Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by rusk 1905 days ago
Here’s the thing - if it relies on a central authority to say “this is the genuine article” why do you even need a blockchain? A PGP certificate or X.509 is arguably “a cryptographic representation of something unique”

EDIT even something like a domain name - which is arguably a better example as only one of such a thing can actually exist in that only one owner can derive the value from it.
3 comments
gnopgnip 1905 days ago
An NFT on the blockchain can be verifired crytographically that it is the "original", it can't be duplicated, and you can transfer it to anyone if you have the private key and the gas.

A token off the blockchain controlled by a centralized group could transfer ownership without a key at all. They could issue the same one to more than one party and duplicate it. Someone else could claim to own the record and they could decide you don't anymore, they get to decide who it is sold to. Or prohibit you from transferring it at all.

link
rusk 1904 days ago
The real world item that the token refers to is by definition “a token off the blockchain”.
link
beiller 1904 days ago
What if two people have access to the private key? How do we prove who owns it?
link
makeworld 1905 days ago
I don't like NFTs, but the point of putting it on the blockchain is that it's globally available, verifiable, and immutable. Many versions of a PGP-signed message could exist and be passed around.
link
rusk 1905 days ago
My point isn’t that the token itself is globally verifiable but that the asset it refers to actually is ...
link
asimpletune 1905 days ago
Because then it’s not on the blockchain. Yes, I could sell you a txt record, saying you own this hash, which represents a jpg, but then it’s not blockchain.

Honestly, I don’t know.

Maybe it’s because the blockchain is immutable? Like, I could change that txt record because I’m evil or something. That makes sense to me, in terms of technology.

link
miracle2k 1905 days ago
Someone is trying it your way: https://signed.work/

The problem is that these signatures cannot be traded anymore, since no one is tracking who owns which editions. I can sell my signature to you, and then sell it to someone else tomorrow. The artist intended to mint 100 "prints", but suddenly 1000 people claim to own one.

link
rusk 1905 days ago
No but the point is, when you’re talking about physical artefacts you can in theory issue as many tokens as you like ... it’s still down to a central authority to certify.
link