Conversation

Replying to
The big downside of this is, oddly that it requires too much trust. Ironic for a technology of trustlessness. Maybe there's a no-free-lunch trust theorem here. You have to trust that a) the creator will do something interesting and valuable b) act in good faith in sharing it
1
16
You have no guarantee of either. So this is scam potential. I expect 90% of things done under NFT to be de facto scammy, in that they will hint at future value they have no intention of trying to deliver. Like vaporware startup pitch decks etc. but worse.
happy season 4 GIF
GIF
1
15
So oddly enough, the test of whether there will be value is the old-fashioned human trust way... if the person seems like they'll want to remain in your milieu indefinitely (maybe they are part of your subculture) your best guarantees come from that. They won't want to lose face.
1
17
I'm kinda curious about creating an NFT valuation formula. The individual's past track record and home milieu stability can predict a future via something like iterated prisoner's dilemma ("this artist's NFT experiment will follow him through his career in the NY art scene")
1
10
While characteristics of the work itself (statistical signatures, measures of composability and chemistry) can provide some sort of valuation of the generative potential.
1
4
And of course, the strongest signal is just the buy-in levels of funding themselves. If a set of graphic assets raises $50m worth of ether, there's a good chance the artist will want to double down and do something with that windfall, like make a game or movie or whatever.
1
7
An NFT is (or can be positioned as) something like an unsecured restricted income share agreement (or general value share) anchored on an asset+person. Unlike a generic ISA, it points only to the value induced by “seed” objects
2
12
In fact you could just “NFT yourself” as a simple ISA-like thing. Name a coin after yourself. Done. Null nft with all alpha linked to the minter.
3
10
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
Replying to and
they essentially represent the number 1, which can be a single non-fungible entity or fractionalized for fungibility as a result, they have the flexibility of both 20s and 721s, and can operate in a more computationally efficient way. possibly the future standard?
2