484
submitted 1 week ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago

One of the things blockchain could do is become a digital proof of ownership, augmenting or replacing things like property deeds and car titles. We already agree that a written record of ownership of such things is legally binding (even if the writing is stored digitally), but transfer of that ownership to another person is still a very manual process. Imagine an NFT that represents ownership of your house, and when you want to sell your house, you transfer that NFT to someone else's custody - adding their ownership information to it. It would record the entire chain of ownership, and specific details about the piece of property involved.

[-] [email protected] 12 points 1 week ago

And who would the largest nodes on that blockchain be? The banks? Who could say and do whatever they conspired since they command >50% of the computing power and/or value?

The average person isn’t going to build a fucking blockchain node just to keep the deed to their house.

“Grandma, please you need to fill your basement with these ASICs or else script kiddies will steal your house”

[-] [email protected] -3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

That's not how that works.

NFT is issued determining ownership to a property. Property sells, another NFT is issued, tied to the original one to maintain a chain of ownership. Issuance of a second NFT for a sale to a new owner would depend on authorization by the previous NFT holder. Lienholder information could also be stored, and linked to a mortgage NFT with payment history.

The "NF" part of that stands for "non-fungible." As in, once created, cannot be changed.

[-] [email protected] 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

They're not making a technical argument but a practical one.

Who ever owns the chain is the ACTUAL owner of the NFTs. Who ever owns the physical hardware is the ACTUAL controller of the chain.

The problem with NFTs is ... they only solve theoretical problems, not problems in the real world, where it ALWAYS takes agreement and cooperation for anything to ACTUALLY function and serve a purpose.

Blockchains have already proven to be no more secure than a properly designed normal database, and are ALWAYS going to take more electricity, so...they continue to be nothing but a toy and a canary for the gullible tech bro.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

Not to mention, at scale, big things like cars and houses are sold a ton every single day...

Having to use all that electricity to mint an NFT every single time, not to mention cases mentioned above like "Oops got it wrong", yikes.....

Would that cost more electricity than hypothetically shifting all vehicles to electric? Now I'm curious haha.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

I mean, you can use other systems besides cryptographic proof-of-work to determine legitimacy of stakeholders of a blockchain. It doesn’t necessarily have to waste power.

That being said, none of the other alternatives are really viable either. Proof-of-stake? So the “richest” people on the chain control all the money? Sounds like we just reinvented the late-stage-capitalism we already have.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Nah, movement is a ton of energy be it gas or electric. Electric vehicles are still the future for the simple fact that they replace something even less economical or long term.

NFTs replace nothing. Not with an improved version, anyways.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2024
484 points (92.6% liked)

Memes

44230 readers
1395 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS