[Yizahi]

Accepting external cryptotokens like BTC or ETH is one thing, but it is totally not a "like PayPal or Apple or Stripe adding blockchain based mechanisms under the hood" end quote. Sure, assuming external ecosystem is at least somehow working on it's own, then payment processors can integrate with it. But using blockchain tech internally is dumb and pointless. (unless we are talking about Git, but tokenbros try to pretend that is not a blockchain anyway)

I don't see how digital IOUs is anything novel or invented by tokenbros. Paper or digital, it's the same this essentially.

NFTs... How EXACTLY does NFT "holds custody" of anything? Please describe what do you mean by that.

[676234e117]

If you are asking "how does NFT hold custody" of a digital record then I assume you have never looked at how NFTs work at a technical level. If you know code, you can look at the ERC721 spec yourself.

A practical example of an application on top of this is namespace aliases that are held non custodially by the users through an ERC721 contract - see ENS. The user's private key gives them access to a record within a smart contract, allowing them to update some state or transfer ownership of the data object.

[Yizahi]

Haha, you got me :) . DNS records is actually a valid case. I have no idea if it is also a "better" case, but lets assume so for the sake of argument.

I will clarify my question better now, hopefully. How EXACTLY does NFT "hold custody" of anything not living fully on on the blockchain already? So any physical object, or any digital object outside of cryptotokens and DNS records on the blockchain.

[676234e117]

> How EXACTLY does NFT "hold custody" of anything not living fully on on the blockchain already?

I am not suggesting it does. I am suggesting it allows you to hold ownership of an asset on the blockchain. At this point it means ENS, art, collectibles, loans, stablecoin positions, user accounts, and other assets that can be defined digitally and on chain.

At some point in the future, property laws might change to recognize crypto tokens as their own asset class, which would make possible things like having some claim of ownership over a gold bar based on holding a NFT. Many investors today hold gold in their portfolio without it physically being transferred to them. Instead, ownership of the assets is recorded on some ledger, which could be a public ledger.

Mattereum is working in this space, trying to tokenize gold bullion, wine[1], and recently real estate[2] with legal warranty, but I would not put much stock in this idea until there is more clarity from lawmakers.

[1] https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20220624005079/en/IG-...

[2] https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20220731005030/en/Mat...

[Yizahi]

- ENS - yes

- art - no

- collectibles - no

- loans - as in "loan your NFTs"? Technically yes, but since NFTs are worthless bullshit it is kinda pointless.

- stablecoins positions - please elaborate, never heard this idea before

- use accounts - no

- other on chain assets - yes

- other off chain assets - no

tl;dr - NFTs themselves lack any ability to provide proof of ownership, transfer IP rights, or hold custody simply because it is technically impossible. Any cadaver constructs which allows this are inevitably an additional centralised systems which do all the actual work and actually store digital data. NFTs are fifth leg in a horse - pointless and useless. (DNS records alone of course don't justify NFT existence)

[676234e117]

Have you ever purchased art or collectibles? It does not entitle you to IP rights or transfer any IP rights to you.

Loans and DeFi - see Uniswap issuing ERC721 Liquidity Pool tokens.

User accounts - exact same mechanism as ENS, but different namespace specific to a protocol. See Lens protocol for example.