[shrimp_emoji]

NFTs are like a combat mech the size of the Solar System.

Someone can use it to have a really ironclad DRM implementation, guarding the art you saved and to make sure only its approved owner can view it (mimicking the tyranny of physical scarcity of meatspace for cyberspace goods).

The reason you saved it and can view it is that nobody's doing that yet. And because there are way easier and cheaper ways to implement DRM than Solar System-sized mechs, nobody probably ever will use NFTs for that. : p

[remote-dev]

Please explain how someone can have an ironclad DRM implementation that guards access to download a link to a jpeg on a public blockchain that you want everyone to be able to view.

[AnIdiotOnTheNet]

DRM is a fundamentally broken concept. I feel like there has to be a mathematical proof out there somewhere that it is impossible to both make information consumable and, at the same time, prevent its duplication.

[jimbob45]

Why couldn't you just have a SQL DB where you store the ownership of these assets though? There's no reason to use an NFT - it's overkill.

[cool_dude85]

What, and trust the central planners at Sotheby's to not steal my apes and slimers? They'll sell off half the pixels to the government because of my back taxes.

[jimbob45]

Is that different from how crypto operates though? Cryptocurrency exchanges already have to report to the IRS/government and they'll still come after you if you have unpaid taxes.

If NFTs get big enough, there's no reason to believe that the NFT exchanges wouldn't have to register with the government/IRS.

[whateveracct]

A simple example:

You wouldn't trust your NBA Topshot ownership to .. the NBA? Of course you would - SQL DB strictly better.

[TigeriusKirk]

Sounds like a business opportunity.