I felt in love with building static websites last year too.
Thanks to a custom build with kotlinxhtml and a bunch of other tools, I'm very efficient. High performance thanks to simple html+css and a little vanilla js, so the pages show up instantly with 38k+ monthly visitors on a low-spec cheap server. No background loading or rendering in js or whatever.
A few years ago I was upvoting such articles myself, probably out of annoyance that I had known about Bitcoin since 2010 but had no financial interest in it. What got me into it was the open source aspect.
I expect that many users on HN have known about Bitcoins since the beginning and are upset that they didn't look into it years ago. Many will find their niche in it(smart contracts, NFTs..), younger people more so.
Stateless P2P open source currency is an incredibly powerful combination of words.
Science? Cardano published 100+ scientific papers https://iohk.io/en/research/library if you have time check out the ones about Ouroboros (proof of stake)
It's not just ugly gifs. It's digital art, your online game items, concert tickets, supermarket vouchers and so on.
Quote from statista: "In 2020, global gaming audiences spent an approximate 54 billion U.S. dollars on additional in-game content". But the players don't own their purchases. You don't play the game anymore, servers go down or you get banned and all your stuff is gone. Think about that.
Edit: Of course my comment got nothing but down votes again on HN. Was worth a try anyway.
But it’s not. It’s a token on a blockchain with some metadata. You’d actually need a separate legally binding contract to link it to actual ownership, and at that point you could have just made up the legal contract without any blockchain or token…
With your example, if the game goes down, an NFT of the in-game purchase isn’t going to be very useful. What’s the difference between having a token or not of the content if there are still no servers for the game either way? Maybe the NFT still points to a screenshot? Great…
Doesn't your indie developer still have to acquire both licenses and assets for all those items, since NFTs (a) don't actually convey a recognizable legal ownership or right of any kind and (b) impose costs proportional to size in bytes, and so can't effectively store the actual data over which they claim ownership?
Good points.
(b) The actual data (jpeg, mp4, 3d mobdel, etc) is usually stored on a system like https://ipfs.io and not on the NFT chain itself.
(a) I think the optimal solution would be that it is in the interest of publishers to have their assets used in other projects. This would give them more value, and the NFT creator usually charges a transaction fee on their assets (every time something is sold on the secondary market, a percentage goes to the creator). Another option would be for the indie developer to assign these items to their own items. For example, AAA studio sword xy is assigned to indie game sword xy. Of course you can't manually assign zillions of NFTs, you would probably do this in tiers and I would imagine there would be services built around that. This would eliminate the IP problem as far as I know, and would just mean that owning NFT xy unlocks a feature/element in the game. This would of course be interesting for official collaborations between publishers.
You mean that your in game items get revoked after you got banned from a game? That's actually a good point. It wouldn't help you to sell these items on a secondary market except you try to scam someone.
At least the items could still bring you value in external games/prokects.
There are lots of places to go to hear cheerleading and doom saying. I would like HN to be a place where people ask questions and get thoughtful answers.
There are many alternatives to the proof of work concept. Cardano uses proof of stake with a fraction of energy cost and is academic proven with 100+ peer reviewed papers. Beautiful project
