You know, the basic concept of an NFT — a unique token on a public ledger that serves as a transaction receipt related to a URL and some metadata — has some utility in places where transaction non-repudiation is important

Which makes it like 1000x more frustrating that like 99.5% of what it's being used for is either actual or borderline scams. Even the stuff that's not intentionally scammy is so bullshit that the distinction is really just a legal question. And that's before we get into the bulk of these being built on distributed ledgers that are energy-intensive to update…


Yes, it's a bit like a consensus notary.

I've wondered if it would make a convincing way to certify copyright and public license releases, so you could prove the license you acquired it under, if the public release site were later altered (which sometimes happens).

I mean, I can use a web archive, like the Way Back Machine, but ideally, the consensus circle would be larger than just one authoritative site.

@TerryHancock I can also see authoritative token chains for high-assurance software. Being able to prove that a trusted/audited version of something was acquired and deployed at a particular time to a particular instance could do things like provide a degree of digital tamper-evidence (or at least part of such a solution)

@calcifer I predict the same technology will eventually find a legitimate application somewhere and literally be called something like, "receipt technology"or some such, just because NFT is such a poisonous acronym these days.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

A bunch of technomancers in the fediverse. This arcology is for all who wash up upon it's digital shore.