NFT and the Future of Digital Content
This discussion has been closed.
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
...+1
...cirkey so when will we see a "Zediterod" a "Zed Kennel Club Show", or "Zed County Frog Jumping contest"?
The people making the real money are those selling the NFTs to hopeful fools and those collecting for every transfer - so they need you thinking you have to buy/trade those NFT. Just another stock market game that the house makes money every time you place a 'bet'.
So, it's NTF's as a simplistic video game with really expensive loot boxes. They can try to dress it up with their fantabulous prose but that's what it is.
I think I've run out of "eye rolling" emoticons these days.
Hmmm... I sense an opportunity for an eye rolling NFT... not only would it save one the effort of rolling their own eyes, it would be unique and the purchaser would be the only individual who owns it.
Unless there were other official copies... in which case they'd be one of only a few who own it...
Unless there were lots of official copies... in which case they'd have the honor of giving money to a random stranger...
But most importantly it would be 100% secure from theft... unless the person who created the NFT stole the artwork from someone else, but still by its very nature no one could take that NFT from the person who bought it...
Unless the server where it was stored was poorly maintained or destroyed by Godzilla or something unforeseen occurred...
Regardless of all that, the point being is they'd have at least briefly been able to avoid rolling their own eyes and still gotten across the idea that whatever situation they employed their NFT in, that they conveyed the notion that they felt it was an eye rolling one... and most importantly they'd have spent money in the process because after all what is the point of money if you are not going to throw it around with reckless abandon... what are going to do with it, save it?
Ah, but fear not, the TOKEN will still be unique, no matter how many are minted for the same work. Only the token's uniqueness matters. All hail the token. The cult of crypto has spoken.
Best way to get rid of this is to note that they hadn't had any sales of NFT. I think if I read it correctly there was only $15 in sales. I really hope this whole fad goes the way of the Dodo. At least with the Dodo we truly lost something unique.
...like putting lipstick on a pig.
https://venturebeat.com/2021/05/03/genies-raises-65m-to-boost-avatars-for-virtual-identity-and-wearable-digital-goods/
Interesting article
I dunno... at least the pig would look pretty.
...just don't try to teach it to sing.
Can't quite describe why, but for me the word would not be 'interesting'... more like 'worrying'
https://www.vice.com/en/article/m7eeq8/this-tiktokers-scam-cryptocurrency-took-off-and-he-cant-believe-it
I'm starting to feel like my acorn based cryptocurrency "Wonkles" might actually be worth pursuing...
The following is from an old post or one of my Readmes...
"Bitcoins... Pffft...
Reminds me of the .com days.
Just like small children, investors love playing with bubbles... While I can see some form of crypto currency eventually being a stable alternative currency, I don't think the ones we see now are going to be that, unless there is some sort of radical evolution...
In the meantime these numbskulls are driving up prices for gamers and 3D enthusiasts.
But I'll let everyone in on a secret...
I'm currently working on an even better crypto currency... It's based on a complicated system using special acorns which are numbered and given to spiritually enlightened squirrels to bury and then eventually dig up, each person who purchases one acorn (called a wonkel) before it is buried is issued two bananas which are not actually sent to the client, but are given to a specially registered chimpanzee banana attendant who then eats the bananas and writes out a complicated passcode mostly scrawled in poo, which is scanned and then laser etched into the shell of a turtle (called a "foogie") who is placed onto a series of complicated conveyor belts, some of which lead to enclosures with lettuce or others with lava. The surviving foogies (turtles) are then mailed to a crypto bank in Romania (or somewhere secret) where highly trained turtle whispers spin the foogies on a turtle divination board that's sort of like a roulette wheel. The foogie is spun thirteen times and the resulting numbers are multiplied by the number of surviving foogies from the previous night and then divide by 2.003 and that sum dictates the base value of each wonkel issued before 14:00 hours Greenwich time.
The client is then mailed a specially trained budgie (called a parakeet) who sings them their unique transfer code once before it explodes, which they must then quickly write down in invisible ink in their crypto pass book to redeem their wonkels.
As you can see it is foolproof.
My system is based on a physical item, the Wonkel which can be horded or traded, the entire system is based on a bafflingly stupid premise like all real currency, it involves some degree of risk to increase its volatility which drives its demand, it has an ironclad security system involving exploding budgies and invisible ink and the squirrels act as a randomizing factor to keep it real... This creates a complete system that marries the best stupid ideas of both traditional physical asset based currencies and imaginary wish backed crypto currencies.
Of course in the unlikely event all the foogies end up in lava, the system collapses... Which if you were paying any attention to at all, is clearly mostly almost absolutely sorta fairly impossible.
In fact one wonkel is probably kinda guaranteed to do nothing but increase 62,000% per attenuated monthly polysegment.
Not bifurcated yearly amortized disinterest segment, but a real time attenuated MONTHLY polysegment!
So... All I'm saying is if you don't want to look like the biggest most flatulant idiot on earth, you should get in on this before it goes so big that obnoxious Internet celebrities and Russia billionaires are the only ones who can afford this... Not only that, but by sinking every penny you have into my system you will help drive down the cost of GPUs and you'll then be able to afford a really good one when the Bitcoin craze pops!
Win-Win for everybody my peeps!"
So yeah... It's looking like people are actually getting stupid enough for me to make this a real thing.
Oh, I am so stealing that! ;-)
These companies are basically competing to be the first ones to cash in on The Next Version Of The Internet, which a bunch of influential tech folks have unilaterally decided will take the form of persistent online identities represented by virtual avatars. Ten years ago I would have loved the idea, but given that internet users as a whole are not exactly clamoring for this it's being brute forced by individuals who have already proven they aren't qualified to wield resources and power on the level of a country. They've picked up on the fact that people are willing to spend money on cosmetics in video games, and they're obsessed with interconectedness because the more we interact online and the easier we are to track, the more money and influence they have.
It always creeps me out for the same reason the way Daz approached NFTs did, which is that there's no attempt to make a strong case for it, no "let's experiment with this and see how it goes"--they'll just chirp brightly about how the internet or the art world are going to be and how people are going to behave from now on and forever with total confidence. If people voice concerns or push back loudly enough they'll just incorporate the complaints into their aesthetic; SuperRare's front page the other day was unironically full of introspective calls to action on climate change all centered around an NFT animation about the Earth burning. This is enough sometimes, in the way some people buy "Save the Earth" stuff at Target and think they've done their part by spreading the message.
In any case, Daz has released three core characters since they started this--August, Brooke, and Jazz--that I would've bought without hesitation if they weren't selling NFTs. Even though, as far as I can make out, they've definitely made more money from my purchases over the years than they have selling NFTs, I have no illusions about my relative value or importance as a customer if they see this as the future of their company. The whole benefit of being funded is not having to worry about income in the short term as long as they think they can eventually strike gold.
Pretty much no interest here - any avatar I usewill be forum specific; I will not use the same avatar for multiple sites.
...+1
...and yes I remember the dot com fiasco.
The original Wonkel collector
Isn't that basically just things that have been around for aaages like Second Life and that chat thingy (IMVU, something like that) and those other ones? Those weren't ever very popular.
One thing i've increasingly noticed about "new" "technology" is how very little of it is remotely new, or even better, just rehashed with a new title. Where is my hovercar racing and robot? I can see that 10-20 years from now things will probably be almost exactly the same as they are. Other than companies will own rights to your bodily functions and the phones will have 100mp cameras that are still rubbish (and still pretty terrible at making calls).
...there were supposed to be at least one big rotating space station in orbit, colonies on the moon, rocket flights as routine as getting on an aeroplane, and atomic powered flying cars by now.
I want my money back.
For Second Life to even be a thing you needed the internet, another new fangled technology that I remember a lot of people being very against and angry about and now look at it. Same with mobile phones - everyone has one :) Being able to stream my tv shows online on demand instead of fiddling with bunny ears to get better reception and at least hear the show above the crackling is the best thing ever.
I freely admit I LOVE new tech, especially disruptive ones
This was a very good talk by Charlie Fink about how he sees the future of digital content going in case someone finds it interesting.
https://youtu.be/ZrK3K-B3k10
There is disruptive in a good way and then there is disruptive in a bad way... technology usually is rather neutral, its just that some people are determined to find the worst thing in a new technology and exploit that until it ruins it for everyone... conceptually Cryptocurrency and NFTs could be good, it's just that as long as there are people who are only interested in short term personal gains at the expense of all else, it tends to make it all less of wonder of technology and more of a short term money grab that only benefits a very defined group and few others.
Watch out, the Chia miners are coming:
https://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=1845275
OK that was interesting - never heard of Chia but this explains it a bit more
https://theconversation.com/new-chia-cryptocurrency-promises-to-be-greener-than-bitcoin-but-may-drive-up-hard-drive-prices-160114
I watched a lot of Star Trek as a kid and am also sorely disappointed. I explicitly ordered rainbow space communism and FTL travel, very clearly said no substitutions.
Instead I have been sent a Prius (0 to 60 in... eventually), crippling GPU prices, and potentially crippling storage prices as well if this Chia thing takes off. I remember when "chia" just meant food, or smearing seeds all over a clay sheep that never ended up growing right so it looked like it had mange.
...hmm a crypto based on this?
Crikey I could have got in on the ground floor decades ago.
But liiike, the internet (1983), mobile phones (1973) and on demand shows (1998) aren't really thaaat new? The newest one is 23 years old and from the last millenium..
A blink of the eye :D
I forgot to mention smartphones which would be 2007 when the Iphone made its appearance so we're about due for new tech :)
That's actually even older than the video thing! The first device with those capabilities was from 1992, so the "smartphone" thing was just a rebranding of (then) 15 year old technology..