this post was submitted on 06 Feb 2022
16 points (94.4% liked)

Open Source

31190 readers
289 users here now

All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!

Useful Links

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

They seem to be fundamentally at odds, or i don't understand something

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] DPUGT2@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I'm not sure I understand how they create scarcity. This isn't the Wu Tang album... everything put into an NFT has, as far as I know, had another copy out there that anyone could get ahold of. Am I wrong?

[–] MadScientist@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 years ago

the content itself is of course copyable, but the verifiable ownership of an nft is scarce. only one ethereum address can verifiably say it owns that token. by itself this means fuck all, but people are trying to attach some sort of meaning to the tokens, basically just in an effort to make money

[–] GenkiFeral@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago

correct. and a copy of a digital item diminshes the value of the original. It is like selling an empty box and then the fool who buys it brags that he bought the most exquisite item that is invisible! Yes, invisible is so rare, like a precious stone, but even more rare. its stupid. But, value is often in the eye of the beholder. Most items both free and of charge are overvalued (again, value is relative). FOSS is usually undervalued (except it can waste/cost precious time).