NFT's as they are is an obvious scam, an attempt to get people to get into the 'hype-train' of purchasing non-existing goods, and very low quality 'art' goods. So an idea occurred to me. Not that i see this happening, but it might be a use-case for them.


What if NFT's were just token, more specifically tied to physical objects. These would have to be regulated on a per-business basis, and they'd have to honor them like a contract. It would be even better if these NFT's could be tied to an actual physical object like a RFID chip embedded in say a poker chip sized item.

So first example, say DVD's/Bluerays. When you buy a digital copy of said movie you get a token, and the token linked to your email account would let you access it via your service. You can then sell/trade said token and it moves to whom owned it, sorta the same way as selling an actual disc you'd forfeit those rights. This could work wonders if you are moving, where you turn in your DVD collection and get tokens, travel to a different city, then turn in said tokens for the same movies, saving you space and shipping worries during transit.

Another would be gas. Say you went to 7/11 and bought 100 gallons of gas (say at the beginning of the month) but in tokens. Then you turn in 15 tokens for 15 gallons of gas during a road trip up, and 15 on the return trip back. In a way you could get fixed $10 tokens and hand them out like gift cards who then get the same $10 back when turned in.

Then something less tangible. Tokens to say movie tickets, something that there's no fixed limit but it is an entry fee, you could buy Matinee tickets to the local theater, and then turn them in as long as they qualify (sorta prepurchasing your entertainment to watch at a later date).

Now this idea only really seems to make sense, if it's a big chain in multiple cities. Safeway, walmart, certain theater chains, drug stores, major gas stations, steam, subway, redbox, etc. Smaller chains or local ones would just do their own gift card/credit.

so your solution to something which main purpose is to be digital, is to make it physical.
.
.
.
.
I'm sold, i see no problems here.

And what's wrong wit a regular receipt?

Or a gift card?

No. 'making it physical' would only be if you connected it to something like a poker chip to make physical trading easier.

I am meaning you tie the token to something physical, food, gas, license to a DVD/movie (which you could trade for the DVD in question). Nothing is wrong with those. Except gift cards don't send very well via email if you wanted to give as a gift to someone.

A receipt says you received something, which i suppose works since you can preorder stuff, but you don't often return the receipt to get the preorder item do you?

In my examples think of NFT's more like casino chips. You don't actually get the value it represents until you turn it in, until then you can trade barter and gamble with them as you wish.


And i'm not advocating NFT's, just throwing a possible actual usecase of them.

I think of NFTs as adding a degree of artificial scarcity to digital objects, such as a "first edition printing" of a book, with a small serial number and an autograph from the author, etc. Or original paintings compared to "prints", or statues compared to scale models. There could be 100 billion verbatim digital copies of such a work, but only a few "certificates of authenticity" to say proudly and authoritatively "this is popcorn which Gene Siskel spilled on the floor of the Megaplex cinema at such and such epoch".

As such, this isn't a technology I consider for everyday purchasing (or purchasing in general, IMO): if you are using "non-fungible" things for trade it becomes less "I have this nugget of silver of standard objective quantity and purity and instead want this loaf of bread: let's trade". The guy at the gas station doesn't have to share my niche and rather fanatical appreciation for Gene Siskel's spilled popcorn; we don't have to reach an agreement on how many ounces of gas such a unique one-of-a-kind relic is worth.

A pregenerated string of characters, like those you can find on gift cards, must be really difficult to send via email...

Why is an NFT monstrosity, which requires a huge amount of computational power and energy to create, better?

No. Fuck NFTs and everything related to this crap.

Assuming it isn't the type that requires you to use the magnetic strip to use... Which i suppose is most of them really, so that goes out the window.

Though the price of gas may differ in City A and City B, so tokens for N gallons of gas may save you money in a way, along with taxes already included in the sale of tokens. And assuming it isn't enough of a quantity where they would ban the practice across say state lines. No clue. But it isn't the worse thing either. If it's digital i don't see the point of artificial scarcity. If used for trade i wouldn't consider any of that crap to cross over. As a company they'd generate say 10,000 tokens for a gallon of gas each, which are naturally worth nothing until traded/sold. Then they'd only trade or re-purchase tokens they issued out, so you can't trade a certificate of silver for gas (at least when redeeming at the gas station).

But with how scam ridden NFT's currently are i'd be iffy about buying 100 gallons of gas and then having that gas stolen from me because i clicked something on my phone; I'd end up like the monopoly man with his pockets turned out when i really needed the gas.

And likely as things go, unless it rebrands to something useful, NFT's will ultimately crash and be useless. Or owners of NFT's will hold them never able to sell them because no one cares about 'Gene Siskel's spilled popcorn' NFT, so buying it at 10 million dollars and having it's value drop to 10 dollars desperately hoping to sell it back at 10 million or higher will never happen. As NFT's stand and are pushed, i agree with you.

Every single "use case" you came up doesn't need NFTs for anything, so it's still a completely useless scam that wastes an obscene amount of energy on top of that.

These uses don't require blockchain. They're already centralized and/or have a trusted authority. Blockchain is only useful for when there is no trust authority.

https://calpaterson.com/blockchain.html

The only reason to do anything with NFTs is because your goal in life is to needlessly waste as much energy as possible as just creating these things uses ridiculous amounts of energy. Also every example you gave of great uses for NFTs involves things that don't require NFTs and able to function without them.

Indeed. NFT's are the poster child of "Solution looking for a problem" and often sound exactly like Dot-Com Bubble 2.0, ie, "No I don't have a business plan. Getting a website is my business plan" = "No I don't need NFT's. Wanting to need NFT's for something is my need for NFT's". Literally the main push for digital content (from publishers) is all about wanting to permanently lock as much content to online accounts as possible so that it cannot be transferred, thus killing off the competing 2nd hand / resale market (DVD-ROM to Steam style). See how Kindle books are often more expensive than 2nd hand paperback copies even after postage. Or see "digital" PC games where publishers will inflate the base price then 'generously' 50-75% Super Sale discount it, yet +15 year old PC games still often cost more than what 2nd hand console games are sold at on any day (eg, £4-5 Bioshock / Oblivion double packs for XBox 360 on Ebay). Publishers aren't struggling to think of "how" they could sell 2nd hand digital copies, publishers simply do not want 2nd hand digital markets to exist at all, hence the aggressive push for streaming, disc-less consoles and "digital de-ownership" in general...

Preactical use of NFT: scam people. Inflate markets with fraud. YAY!

You're basically describing adding some useless garbage onto the pile of useless garbage meant to perpetuate even more useless garbage.

So late-stage capitalism.

And yet by UK law you're allowed to sell your digital games, certainly steam and many other companies are fighting with this to not allow it to happen. Though if games are cheap enough that selling them offers no real use then there's that.

I'm not sure i trust any of the authorities at this point. Most large corporations are corrupt, government is corrupt, banks are corrupt.

The same as when steam and google came out, at least until everyone adopted it. Now there's a lot you can't do without them. As they say there's more than one way to skin a cat.

As i'm sure a lot of inventions start with. But like the 'Metaverse' facebook is trying to push, it would seem that both of these technologies are bloated and unneeded/unwanted. Which is a good thing, as adoption and use probably won't go far.