|
keep punching joe posted:Don't people already exchange items /accounts for money... Actual money I mean. But this is different! In an NFT-based game, there's a tacit approval of that aftermarket by developers. It's like having all of the goodness that was brought by Diablo 3's real-money auctions without being able to extract any profit from it. What sane developer and/or publisher wouldn't jump on such a golden opportunity?
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2021 08:34
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 14:01 |
|
|
For all of how incredibly stupid NFTs are, them being "only" a URL is the wrong thing to latch on to. That specific piece of the puzzle is actually fine-ish. The URLs in  legit NFTs are more like a torrent magnet link. As long as whoever owns that NFT keeps doing the ipfs equivalent of seeding, it'll stay online.Obviously, this only works if the people buying the NFTs are aware of it and are willing to effectively pay for hosting the image out of their own pocket. NFT sellers are trustworthy people after all. They would never fail to mention that there is an expected responsibility on the part of owners  .
Aramis fucked around with this message at 19:10 on Nov 18, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2021 19:05
|
|
|
Asproigerosis posted:My brain is genuinely melting at the cryptoland thing. The dimensions of satire and reality have merged and obliterated the barriers between the two, I cannot comprehend it. It's like watching the magnum opus of tim and eric. The musical number set to the tune of Prince Ali should have been what broke me. Even then, cryptobros completely missing the point of a children's cartoon is absolutely credible.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2022 15:16
|
|
|
PhazonLink posted:they should lose their license to do whatever. Bitcoin might be stupid, but even that is not stupid enough to use floating point values to do math operations on "currency".
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2022 06:13
|
|
|
smackfu posted:The statement of facts from the indictment has lots of boxes and arrows and footnotes. quote:U.S. authorities traced the stolen funds on the BTC blockchain.7 A lot of people who were counting on tumblers to launder their crime money are going to be making GBS threads their pants over this.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2022 09:29
|
|
|
Somfin posted:Proof of stake will never matter because the folks with the industrial mining rigs have gigantic sunk cost problems and will not let their investments become scrap for the sake of "the planet," they're the fuckers building the giant rigs in the first place. The only role Proof of Stake is fulfilling is to provide an argument against "Crypto is bad for the environment" by way of demonstrating that PoW is not the only way to achieve decentralised consensus. I'm having a lot of trouble believing that automatically populating the governing body with whoever happens to be the richest is an idea that anyone considers intrinsically good and desirable. It only has any traction because PoW is so obliviously unsustainable, yet no one has any other alternative to offer.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2022 09:06
|
|
|
ymgve posted:also note that their numbers are based on an article from loving 1999, we all are using 56k modems and desktop CPUs with no idle throttling still, right? Not that this needs further debunking than just pointing at the date, but the figure was also about "package, store and move 2 megabytes of data", of which only one of these is done per video view, not to mention that ISPs maintain various levels of caches.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 18:50
|
|
|
Pham Nuwen posted:Facebook is extremely concerned that people might gently caress, or try to simulate loving, in their corporate-friendly metaverse. Floating torsos are presumably an effort in that direction. You have to keep in mind that Zuck & co. are marketing this to a demographic that has very little tolerance for jank in general. To me, this is just way to bypass the fact that making a human-played character with an arbitrary view direction walk in a way that doesn't look like a late 90s FPS is hard as balls. Groping is almost certainly the biggest sex-related problem they are facing, and this does absolutely nothing to help. Aramis fucked around with this message at 20:25 on Feb 14, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 20:13
|
|
|
The_Franz posted:Eh, these look like custom chips designed to compete with other ASIC mining hardware. Nothing of interest for anyone else. What's annoying is the bit at the end: Intel is in the rare position of actually being able to pick and choose what a large amount of silicon foundries are spending time and resources on. Allocating any of it to stuff that can only be use for mining is absolutely reprehensible.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2022 16:54
|
|
|
Darth TNT posted:https://kotaku.com/pepe-frog-nft-lawsuit-sue-dao-matt-furie-halston-thayer-1848663957 The whole point of NFTs is that you can make a distinction between originals and copies of a digital good. Copies being made not leading to a devaluation of the original is the one single thing they were meant to accomplish. My mind is kinda blown. Somehow, this manages to make NFTs look even worse to my eyes that they already were. Completely irredeemable. His case is basically: NFT art is fundamentally useless on a conceptual basis. Obviously, he's right, but I can't help but wonder how NFT pundits will try to square that circle. Aramis fucked around with this message at 20:30 on Mar 18, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2022 18:01
|
|
|
It's a good thing the price of Bitcoin doesn't fluctuate too much. Otherwise, the risk of a momentary drop in value triggering an automatic default on the mortgage would be an obviously unreasonable risk. Edit Ok, well, maybe not default per se, but pretty much. Aramis fucked around with this message at 22:02 on Apr 27, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2022 21:58
|
|
|
Splicer posted:If I make a program that generates images and the total distinct images it can generate is a known finite but impractical number like 10^10 or something, can I claim copyright on all possibly generated images even if I do not explicitly generate them? Personally, I don't really see the distinction between algorithmic art and say, a Jackson Pollock painting for the sake of this. The artist comes up with a process and let it run its course, producing a piece of media of which they own the copyright. The fact that they do not know exactly how the piece will come out when they set the gears into motion doesn't seem like it should matter.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2022 23:57
|
|
|
busalover posted:Volvo on the blockchain! When an exec walks up and says that his golf buddy convinced him blockchain technology can help, the dumb engineer laughs and says no. The smart engineer says: Sure thing boss! For $$$ I can convert the database to a "private blockchain", proceeds to deploy an off-the-shelf nosql database, and sits on their rear end for a month. I don't know if that's what's going on here, but I have no doubt whatsoever that this is frequently the case.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2022 13:40
|
|
|
zedprime posted:Um actually viruses are running Folding@home 
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2022 15:12
|
|
|
repiv posted:i wonder what the third wave of NFT nonsense will be Calling it now: It's going to be some bullshit thing where the bag holder's computers are used to operate the backend of whatever service is tied to the token. It will be billed as the revolutionary innovation that finally addresses the one and only issue that NFTs suffered from. It will crash as soon as one of those services is inevitably found to harvest real bank credentials.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2022 00:57
|
|
|
In other words: Stablecoins where invented because the blockchain ecosystem needed a currency.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2022 07:31
|
|
|
The LUNA algorithm was never meant to actually run at all, wasn't it? The idea was probably that the mere existence of the algorithm was enough to cause buyers and sellers to self-regulate the value of UST in a sort of chess-like "the threat is more powerful than the attack" sense, I guess? The fact that it still stands at 0.45 (at least for now) despite LUNA having hit rock-bottom sort of leads a tiny amount of credence to that notion, but LMAO at free-market geniuses building something that requires any amount of cooperation from participants to be functional.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2022 16:40
|
|
|
HappyHippo posted:What? I'm pretty sure it's running, that's why billions of LUNA have been printed in the last few days. I'm not saying that it's not running at all, but that it was never meant to, or at least not at that scale. If people just traded their UST at or around the pegged 1$ value, then the algorithm wouldn't have to run, and when it did, it would just be some minor influence, and the system would achieve stability.
Aramis fucked around with this message at 16:50 on May 12, 2022 |
|
#
¿
May 12, 2022 16:45
|
|
|
fullroundaction posted:I know next to nothing about crypto, I just enjoy the schadenfreude. But the soul bound thing has me wondering a simple question: If your wallet gets hacked, do you have any recourse for recovering it? If not, wouldn’t all of the use cases for soulbinding things still be way worse than any other centralized option? Wallets don't intrinsically belong to anyone. There is actually no such thing as your wallet. Anyone who happens to know what the private key of a wallet is can make transactions from that wallet. That's it. There is literally nothing more to it than that. However, for many tokens (including these newfangled SoulsBound tokens), the token is never actually in the wallet. There is a pseudo-database associated with the wallet controlling the tokens that keeps track of which wallet owns what token. So whatever controls that wallet can technically just up and decide to change the content of the database. Why yes, that severely defeats the purpose. Aramis fucked around with this message at 22:26 on May 22, 2022 |
|
#
¿
May 22, 2022 22:23
|
|
|
fullroundaction posted:Can you re-key your wallet like you do with servers, or is that once the key is known that’s it forever? Transferring everything from that wallet to some other uncompromised wallet would be the equivalent of that, but odds are pretty good that whoever "hacked" the wallet did that already.
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2022 22:34
|
|
|
notwithoutmyanus posted:Here's how obvious it is. In the run-up to the 2016 election, I remember ascribing the massive rise of fake news to the inevitable conclusion to how Facebook works. It turning out to have been a deliberate Russian effort all along really took me by surprise. Occam's razor was pointing straight at greed-driven grift, and that was dead wrong. I swear to god, if crypto turns out the exact way once the dust settles...
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2022 08:49
|
|
|
Russia is making big use of Bitcoin for sure. I'm talking about Putin revealing he was Satoshi Nakamoto all along, or them being behind OpenSea. Something along that scale.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2022 09:05
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Isn't the impossibility of reversing transactions supposed to be a major feature of cryptocurrency. On paper, yes. However the user has not actually bought any crypto. They gave 35,000$ to coinbase for them to buy that crypto and put an entry in Coinbase's database that that portion of their Eth belongs to that user. No actual transaction will happen on the blockchain (apart from Coinbase's regular book-balancing) until the user transfers the coins to some non-Coinbase wallet. In other words, Coinbase are 100% lying, and could perfectly well reverse that transaction. They just don't want to.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2022 22:19
|
|
|
HappyHippo posted:How does PoW "back" the crypto price? That doesn't make any sense. The view I heard on this is that spending electricity on PoW is equivalent to locking gold into Fort Knox. By removing a scarce resource from the world, you transfer that resource's value onto the currency. Why yes, there IS an immense obvious hole in that comparison. It's just a sham to rope-in gold-standard zealots into the ponzi scheme.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2022 14:18
|
|
|
Supply Side Currency. I might actually start using that. edit: Cyrano4747 posted:They don't correlate 1:1, but they are related. Note in particular the drop in mining difficulty about the same time as the crash in prices around 7/21 - mining (briefly) became less valuable than electricity, so people pulled out. Right, but peopled pulled out because the price crashed. If mining was driving the price, it would have been the other way around. Aramis fucked around with this message at 14:36 on Aug 25, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2022 14:28
|
|
|
Maybe I'm missing something here. I do not see anything within this whole explanation that exerts pressure on the price itself. To my ears, it sounds like saying that you can increase Voltage in an electrical circuit by increasing the Resistance because V = R*I.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2022 14:53
|
|
|
If you squint hard enough and project in the far future, using information as an energy storage medium is theoretically conceivable, so the idea of "digital batteries" is not inherently stupid. However, that does not apply to Bitcoin in any way shape or form. If anything, from that PoV, Bitcoin is possibly one of the most roundabout and miserably inefficient way to go about it imaginable. Aramis fucked around with this message at 18:57 on Aug 25, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2022 18:50
|
|
|
zedprime posted:Its really just gold with a new coat of paint that you can't wear or use industrially. So yes, maybe it's not gold. But as a currency it has all the same properties and problems. A very important property of metallics is that, unless the issuer is cheating, the transformation is reversible, in principle at least. The fact that the power -> Bitcoin conversion is a non-reversible operation makes it a very different beast, and invalidates the comparison entirely IMO.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2022 19:15
|
|
|
zedprime posted:Are you saying you have a productive use for the 140 million ounces of gold in Ft Knox because Uncle Sam would probably be interested in liquidating. Put it this way: I claim that if the cost/value of electricity was to double overnight, it would not cause the price of Bitcoin to raise, but instead would cause the global hashrate to plummet until a new ROI equilibrium is reached, all the while leaving the value of Bitcoin as-is. Obviously, I'm ignoring indirect market-wide disruptions caused by the sudden change in the price of power here. That's not the case for metallics. If the backing metal of a currency shoots up in value, so does the currency. And the difference in reversibility of the operation is something I'd identify as a large contributing factor. Aramis fucked around with this message at 20:29 on Aug 25, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2022 19:35
|
|
|
zedprime posted:[...] Can you elaborate on this please? By what mechanism does this feed forward to the Bitcoin price? It seems to me like the puzzle difficulty being automatically adjusted so that the rate of mining remains constant regardless of the global hash rate precludes miner behaviour from meaningfully affecting the price beyond providing a hard floor. However, I will gladly agree with "Bitcoin is equivalent to Gold-backed currency in that it suffers from a lot of the same issues that makes the former nonviable in a modern context". The view I'm calling wrong is the one equivocating power spent on bitcoin to locked-away metal in an idealised version of metal-backed currency. Aramis fucked around with this message at 21:20 on Aug 25, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2022 21:00
|
|
|
tango alpha delta posted:e: blockchain is so loving stupid. That's the key point really, and one that's extremely hard to get across in my experience. PoW Blockchain is to decentralized currency what the Alcubierre Drive is to FTL travel: A counter-example to claims that it's impossible, and not much more. Maybe one day we'll have crypto currency, but it's not going to be on the blockchain if it ever happens, and I'm very comfortable claiming that there's currently no road in sight that gets us there. There's been 0 progress on that front in the last 13 years. None. And it's certainly not for lack of trying. It's not crypto in spirit that's the problem. It's that the only single way we know how to make it happen is unacceptably loving terrible. Mind you, crypto is absolutely stupid in spirit as well, but that's not going to convince anyone. The one thing that crypto advocates get right in my opinion is that if a decentralized digital currency existed in our capitalist hellscape, there's little that could be done to prevent its adoption, and it would likely become a de-facto standard sooner or later. Aramis fucked around with this message at 02:54 on Aug 29, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2022 02:50
|
|
|
In my mind, this should be pretty simple: The Ownership and Governance of the coins remained entirely the exchange's until the woman transferred them to some other wallet via the authority that was deferred to her. The entire mess should be resolved purely via the crypto.com terms of service, which means it boils down to a run-of-the-mill contractual matter. edit Just looked it up, and it seems pretty cut and dry that she has to pay them back, on paper at least: First off: confirmation that they are extremely explicit about you not being the owner of the assets (makes sense, otherwise they'd be a bank) quote:5.1 Grant to Crypto.com And then the part where they cover their rear end: crypto.com's TOS posted:6.5 When we may refuse, cancel or reverse Instructions Exchanges have always been, and will always be, scummy as gently caress. Aramis fucked around with this message at 21:33 on Aug 30, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2022 20:57
|
|
|
--snip--, quote != edit
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2022 21:30
|
|
|
SettingSun posted:Wait are they suggesting they should intentionally exploit the poor for the sake of it? Paying someone to act as an npc rather than just coding one? Jesus. Either this is a good thing, or capitalism is fundamentally reprehensible. The later is inconceivable to them, so the former must be true, even if they are not quite sure how.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2022 17:55
|
|
|
buglord posted:Maybe I’m answering my own question in some way, but if the bitcoin prices are so fake, why don’t they just prop the number up to a round whole 20k instead of having it languish at this psychologically-fraught 19k instead? The wash trades don't really "compete" with real suckers buying in. They just provide an illusion meant to convince them to buy at a higher price. The system cannot work without a constant influx of real money. notwithoutmyanus posted:[...] Nah, they have considered it, and have reached the conclusion that it's a good thing for the exploited, and they should be thankful, really. Aramis fucked around with this message at 21:04 on Sep 6, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2022 18:38
|
|
|
Ups_rail posted:look I ll meet you guys half way. What makes you think that we are deranged enough to be willing to tolerate something we find objectively bad and ought not to exist if it happens to hurt/piss-off "bad people"? That's some rolling-coal level bullshit.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2022 14:34
|
|
|
I would blow Dane Cook posted:Is there anything that's going to replace Ethereum as a source of income for GPU miners? All I can see is a few shitcoins that don't have nearly enough value to soak up all the miners need for revenue to pay for electricity. Large-scale distributed neural networks. Ups_rail posted:*sigh* so to explain the joke. Those countries are under sanctions. 2 of those countries have used crypto to work around said sanctions. So thats like 1 layer to the joke. I know it was a joke. You thinking this "joke" is funny still reveals a lot about how you view the world.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2022 16:02
|
|
............
|
This comparison is incredibly pointless in the first place. Comparing a system capable of pulling about 10 TPS of what are ultimately simple transactions to the entire totality of AWS is ludicrous.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2022 22:12
|
|
|
Neito posted:Yes, and nothing. Well, to be fair on the second point, there "is" something there to prevent it in the sense that validators are incentivized to not gently caress with the system as it would dramatically devaluate their assets. After all, relying on actor rationality is a well-established way to provide stability. It isn't, in case anyone would dare to read that as anything but sarcasm.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2022 18:20
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 14:01 |
|
|
Aren't Color Museum these assholes that tried to become the pantone of NFTs? Without doing any research, I'm going to bet that these rugfools are structured in a way where whoever "owns" the primary color of a given NFT gets a cut out of them, and the main objective is to prop up the value of the original project. Edit: Alright, I've wasted enough time on this. One of the promo videos is voiced and animated, starts with "Hello everyone, I'm perfect blue", and its background color is #006597. There also happens to be a "color NFT" with the same name for #006496 https://www.color.museum/gallery/color-nft/25750. They tried to obfuscate the link in the promo material by shifting the color values by 1, but it's pathetically obvious. Aramis fucked around with this message at 22:48 on Sep 12, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2022 22:07
|
|