Clinamenic
Binary & Tweed
Today is an especially red day.
I doubt he knows much about the tech, but Logo's under the impression NFTs and blockchain are part of a broader move to monetise absolutely everything online;
"Blockchain is hyper-neo-liberalism transforming all digital content into infinitely divisible commodities. We will pay thousandths of a cent for things-- we will pay for *literally everything* in the future Web3-tards are building."
"The whole point of this bullshit is just so that NBC gets 1/1000th of a cent every time someone uses an "Office Jim" gif."
He is absolutely wrong about blockchains somehow preventing the free transfer of information. even if journals were to utilize NFTs there is no functional difference vs today in how easily the information can be sent/shared. the only difference is that proof-of-ownership would happen via a decentralized blockchain, rather than some publisher's private server. One can still illegally/legally send each other pdfs/information- NFTs only signify ownership, they don't magically prevent you from sharing the information of the thing you own.I doubt he knows much about the tech, but Logo's under the impression NFTs and blockchain are part of a broader move to monetise absolutely everything online;
"Blockchain is hyper-neo-liberalism transforming all digital content into infinitely divisible commodities. We will pay thousandths of a cent for things-- we will pay for *literally everything* in the future Web3-tards are building."
"The whole point of this bullshit is just so that NBC gets 1/1000th of a cent every time someone uses an "Office Jim" gif."
Like I'm not sure what world he/she is living in, but literally all digital content is monetized to an infinite degree these days. You pay for everything today, the cost is just hidden behind the data you implicitly sell to google/facebook/twitter.He is absolutely wrong about blockchains somehow preventing the free transfer of information. even if journals were to utilize NFTs there is no functional difference vs today in how easily the information can be sent/shared. the only difference is that proof-of-ownership would happen via a decentralized blockchain, rather than some publisher's private server. One can still illegally/legally send each other pdfs/information- NFTs only signify ownership, they don't magically prevent you from sharing the information of the thing you own.
Regardless I understand the sentiment, however misplaced it is. The property of non-rivalry of information on the internet throws a wrench in the capitalist paradigm, and thus it is (the non-scarcity of data/info) is worth preserving. Thus from his point of view, because NFTs seem to artificially create scarcity and rivalry for goods that do not/should not be scarce and rivalrous, NFTs are bad. This, however, misses the fact that this already occurs in our modern capitalist economy. DRM exists and is enforced by legal means. All digital content is already monetized. At least with NFTs the property system is transparent and (usually) built conscientiously.
A world of old books and arguing on Twitter.Like I'm not sure what world he/she is living in,
This thread on NFTs transforming art just dropped
Yeah you can associate anything with a NFT, in principle, its just too early to see how well the format works for certain assets, e.g. real estate.is nft art always digital art? what i see is just pictures made on a computer such as those pixelated cartoons? can you also sell a physical sculpture via nft? how does that work?