Okay so I've talked a lot of shit about NFTs conceptually but TIL there are ways you can sell them on blockchains that use proof-of-stake. Hypothetically, say you put your royalty at 25% and then used that to offset carbon regularly, that seems to me way better than using the ETH-based blockchains for similar purpose?
The whole thing is still a weird ponzi scheme but maybe I should stop being so hard on people given it's a very low barrier to entry one?
Am I missing something still?
@zens Okay, I get a sense where you're going with that but you'll have to expand a bit. Insomuch that merely people are spending cryptocurrency to create an entry in a ledger pointing to an address, and isn't any form of actual ownership, sure. But how is it any worse than e.g., tradable items in video games? And if it's a way to support content creators, what's wrong with that? If I've totally misread your point, apologies
@andi (a) a low barrier to entry ponzi scheme is still a ponzi scheme! Arguably worse because more people get scammed!
(b) usual blockchain problem of no oracles: plenty of creators get NFTs of their stuff made without consent
(c) carbon credits don't fix anything, they just move the problem around & arguably make it worse by making people think it's ok
@doop Okay, fair points on all accounts, but in terms of things worth being angry about in the world, it seems up there with TF2 hats on Steam? I'm just trying to dial in how much moral outrage I should express about them.
@andi dunno if I’d stretch to outrage personally but I think “have nothing to do with them” is the minimum response
@doop Oh Jesus thank you for exposing me to yet another horrific aspect of crypto culture, hadn't noticed the laser eyes trope yet
This is the personal instance of Andi N. Fiziks. Love me or hate me it's still an obsession 😘