NFTs - digital art or something.

[BigTom]

I understand that he retains rights but it also gives rights to the buyer. Otherwise why spend $70M on it? Or I suppose the buyer owns the piece but Beeple is still able to display the works on his website.

The buyer owns the nft. They have the right to display the image and resell the nft.

They do not own the artwork itself, Beeple retains those rights fully.

Closest I can compare i think is with limited edition prints of an artwork.

You don't own any rights to the image, the print is yours to display and resell as you wish. Same with an nft.

In the article it's clear that Beeple sees the buyers as people who want the price of the nft to rise. That's why they are buying it, as a speculative asset and store of value.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

The buyer owns the nft. They have the right to display the image and resell the nft.

They do not own the artwork itself, Beeple retains those rights fully.

Closest I can compare i think is with limited edition prints of an artwork.

You don't own any rights to the image, the print is yours to display and resell as you wish. Same with an nft.

In the article it's clear that Beeple sees the buyers as people who want the price of the nft to rise. That's why they are buying it, as a speculative asset and store of value.

So not such a terrible thing, from Beeple’s POV?

 

[Shippou-Sensei]

So not such a terrible thing, from Beeple’s POV?

Yeah but you could say the same about that time I sold tainted heroin to children. from my point of view it was pretty lucrative. plus kinda funny they way they kept twitching.

 

[BigTom]

So not such a terrible thing, from Beeple’s POV?

Good for Beeple sure but for every Beeple they are hundreds, maybe thousands of artists who works are being "sold" as NFTs without their knowledge or consent.

Just ripped off deviant art or spotify or wherever.

I don't think we can say NFTs are good for artists overall, even if some have been able to use this to get paid where they weren't able to before.

 

[NoXion]

So not such a terrible thing, from Beeple’s POV?

If the only vaguely positive thing left after examining something, is that it makes a particular individual (or a small minority) obscene sums of money, then that hardly seems to balance out all the other awful shit that comes with the notion.

 

[tommers]

Hahahahaha.

 

[pbsmooth]

maybe he could sell it to his wife

 

[BigTom]

Hahahahaha.

and there I was thinking crypto was meant to stop governments printing money!

 

[tommers]

Maybe it's an April fools and they're just a few days late. Do you reckon it'll be monkeys? Or maybe a series of Winston Churchill in day glo colours.

 

[magneze]

Shark well and truly jumped.

 

[magneze]

"Quick we need to distract from the monumental fuck up over lack of help over cost of living"
"Will this do?"
"Perfect"

Public:

 

[magneze]

NFTs Shatter the Illusion of Privacy Entirely
A key component to keeping crypto activity anonymous is to avoid tying transactions to any identifying information. Which means NFTs, by their nature, can fundamentally undermine this goal. The idea behind NFTs is that they are fundamentally unique, identifiable tokens. And while they don't work quite the way advocates say they do, it's still technically true that no individual NFT can be duplicated.

This means that, if a user ties an NFT to any part of their online or IRL identity—say by using an NFT as a profile picture on Twitter or maintaining a profile on an NFT marketplace—it becomes trivially easy to find out what else their wallet has been up to.

NFTs Are a Privacy and Security Nightmare

The blockchain isn't as "anonymous" as you might think.

www.wired.com

 

[BigTom]

NFTs Are a Privacy and Security Nightmare

The blockchain isn't as "anonymous" as you might think.

www.wired.com

There's a really interesting snippet of info in a linked article about the Beeple sale, which might answer Magnus McGinty question as to why someone would spend $69m on the NFT of a Beeple artwork...

NFTs Don’t Work the Way You Might Think They Do

We bust the biggest misconceptions about what "minting" actually means.

www.wired.com

Another benefit proponents of NFTs assert is that they can help artists make money by selling NFTs of their own artwork, but demand for that NFT artwork may be illusory. For example, the jaw-dropping $69 million NFT sale from artist Beeple grabbed headlines in March 2021. However, a few months before this sale, a project called Metapurse had purchased 20 other unrelated Beeple artworks, bundled them together, and in January 2021 sold 10 million fractionalized ownership tokens of the collection, called B20 tokens. Ostensibly, the idea was to let people who couldn’t afford to buy expensive artworks buy portions of the collection and join the speculation game.

The buyer for the $69 million Beeple in March—angel investor Vignesh Sundaresan, also known as Metakovan—also owned 59 percent of the B20 tokens. B20 tokens were initially sold to the public on January 23 at 36 cents per token before hitting a high of $23.62—a 6,461 percent increase—just a couple of days before the two-week-long $69 million Beeple auction reached its end. By the end of May, B20 was back down to trading for under a dollar. As of this writing, the token is trading for 40 cents.

So... 10 million B20 tokens, of which the buyer of artwork, Vignesh Sundaresan, owns 56% - 5.6 million.

The price of these tokens goes up to $23.62 as a result of the high prices sold at auction of Beeples artworks.

Vignesh Sundaresan sells their 5.6million tokens for average of $20 for the sake of easy maths = $112m. Cost of artwork = $69m. Profit = $43m.

not bad for a days work... and you still have the Beeple NFT that you might be able to sell onwards, even if not for the high price you paid for it.

So this is just a pump and dump scam - but not on the NFT itself, on a different set of crypto tokens!

 

[littlebabyjesus]

There's a really interesting snippet of info in a linked article about the Beeple sale, which might answer Magnus McGinty question as to why someone would spend $69m on the NFT of a Beeple artwork...

NFTs Don’t Work the Way You Might Think They Do

We bust the biggest misconceptions about what "minting" actually means.

www.wired.com

So... 10 million B20 tokens, of which the buyer of artwork, Vignesh Sundaresan, owns 56% - 5.6 million.

The price of these tokens goes up to $23.62 as a result of the high prices sold at auction of Beeples artworks.

Vignesh Sundaresan sells their 5.6million tokens for average of $20 for the sake of easy maths = $112m. Cost of artwork = $69m. Profit = $43m.

not bad for a days work... and you still have the Beeple NFT that you might be able to sell onwards, even if not for the high price you paid for it.

So this is just a pump and dump scam - but not on the NFT itself, on a different set of crypto tokens!

And if Beeple was in on it from the start, which reading that makes me suspect that they were, those initial tokens might have cost nothing more than a bit of an admin fee - buyer borrows a couple of million for a day, buys the tokens, Beeple pays the money straight back. Or, they don't even borrow the money - they use the money from the sale of the other 44% of the tokens.

 

[BigTom]

And if Beeple was in on it from the start, which reading that makes me suspect that they were, those initial tokens might have cost nothing more than a bit of an admin fee - buyer borrows a couple of million for a day, buys the tokens, Beeple pays the money straight back. Or, they don't even borrow the money - they use the money from the sale of the other 44% of the tokens.

Metapurse was created and funded by Vignesh Sundaran according to their twitter feed (https://twitter.com/metapurse?lang=en). He wouldn't have paid anything for the tokens, and probably gave the ones Beeple have to him. No need for any admin fees even, just the cost of coding & creating the blockchain. He also would have made like $1m dollars selling the other 50% at their launch price.

 

[BigTom]

Official Formula 1 NFT Game Shuts Down, Tokens Are Now Practically Worthless [Update]

Hello, and welcome to another episode of 'dumb crypto stuff not working in the real world'

kotaku.com

Official F1 NFT game closes after losing F1 licence.
As the article says, plenty of games close leaving the people who have bought in game items with nothing to show for their money, but in this case the game was sold as an investment and play to earn game. They sold one F1 car NFT for $100,000. Shows the inflated price of things when you call them NFTs (and/or the general stupidity of the people who buy NFTs thinking there is some kind of solid value there).

 

[littlebabyjesus]

'play to earn' is the crypto perpetual motion machine.

Sometimes these things are so obviously circular. Where exactly do they think the value comes from?

 

[BigTom]

'play to earn' is the crypto perpetual motion machine.

Sometimes these things are so obviously circular. Where exactly do they think the value comes from?

Yeah, they are obvious pyramid schemes at best.

 

[pbsmooth]

Presumably wrapped up in all these pyramids, alongside the poor mugs, are people invested in hyping the relevant tokens, coin, or NFTs and crypto in general. So a pyramid scheme with a circle jerk inside.

 

[Artaxerxes]

Presumably wrapped up in all these pyramids, alongside the poor mugs, are people invested in hyping the relevant tokens, coin, or NFTs and crypto in general. So a pyramid scheme with a circle jerk inside.

Yes.

Honestly I don't normally recommend Youtube videos alone but that Line Goes Up one is just so good at explaining everything it needs watching.

 

[cybershot]

Fuck off twitter.

 

[magneze]

"NFTs are a privacy nightmare"
Social media: we should get in on that.

 

[BigTom]

Twitter: hey, if we introduce NFT profiles, we'll know someone's wallet and everything else they have ever bought or sold using it. Do you think this information might be useful to sell advertising?

 

[pbsmooth]

Italian culinary superstar Gino D’Acampo launches Play to Earn NFT Metaverse Game, Big Town Chef

Celebrity daytime TV chef Gino D'Acampo is leading an exciting project to create a brand new play-to-earn Metaverse game. Launched on the 14th March by his chef avatar, his crypto gaming team are busy creating Big Town Chef. A next generation metaverse game that enables players to farm, trade virtual ingredients and compete in cook off battles.

All in-game activity will take place in a specially designed immersive and engaging 3D Metaverse environment called Big Town. Unlike other cooking games, Big Town Chef is built on blockchain technology and allows users to earn tokens that can be traded for tangible real-world rewards and collect potentially valuable digital assets.


Famous for his regular appearances on This Morning, his restaurants, recipe books and popular range of Italian food; the Italian chef’s first venture into gaming had to reflect his passion for cuisine. Powered by the $BURP token on the Polygon network, Big Town Chef is the next generation of interactive online decentralised gaming. Users can steer the narrative, shape the experience and vote on the direction of the wider organisation. Those looking to learn more about the crypto space can enjoy the process of growing virtual foods and competing with other players while earning in-game credits that equal real-world revenues.


Gino D’Acampo’s digital game avatar, complete with a bandana, glasses, chef's uniform and chilli pendant, is one of the first NFTs made for the game. This is what helps make Big town Chef so unique. The ticket to the game is the NFT avatar itself, a collectable one-of-a-kind 3D artwork with unique in-game features. With their NFT chef, players can then stake in-game NFT seeds on their own patch of virtual land and grow them into more valuable items. Farmed goods can either be traded in the Big Town Marketplace for rare items and real-world profits or used in recipes for the cook off battles.


The game is currently under development with interested players, investors and collectors being invited to reserve a space on the NFT presale list. A spot on this list means they are first in line to secure the freshly minted chef avatars when they are released. By joining the community on Twitter, Discord and Instagram or through Big Town Chef’s partners, users can secure additional presale spots increasing their odds of securing a rare chef avatar. Each avatar NFT will have different looks and unique skills attributes with many having supercharged capabilities. Securing one of these rare chef NFTs will give early adopters gameplay and earning advantages when the game launches later in the year.


Play-to-earn games often referred to as P2E games, began in 2017 with Crypto Kitties and Axie Infinity in 2018. The model combining gameplay with NFTs and real-world earning capabilities is steadily replacing conventional online gaming. Combining an in-game avatar with tradable NFTs has led to some impressive real-life profits. In Axie Infinity an avatar named Angel was sold for 300 ETH, the equivalent of about $120k. In CryptoKitties the most expensive crypto kitten avatar was sold for 600 ETH (about $170k).


In Gino D’Acampo’s debut crypto metaverse game, Big Town Chef, players can choose to trade NFTs or join the gaming community and strive to become the best chef in town.


Big Town Chef invites players to join their Discord community to be the first to learn about presale limited edition chef avatars, their essential ticket to join the game.

 

[Crispy]

Speaking of play-to-earn, Axie Infinity (the PTE game featured in the Line Goes Up video) got completely cleared out by an oversight in a smart contract last week. $600m in Ethereum stolen.

A hacker stole $625 million from the blockchain behind NFT game Axie Infinity

The theft was discovered nearly a week later.

www.theverge.com

According to Sky Mavis, the Ronin attack was possible partly because of a shortcut the company had taken to relieve an “immense user load” on its network in November of last year — months after the game exploded in popularity in the Philippines and other countries where players relied on it as a full-time job. The system was discontinued in December, but the permissions that allowed it were never revoked.

 

[BigTom]

"Trust the Code"



As ever feel bad for those who have been desperate enough to try this as a way to make a living but there are so many examples of theft via code vulnerability that I just don't know why anyone trusts any of this shit.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

If the only vaguely positive thing left after examining something, is that it makes a particular individual (or a small minority) obscene sums of money, then that hardly seems to balance out all the other awful shit that comes with the notion.

Fair enough. My (very) limited knowledge of it is from people in digital art seeing it as a good thing for digital artists. I haven't checked in for a while though to see if that view has changed.

 

[BristolEcho]

I'm starting to feel like this is the part where I start to feel old at last. All of this just seems fucking bizzare, but it's clear the usual suspects see it as a good way to make lots of money.

 

[cybershot]

Fuck off paramount.

First NFT Collection from Paramount Global and RECUR Partnership to Drop with Star Trek on April 9

Star Trek NFTs Launch Paramount.xyz, a Unified Platform for Fans of Paramount’s Biggest IP and Franchises

intl.startrek.com

 

[Storm Fox]

From Web3 is going great.

The guy who bought 'The Original Tweet' for $2,900,000 has tried to sell it and the best offer he received was $277
So a loss of 99.990448%

NFT collector gets $280 top bid for the Jack Dorsey tweet NFT he bought for $2.9 million last year

After Jack Dorsey made an NFT out of his first-ever tweet, then-cryptocurrency executive Sina Estavi won the auction in March 2021 with a 1,630 ETH bid (then around $2.9 million). A little over a year later, on April 6, Estavi tweeted that he would be selling the NFT. He listed the NFT on...

web3isgoinggreat.com