| > The problem is then you have to trust that database. You have to trust the person running it, you have to trust they will still be in business, you have to trust the person running it will allow other people to connect to it (or get stuck in their walled garden). That's just it. I do trust the bank. The bank has stood for several human lifetimes (might have changed names, but the same bank). They have overwhelmingly served people reliably. The deposits are insured by the government that has stood for several human lifetimes. They are accountable legally and practically. Bad transactions can be reversed thanks to the trusted processors, banks, and government. > We're pretty far into this Web 2.0 experiment with centralized services. The experiment is over, the results are in. We can't trust them. What on earth are you talking about? I've never had money taken from my bank account without my permission. Those few cases of fraud I've experienced have been detected and resolved swiftly, with little activity required from me. Meanwhile with a blockchain you have to trust the majority of unknown actors. People I don't know, from states where theft of my money might go unprosecuted, if the actor can even be detected. Bad transactions cannot be reversed. Fraud? I'm SOL. And then there's the fact that crypto enables ransomware. And the environmental costs. Absurd. > What NFT's give us, is the ability to own a unique digital assets in an open system and not have to rely on ad driven business models. It's a digital asset which can be ANYTHING. We already have this in the US and other nations, it's called copyright, and the courts will enforce it as well as they can. NFTs do not provide an enforcement mechanism, they still rely on the legal system, and a pointer to a uri does not prove what object was originally at that uri. |