[matheusmoreira]

> ownership of digital products

There is no such thing. Data is just bits. Really big numbers. Asserting ownership over numbers is simply delusional. The second that number is published, it's already over.

Non-fungible tokens do absolutely nothing to change those facts. They just let people delude themselves into believing they actually own stuff. The only thing they own is the token.

[knorker]

You're just talking nonsense. I don't think you thought this through at all.

I own a house. In what way? The land registry says that I do. If it starts saying something else, then I don't. The police and courts will make it real.

My wallet is only mine because that's what we agree.

The brand Coca Cola is just information. But if you start selling your own under their brand you'll find out just how real intellectual property is.

Everything is society is only real because we make it real. "Ownership" isn't any more or less real of tangible or intangible things.

[matheusmoreira]

All of your examples are real things. They exist in the physical world. Naturally finite, tangible. It makes intuitive sense to most people.

Data is the opposite of all that. Society is trying to retrofit all of that physical world intuition into the virtual world. It doesn't work. It sorta worked up to the mid 20th century because data was still tied to the physical world. Now that computers exist and are globally networked, there are absolutely no physical barriers holding us back.

> The police and courts will make it real.

Police, courts, entire industries worth trillions of dollars, entire countries have been trying to make it real for what, over 50 years? The US will put your country in a literal naughty list if it doesn't take measures against infringement. Yet it happens every day, all the time. People don't even realize they're infringing copyright when they download a picture and post it somewhere. It's just a natural thing to do.

It's not working. Maybe it's time to understand that the world just isn't the same anymore. Times have changed. It's time to let go of these illusions of ownership and control.

[knorker]

> All of your examples are real things. They exist in the physical world. Naturally finite, tangible.

"Ownership" isn't physical.

> It makes intuitive sense to most people.

This is just pleading to the anonymous crowd of an imagined silent majority who agree with you.

Ask a majority if they think it should be legal to open a store selling bootleg copies of Britney Spears CDs, videogames, and whatever else they want to sell.

> Police, courts, entire industries worth trillions of dollars, entire countries have been trying to make it real for what, over 50 years?

So you think it's not real? Go ahead. Try it then. You're saying it's both ethical and de facto legal. Seems like a slam dunk million dollar idea. Good luck.

[matheusmoreira]

> "Ownership" isn't physical.

Land is.

> This is just pleading to the anonymous crowd of an imagined silent majority who agree with you.

What? I'm saying that most people intuitively agree with you when it comes to ownership of physical things. I don't see what the issue is.

> So you think it's not real? Go ahead. Try it then.

Have you ever been to a developing country? There's an entire block filled with stores just like you described less than 15 minutes from me right now.

[knorker]

>> "Ownership" isn't physical.

> Land is.

But ownership isn't. How are you not getting this?

[matheusmoreira]

Land ownership is physical too. Apply a little violence and your land is gone. Villages can be raided. Countries can be invaded. Organized drug traffickers can literally take over entire cities.

You need to be there and defend your land if you want to keep it. The fact that in civilized society people have transferred this responsibility to governments doesn't make it any less physical.