental company in 2011. BlockbusterDAO aims to raise the cash by selling BlockbusterDAO NFTs for 0.13 ETH (about $530 USD). 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I couldn't quickly find the tweet, but I saw a recent thread of someone complaining of "stolen" NFTs. It turned out that the person saving and re-minting the images was just hosting them on Google, so they sent Google a takedown request and Google removed it.

 

I just find the whole thing so absurd. First, that someone would care if a digital image on the internet had been copied. Then that it's even possible for these NFTs to be minted to a https address where who knows what will happen to the host. Plus, it's hilarious that this technological savior of digital scarcity is saved by issuing a copyright takedown request of a standard web host.

 

It's all just so absurd.

 

So I went on OpenSea and clicked on a random NFT on their front page and checked the TokenURI, and the very first one I clicked on used an https address that was a domain obviously affiliated with the minter. I'd love to know what percent, both in total NFTs and in dollar values, of NFTs resolve to an https address. If you have to trust the domain provider and the host, you've avoided exactly zero web 2.0 gatekeepers or pitfalls.

 

At least when something is on IPFS or something else distributed, there's some case to be made that it's more likely to stick around, but it's still trusting a very new system where even the survival of that system doesn't guarantee the survival of your particular content. Hell, right now only 30 of the 107 public IPFS gateways are online. I have no clue how often that changes, and obviously there are private peers, but it doesn't seem like the kind of system that I'd want to rely on to store all my "valuable" NFTs on forever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TwinIon said:

I couldn't quickly find the tweet, but I saw a recent thread of someone complaining of "stolen" NFTs. It turned out that the person saving and re-minting the images was just hosting them on Google, so they sent Google a takedown request and Google removed it.

 

I just find the whole thing so absurd. First, that someone would care if a digital image on the internet had been copied. Then that it's even possible for these NFTs to be minted to a https address where who knows what will happen to the host. Plus, it's hilarious that this technological savior of digital scarcity is saved by issuing a copyright takedown request of a standard web host.

 

It's all just so absurd.

 

So I went on OpenSea and clicked on a random NFT on their front page and checked the TokenURI, and the very first one I clicked on used an https address that was a domain obviously affiliated with the minter. I'd love to know what percent, both in total NFTs and in dollar values, of NFTs resolve to an https address. If you have to trust the domain provider and the host, you've avoided exactly zero web 2.0 gatekeepers or pitfalls.

 

At least when something is on IPFS or something else distributed, there's some case to be made that it's more likely to stick around, but it's still trusting a very new system where even the survival of that system doesn't guarantee the survival of your particular content. Hell, right now only 30 of the 107 public IPFS gateways are online. I have no clue how often that changes, and obviously there are private peers, but it doesn't seem like the kind of system that I'd want to rely on to store all my "valuable" NFTs on forever.

 

What's good is that everything said on D1P is totally unique and can never be copied.

 

image.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TwinIon said:

I couldn't quickly find the tweet, but I saw a recent thread of someone complaining of "stolen" NFTs. It turned out that the person saving and re-minting the images was just hosting them on Google, so they sent Google a takedown request and Google removed it.

 

I just find the whole thing so absurd. First, that someone would care if a digital image on the internet had been copied. Then that it's even possible for these NFTs to be minted to a https address where who knows what will happen to the host. Plus, it's hilarious that this technological savior of digital scarcity is saved by issuing a copyright takedown request of a standard web host.

 

It's all just so absurd.

 

So I went on OpenSea and clicked on a random NFT on their front page and checked the TokenURI, and the very first one I clicked on used an https address that was a domain obviously affiliated with the minter. I'd love to know what percent, both in total NFTs and in dollar values, of NFTs resolve to an https address. If you have to trust the domain provider and the host, you've avoided exactly zero web 2.0 gatekeepers or pitfalls.

 

At least when something is on IPFS or something else distributed, there's some case to be made that it's more likely to stick around, but it's still trusting a very new system where even the survival of that system doesn't guarantee the survival of your particular content. Hell, right now only 30 of the 107 public IPFS gateways are online. I have no clue how often that changes, and obviously there are private peers, but it doesn't seem like the kind of system that I'd want to rely on to store all my "valuable" NFTs on forever.

 

Minting an NFT with all the image data within it is wildly expensive. I can't find the back of the napkin math I read on the subject previously, but it was something like ~$100 worth of Ethereum per kilobyte. All of these NFT hosting companies are just imgur with a lot more scam. None of them even have the ability to ensure they aren't hosting malicious code. Waka Flocka up there's lost $19k because he didn't realize you should ignore NFTs in your wallet you aren't familiar with because they could be malicious and interacting with them in anyway can drain your wallet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

Minting an NFT with all the image data within it is wildly expensive. I can't find the back of the napkin math I read on the subject previously, but it was something like ~$100 worth of Ethereum per kilobyte. All of these NFT hosting companies are just imgur with a lot more scam. None of them even have the ability to ensure they aren't hosting malicious code. Waka Flocka up there's lost $19k because he didn't realize you should ignore NFTs in your wallet you aren't familiar with because they could be malicious and interacting with them in anyway can drain your wallet.

 

It wasn't even malicious code, per se, it was just the structure of the smart contract :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Ricofoley said:

I find it very hard to believe that almost an equal amount of people own crypto as own traditional stocks. Maybe I'm just really, really, not around the right sort of crowd in real life that would be super into crypto though.

 

I work with a lot of dumb motherfuckers in media/tech/entertainment and they all own it. But no "normal" people I know do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SuperSpreader said:

I work with a lot of dumb motherfuckers in media/tech/entertainment and they all own it. But no "normal" people I know do. 

 

More "normal" people may own crypto than you might think. I know CashApp gives you free Bitcoin if you use their app for buying stuff sometimes. You can also use PayPal for trading crypto; same goes for Venmo. The barrier of entry is pretty much non-existent.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a coworker who's all in on crypto, thinks that it's going to let him retire in his 40s.  He has a bunch of oddball coins he's convinced in a decade will be worth 10x or more what they are now.  He's educated and reasonably successful professionally, but got hooked into the crypto shit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

More "normal" people may own crypto than you might think. I know CashApp gives you free Bitcoin if you use their app for buying stuff sometimes. You can also use PayPal for trading crypto; same goes for Venmo. The barrier of entry is pretty much non-existent.

 

This is super true. Not everybody is a weird crypto bro about it, trying to get people to buy into random altcoins. The embrace of crypto by what are effectively alternative banking platforms for traditionally unbanked people is a story waiting to be told by the mainstream media. It will have huge ramifications moving forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

This is super true. Not everybody is a weird crypto bro about it, trying to get people to buy into random altcoins. The embrace of crypto by what are effectively alternative banking platforms for traditionally unbanked people is a story waiting to be told by the mainstream media. It will have huge ramifications moving forward.

 

Yeah, I don't think there's been nearly enough coverage in the wild rise in digital banking platforms. I know T-Mobile made some news, but there are platforms like Varo, Chime, One, or Albert that have tens of millions of users. That's ignoring the fact that big players like Paypal, Venmo, and CashApp also want to push their platforms into becoming people's primary banking platforms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After a tweet from Paul Tassi, I became aware of Decentraland, which seems to be "Second Life, but with NFTs." That feels pretty run of the mill, and it's probably not even the only game that could be described that way, but what I find kind of demonstrative of the whole hype around blockchain is that decentraland is organized as a DAO, and the value of their coin Mana currently has a market cap of $5.9 Billion.

 

To put that in perspective, that would value Decentraland not far below Zynga, Square Enix, and Ubisoft, but above Capcom and CD Projekt. That gives it a valuation double that of Razer and nearly triple Corsair. All for a game that has a maximum concurrency of ~2,500 players, which (at this exact moment) would put it as the ~280th most played game on Steam, below Fishing Planet.

 

To be fair, those player numbers aren't terrible for a game launched only a few months ago. Still, the valuation of that coin is insane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...