hes not selling me anything, but hes selling to companys who have a choice of the stuff hes making or the stuff others are making as FOSS, and the stuff other people are making is being adopted more than his stuff. I guess that would be annoying.
I do notice how a decade in, the goalposts continue to shift. The millions of users are still nothing, the daily volume of transferred value is nothing, the hundreds of daos and communities are nothing, twitter discord reddit ycombinator, all of them delusional. yes its all just scammers and people being scammed. thats the true reality.
his company makes the closed source financial infrastructure for digitising cash for multinational corporations, that is made useless by crypto becoming popular.
of course he doesnt mention this when writing hit pieces on crypto culture.
lol maybe today on a friday afternoon i do haha :)
but in general the conversations are getting exhausting and distracting. I feel like it is at a point where we will just keep building the things we find useful for ourselves and our communities, maybe others will join in.
hopefully he people with such extreme anti-crypto views recognise that we are human; we'll try and we'll fail and maybe we'll make some cool stuff too. maybe they dont share the same values and maybe theyre scared of what might happen, but the continual insults and accusations of everyone being scammers/scammed because we linked some metadata with some signatures is absurd and weird.
if theyre so worried about culture and society maybe they should take a moment to think of what energy they are putting out into the world and if its at all healthy.
> "People need to be paid to do the work". Clearly, they don't.
im really not sure what you are arguing for here? It seems you just really dont want a person to give someone else money and that have exchange/relationship be tokenized?
because regardless of how you feel about it, clearly lots of other people do want this. many artists and musicians do want this, particularly with royalties on resales.
I make something, I put up a signed version for auction, it gets sold. That person has the version i signed, they like having that, maybe in the future they sell it again and i also get royalties from the future sales. This is a positive improvement for me selling my artwork/music, and i much prefer it to begging on patreon. Even just making/advertising a patreon account is seen negatively from my experience, people would much rather pay me for something than send me $5 a month. I guess the follow up is why crypto not paypal, and beyond the obvious dependancy/fees/region locks, well its just more fun :)
We know that people feel different when they buy things. We know that ownership brings with it a sense of care. We know the exchange of one token for another (be it crypto of pieces of paper or stones) builds relationships, builds community. And a record of those exchanges builds legitimacy. That legitimacy extends to the system, as more people use it the more accepted it becomes.
>that can be changed out at any time by the creator
that would be one quick way to destroy your legitimacy, future sales, and upset your audience, sure. not sure why you'd do that?
As I mentioned to others, remember the saying "90% of everything is shit" and make some time for the 10% maybe being legitimate, maybe having something worthwhile that is attracting all the attention.
Most people I know making art are funded by Arts Councils and government programs. Then there is the private markets, which look similar to the NFT speculation games (go watch a sotherbys auction some time, its eye opening) but with no royalties going to the artists. NFTs at a minimum have that 1 up on auction houses.
Then there is larger grants from foundations and charities, which would fund a project without expectation of ownership on any items. Philanthropists.
Then there is the smaller graphic/illustration commission artists who use paypal and patreon, interestingly they also seem to be the ones kicking up the most fuss about nfts, im not sure why though.
And it is just plainly wrong that artists arent using NFTs, and that it is just people playing status games. Its been quite widely accepted and adopted, particularly amongst those who already deal with selling their works so dont have that hesitation and fear of asking to be paid.
Sure there is abuse and scams, those are the 90% of shit. most pop music is produced by organisations making bland acceptable rhythms with a pretty teen face dancing around to make a company a bunch of money, kinda sounds scammy too. But that doesnt mean theres also good stuff going on. Its up to you if you want to engage with it, but flat out denying it is happening wont make you an expert either.
> I have every single game ever made for every console generation from 1978 through 2002. This cost me next to nothing
I think you are confusing the cost of production of these things, and the cost to you personally.
There is a cost (material) and scarcity(human time) involved in making things. I think we have got away as a society with not paying artists and musicians and demanding their content be free and "post-scarcity". That really isnt helpful to people trying to live in this world.
See Gillian Welch sadly singing "Everything is free now... They figured it out, I'm gonna do it anyway even if it doesn't pay".
> which doesn't really benefit the artists in any way.
the default on most marketplaces is a 10% resale royalty paid to the artist. compare this to existing aucition houses where we get 0. or second hand record shops where we get 0%. or spotify or youtube where the ceos are billionaires and we get fractions of pennies for streams AND have our work surrounded by adverts.
when i look at https://foundation.app/collection/clsfd I see an artist i really admire finally getting paid some money for her years of work and experimentation. and retaining control in that system. The work isnt tied and locked in to this particular website like posting on instagram, the provenance is clear and royalties fair (decided by the artist).
Retroactive sales have long been the way most art (and most stuff in general) is funded. Art is made and then sold, then the artist can keep making things. Someone makes them then sells them then they can keep making more. There is also the smaller market of commissioned work, which is popular in illustration and graphic design, but not so much in fine arts as it strips agency from the artist (you are asking them to make a particular thing). Alongside that there is funding applications via arts councils and crowdfunding, the closest for that would be projects on https://mirror.xyz/
People need to be paid to do the work, so they can eat and pay rent. We dont actually live in a post scarcity star trek world. So we find a way that people can be paid yet the information and content can remain free to everyone. It seems like lots of people like this. For some reason some people really really hate that other people are willing to pay to make content freely available to them. The people buying NFTs are footing the bill for you to have that free information. Sure thats a social/cultural status game with a side of speculation, but in turn we have art that is permeating culture rapidly.
As he is quoting a distortion of Stuart Brand, maybe we should see what he would think? well here he is at the ethereum devcon in 2018 talking about this stuff.
“Information Wants To Be Free. Information also wants to be expensive....That tension will not go away” - Stuart Brand
Think about the whole quote and NFTs will make more sense to you.
NFT != DRM
go wild, right click and torrent. i'll send you my nft images myself if you want them.
the signatures and the economic security of that signature taking place is valuable. there is no scarcity of information in NFTs.
these takes are getting so bad, misunderstanding the point so much im not sure how we get people aligned in the discussion at this point. but in the words of satoshi “If you don’t believe it or don’t get it, I don’t have the time to try to convince you, sorry.”
fwiw lsd is very cheap compared to other drugs/medicines. i can get enough for a year for $30. (ten tabs as $3 a tab, 150/250u == ten strips per tab, 100 microdoses spread over the year, about twice a week).
> I am aware of the existence of Layer 2 solutions, but I'm not too sure that by making a somewhat complicated layering solution to solve scalability concerns on the network that it can achieve mass long-term adoption.
the base layers always get expensive because of demand for block space. but zkrollups get cheaper as more people use them and the share of the writing to the L1 is split between more parties.
solana has the exact same scaling strategy as eth, L2 rollups. but its harder for people to run on their own hardware for the L1. maybe thats something people care about, maybe not. time will tell.
yes, im a big supporter of thing like proofofhumanity ubi, also $400m was donated from crypto to the india covid relief fund over the past 6 months. These initiatives are great and happy to share any you have.
This week, on the back of constituitondao, people have started making other daos for other causes like repatriation of stolen historical artifacts https://twitter.com/bronzedaotweets
fine, i cant be bothered with hn anymore. so you can say ok its discord and twitter.
but crypto is fun. people will keep having fun.
we can ignore that and write it off as has been the case for the past ten years, or we can recognise 10% of americans have coinbase app installed. that this is reality. and people can keep saying "we could do this without crypto" but it doesnt change the fact we didnt do it without crypto, we did it with crypto. and then can start to investigate why that is, or bury our heads in the sand saying "show me a real use case"
we can start to investigate why thousands of people are willing to essentially donate money towards a meme, what that sense of community and collective ownership is about, and what this means for the future, and how this tech is enabling that and how we can channel it -> there already talks of BailFundDAO and ReparationsDAO off the back of this...
Not anonymous, team is very public. because of US law this is the practical way of actually doing it, the alternative seems to be not doing it and thatd be boring. theres been long discussions for days in the discord, if people have suggestions of a better way to do this come join in.
people are very open to how else could we do this and how it can be improved and secured.
remember this was just a joke in a group chat last week, that speed of development will have issues, but community and reputation matter, and we can lean on that as we solve the legal structure.
>No, the crypto bit absolutely doesn’t do anything useful
None of this would have happened without 'the crypto bit'.
People are just annoyed that crypto is happening and theyve been betting against it. they were so focused on the 'currency' aspect they missed that groups of people can coordinate, they missed that a reddit group can become a political force, they missed that people are buying land together, the missed that coordination is the killer app.
HN and the cynics have been telling us for years that none of this would work, and when we get examples of it working we hear "you could do this without x".
yes, in theory you could have a mysql database and a company registered in deleware, and stripe processing payments, and also companies in other countries to handle international payments, and blah blah.....
show me how this would have happened without crypto. in less than a week going from being a joke in a group chat to a registered organisation with $25m funding and a clear mission statement to take something from private ownership into public display.
people can keep dismissing how strong a coordination and communication tool crypto, is or we can start taking it seriously.
it has previously been in a private collection, and without constitutiondao would end up in another private collection.
the intention of the dao is clear, display it in a public museum with free entry.
and yes, from a joke last friday to likely suceeding in less than a week! exciting. the velocity of daos is remarkable, and i think it is a just a small hint of what is to come in the future. and it is coming quick.
(meanwhile i expect hn to continue talking about tulips or something :)
Lots of daos have forums and token voting where you voice opinion, and also have 'rage quit' functions where you can exit and take your share of the dao bank balance with you. They're also often open source so can be forked in disagreements - even by anonymous others (see sushi forking uniswap and taking it in a different direction under new branding).
my experience with daos i have worked with is they are often closely aligned with co-op style organisational structure. the difference is we dont all know each other and live all over the world, some people are anonymous dogs jpegs and thats all i'll ever know about them, some people are present in their irl persona. but its a group of people with some shared aim in collective ownership, this doesnt mean there arent directors and roles, but often you can just start talking and participating and be rewarded. e.g. anyone can write a strategy for yearn, pass it on to the team and be rewarded https://twitter.com/iearnfinance/status/1459658364837896192?...
hes not selling me anything, but hes selling to companys who have a choice of the stuff hes making or the stuff others are making as FOSS, and the stuff other people are making is being adopted more than his stuff. I guess that would be annoying.
I do notice how a decade in, the goalposts continue to shift. The millions of users are still nothing, the daily volume of transferred value is nothing, the hundreds of daos and communities are nothing, twitter discord reddit ycombinator, all of them delusional. yes its all just scammers and people being scammed. thats the true reality.
dread it, run from it, destiny still arrives