[peoplefromibiza]

> you store a concise representation of that content

which is meaningless.

because cosmic rays could flip a bit during the transfer and the content would be different, hence not yours anymore.

it's this the kind of ownership you want for the future?

I surely don't.

imagine if your car was considered another car after a scratch makes it non-identical to the one you bought and you had go through the process of establishing that it's your again and again.

> The collision-resistance property of a cryptographic hash ensures that the probability of finding two differing NFTs which hash to the same value is negligible.

that's a bug in this situation.

collision resistance is good fro cryptographic hashing of content that MUST STAY identical.

ownership means I can do whatever I want to my property and still be the owner.

If I buy a painting I can spray paint the world "OK" over it and it would still be my painting.

If I am a popular author maybe now it's worth more money than before.

NFT would make something like "Fountain" of Duchamp impossible.

> you have some way of proving what the original link pointed to.

that now points to a zoophile porn video

congrats.

[riptheworld]

You are moving the goalposts. I described a mechanism that addresses link rot in the current NFT ecosystem. The hash-based method allows an owner to efficiently prove what content was associated with a rotted link with overwhelming probability. Using this basic building block, one could construct a process that allows an NFT owner to update the link stored on the blockchain.

If you are concerned with changing an NFT's content or debating philosophically about whether that should be allowed, I don't have an opinion. I don't own NFTs, nor am I convinced they will stick around. My point is that the NFT ecosystem will likely evolve to create technical solutions solving many of the problems mentioned in the article.

[peoplefromibiza]

> You are moving the goalposts. I described a mechanism that addresses link rot in the current NFT ecosystem

it doesn't.

IPFS is already content addressable, knowing the hash doesn't solve the fact that the link is dead.

It's like having the address of a building destroyed by an hurricane.

> The hash-based method allows an owner to efficiently prove what content was associated with a rotted link with overwhelming probability

It only proves that a stream of bytes resolve to some hash using some hashing algorithm.

Whoever has on their devices the same stream of bytes can republish the same item on the chain creating a new link that is alive and sell it.

The old one is dead and the money spent to buy the content the link pointed at have been lost forever.

It's like the "All I Got Was This Lousy T-Shirt" trope

I spent money to buy a digital assets and "all I got was this lousy hash string"

> will likely evolve to create technical solutions solving many of the problems mentioned in the article.

or not.

as proved by the many problems in the cryptocurrencies space that people predicted would "likely evolve to create technical solutions" but didn't after more than 10 years and billions of dollars poured to the problem.

so why invest in something that fails to accomplish anything and will fail to do so at least for another 20-30 years?