• Metz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    No, NFTs do have good uses

    I hear that now since 12 Years. Its not going to happen.

    • papabobolious@feddit.nu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      11 months ago

      Without really having an opinion on the matter - I think there’s a difference in having a use and being adopted.

      Something can be absolutely awesome in theory but useless if no one is using it.

      • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        11 months ago

        Yeah I think a lot of people don’t understand that “good for x problem”, “better than existing solution”, and “switching to this solution is better than staying with the existing solution” are three vastly different things

        Blockchain fails because switching to it is consistently worse than sticking with current solutions, and often it fails at being better than current solutions in the abstract

    • Yondoza@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      The perfect use case is tickets to live events. One entity creates one NFT for each seat or spot available and can initially sell them. The owner of that NFT (ticket) can then do whatever they want with it without the need for a third party (Ticketmaster) to scalp the shit out of any subsequent transactions.

      Proof of ownership of a single ticket at the time of the event is the end goal, which is what NFTs do.

      Why this hasn’t been done is pretty baffling to me.

      What’s better, is if artists want to provide a subset of tickets that are not resellable they can. Those tickets will only be accepted if a single transaction has taken place.

      • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        11 months ago

        That is an absolutely TERRIBLE use case because it is by definition centralized. The venue already has ample control over who tf gets in and there is little problem with counterfeit tickets.

      • jaemo@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        11 months ago

        Duranium-on-the-Mohs-scale hard pass. Tickets work fine.

        What’s baffling to me is the ramping up of the 21st century penchant for mindless wheel-re-inventing.

      • Euphorazine@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        That’s not a perfect use case for it. That’s a central authority (venue) selling tickets to anyone who wants to buy them. But instead of using a local database and approving transfers from person to person and losing the ability to reverse transactions due to fraud, it’s hosted in the wild west of crypto.

        There’s nothing stopping a venue from offering your perfect use case in a centralized system, but they outsource it to Ticketmaster (namely because Ticketmaster owns like 80% of music venues or something) so they don’t have to deal with it.

        Your scenario outsources it to the block chain, who will charge gas for the transactions instead of ticketmaster charging fees.

      • FreeFacts@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Why this hasn’t been done is pretty baffling to me.

        Because the blockchain needs an incentive. Who is going to be taking part in the blockchain if there is nothing in it for them? That’s why these tokens are often tied to crypto currencies, as mining is the incentive.

        • kautau@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Yeah why would ticketmaster, who makes a killing having their ticket monopoly and control, develop a system where they lose control?

      • Xanvial@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        11 months ago

        The sounds like scalpers paradise. They can buy multiple tickets and sell it without thinking about any authorization (id card or something) when using that tickets

      • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        11 months ago

        The owner of that NFT (ticket) can then do whatever they want with it without the need for a third party (Ticketmaster) to scalp the shit out of any subsequent transactions.

        How is that supposed to prevent scalping, exactly?

        Proof of ownership of a single ticket at the time of the event is the end goal, which is what NFTs do.

        And that’s better than physical tickets, because…?

        What’s better, is if artists want to provide a subset of tickets that are not resellable they can.

        That’s also already a solved problem: write a name on a ticket and validate that name with an ID.

        • Psionicsickness@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          Just responding to the “scalping” quote. It absolutely wouldn’t stop scalping, what I HOPE op was trying to say was that it could be used to prevent Ticketmaster, or any entity like it, from charging fees on every exchange of said ticket.

        • Trainguyrom@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          11 months ago

          And that’s better than physical tickets, because…?

          paper tickets are relatively easy to counterfeit, especially for the purposes of selling the counterfeits as scalped/unwanted tickets.