This emoji summarizes it perfectly: 🤢

  • acosmichippo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    but, why? is there some problem with the way we prove ownership of things now? as far as i know there isn’t an epidemic of car titles or house deeds getting hacked.

    • Nibodhika@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      No, there isn’t, but there are advantages to it as well, just like how a database has advantages over a paper folder.

      An NFT can’t be transferred by anyone other than the owner, and ownership can be verified independently.

      Here’s an example of a use that would be very cool and would take advantage of it (even though I know it’s unlikely to happen). Ownership of games, some games are sold on different platforms, to verify the ownership of the game (or DLC, or cosmetics) games have to verify with first party services (like PSN or Steam), which means that for the most part you need to buy games on each platform individually, but if platforms used an NFT for it games would be buy once play anywhere, and they would allow you to sell or even borrow games, and no company could prevent you from doing so. Which is obviously the reason this will never happen, but it’s a nice idea.

      That being said there are downsides to it as well, such as a person being the full owner of stuff means that a person can lose the key and therefore lose access to the house, or that scammer can steal everything, whereas making you sign your house to someone else is a lot more beurocratic, which serves to protect you from you.

      Just to be clear, I’m not a “we should use NFT for everything” type of person, in fact I don’t think there are many use cases nowadays that are worth using it, but the technology is interesting regardless, and solves the problem of how to prove ownership without a centralized trusted organization.