World of crypto

[Stive Pesley]

1 hour ago, YouRams said:

It's all part of the plans, scare the little guys into selling or push them into liquidation, the big boys will buy up cheap, when mass adoption of Blockchain tech happens the rich get richer, so if you're a little guy like me buy and hold during the fear reap the rewards in the coming years.

Best of luck there mate - you know it's all just a ponzi scheme right

Classic hallmarks of a Ponzi

1. Investors buy in the expectation of profits.

2. That expectation is sustained by the profits of those that cash out.

3. But there is no external source for those profits; they come entirely from new investments.

4. The operators/brokers take away a large portion of the money.
 

[Bwash_Ram]

2 hours ago, Stive Pesley said:

Best of luck there mate - you know it's all just a ponzi scheme right

Classic hallmarks of a Ponzi

1. Investors buy in the expectation of profits.

2. That expectation is sustained by the profits of those that cash out.

3. But there is no external source for those profits; they come entirely from new investments.

4. The operators/brokers take away a large portion of the money.
 

You have just described the whole world financial system.

[Stive Pesley]

35 minutes ago, Bwash_Ram said:

You have just described the whole world financial system.

Not really - as step 3 is the key and doesn't apply.

The money in the global financial system comes from central banks creating it from nothing. It doesn't come entirely from new investments. It doesn't originate from new investors at all

[YouRams]

12 hours ago, Stive Pesley said:

Best of luck there mate - you know it's all just a ponzi scheme right

Classic hallmarks of a Ponzi

1. Investors buy in the expectation of profits.

2. That expectation is sustained by the profits of those that cash out.

3. But there is no external source for those profits; they come entirely from new investments.

4. The operators/brokers take away a large portion of the money.
 

I got stung by a few Ponzi's early on, I  started off investing in node projects which are built on ponzinomics.

If you look properly into the tech and the use case of both Blockchain and NFT's, also the companies that are already highly invested in them, it's only a matter of time before every big institution switches. I agree alot of crypto are Ponzi's you have to do proper research before investing which I didn't at the beginning. 

[Day]

Still not sure I fully understand NFT’s, from what I can gather is they are like digital one of a kind trading cards.

So say this image:

If Derby County released that as an NFT, I bought it for £5000, I would own that image. Absolutely nothing stopping others from using the image as a wallpaper, in posts and that as copyright laws don’t cover them yet.

It’s just I own that image and can sell the ownership by sticking it back on the market and I guess hope to sell it for more than what it’s worth.

Now Derby wouldn’t just release that, they would add maybe a frame round it, bit of text so it’s not just a stock image.

If all this is correct then I just really don’t understand why anyone would pay big money for any NFT, it’s not a physical collectible that can sit in your house, it’s just an image and from what I’ve seen, it’s mostly Monkey drawings. ?

[Boycie]

Well, all I know is that I’d go ape if I lost my money.

Edited June 18, 2022 by Boycie

[Mucker1884]

1 hour ago, David said:

Still not sure I fully understand NFT’s, from what I can gather is they are like digital one of a kind trading cards.

So say this image:

If Derby County released that as an NFT, I bought it for £5000, I would own that image. Absolutely nothing stopping others from using the image as a wallpaper, in posts and that as copyright laws don’t cover them yet.

It’s just I own that image and can sell the ownership by sticking it back on the market and I guess hope to sell it for more than what it’s worth.

Now Derby wouldn’t just release that, they would add maybe a frame round it, bit of text so it’s not just a stock image.

If all this is correct then I just really don’t understand why anyone would pay big money for any NFT, it’s not a physical collectible that can sit in your house, it’s just an image and from what I’ve seen, it’s mostly Monkey drawings. ?

Wotcha, geezer.

I'd give you £500 for a monkey!  ?

[RadioactiveWaste]

3 hours ago, David said:

Still not sure I fully understand NFT’s, from what I can gather is they are like digital one of a kind trading cards.

So say this image:

If Derby County released that as an NFT, I bought it for £5000, I would own that image. Absolutely nothing stopping others from using the image as a wallpaper, in posts and that as copyright laws don’t cover them yet.

It’s just I own that image and can sell the ownership by sticking it back on the market and I guess hope to sell it for more than what it’s worth.

Now Derby wouldn’t just release that, they would add maybe a frame round it, bit of text so it’s not just a stock image.

If all this is correct then I just really don’t understand why anyone would pay big money for any NFT, it’s not a physical collectible that can sit in your house, it’s just an image and from what I’ve seen, it’s mostly Monkey drawings. ?

Well, you wouldn't own the image, you'd own the non-fungible token for the image.

 

[GboroRam]

1 hour ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

Well, you wouldn't own the image, you'd own the non-fungible token for the image.

 

What does fungible mean? 

[RadioactiveWaste]

1 hour ago, GboroRam said:

What does fungible mean? 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fungibility

[GboroRam]

18 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fungibility

Oh. I could have looked it up myself, I was hoping for some pee taking replies. Like fungible means "having inherent value". 

[Stive Pesley]

7 hours ago, David said:

Still not sure I fully understand NFT’s

The rest of your post suggests you understand them only too well!

[Gaspode]

17 hours ago, GboroRam said:

What does fungible mean? 

It means you need some athlete’s foot cream….

[JoetheRam]

On 18/06/2022 at 08:38, David said:

Still not sure I fully understand NFT’s, from what I can gather is they are like digital one of a kind trading cards.

So say this image:

If Derby County released that as an NFT, I bought it for £5000, I would own that image. Absolutely nothing stopping others from using the image as a wallpaper, in posts and that as copyright laws don’t cover them yet.

It’s just I own that image and can sell the ownership by sticking it back on the market and I guess hope to sell it for more than what it’s worth.

Now Derby wouldn’t just release that, they would add maybe a frame round it, bit of text so it’s not just a stock image.

If all this is correct then I just really don’t understand why anyone would pay big money for any NFT, it’s not a physical collectible that can sit in your house, it’s just an image and from what I’ve seen, it’s mostly Monkey drawings. ?

Why would someone pay £87m for an original Mark Rothko when one could pay £20 for a print of the exact same image? And why would one pay £20 for a print when anyone could paint two squares on a canvas? Sign value.

And money laundering, obvs.

Same principle now applies to the digital realm by way of NFT's. It's all b******* of course but isn't it amazing what people will waste, sorry spend, their money on.

 

[ThePrisoner]

19 hours ago, GboroRam said:

What does fungible mean? 

The opposite of non-fungible 

[Leeds Ram]

3 hours ago, JoetheRam said:

Why would someone pay £87m for an original Mark Rothko when one could pay £20 for a print of the exact same image? And why would one pay £20 for a print when anyone could paint two squares on a canvas? Sign value.

And money laundering, obvs.

Same principle now applies to the digital realm by way of NFT's. It's all bollocks of course but isn't it amazing what people will waste, sorry spend, their money on.

 

I guess the difference is a print doesn't have the same feeling or connection to the artist. The real thing is very different from a copy, I have a turner print on my wall in a lovely frame but the texture and colour doesn't draw you in like the real thing. The problem with nfts is that these images are necessarily online so that difference just isn't there, unless you simply care about having the first one which some people do. But I've always thought it's a mistake to equate nfts to art.

[GboroRam]

1 hour ago, Leeds Ram said:

I guess the difference is a print doesn't have the same feeling or connection to the artist. The real thing is very different from a copy, I have a turner print on my wall in a lovely frame but the texture and colour doesn't draw you in like the real thing. The problem with nfts is that these images are necessarily online so that difference just isn't there, unless you simply care about having the first one which some people do. But I've always thought it's a mistake to equate nfts to art.

It's very similar to buying a star, in my opinion. 

[JoetheRam]

1 hour ago, Leeds Ram said:

I guess the difference is a print doesn't have the same feeling or connection to the artist. The real thing is very different from a copy, I have a turner print on my wall in a lovely frame but the texture and colour doesn't draw you in like the real thing. The problem with nfts is that these images are necessarily online so that difference just isn't there, unless you simply care about having the first one which some people do. But I've always thought it's a mistake to equate nfts to art.

But does connection and feeling actually have value? Or does it only have value because we say it has value? And is connection and feeling derived only from the brushstrokes and texture? Show me a picture on my screen of the original Fighting Temeraire and a picture of a print and I (or anybody) won't be able to tell the difference.

With some people's lives being almost entirely online, the bumps and brush strokes that mark an original painting are now the same as a digital certificate that says this is the original "Disaster Girl" or whatever.

These things only have value there, but as we increasingly live in cyberspace, creating virtual signs of wealth and status seems inevitible and trading real world money for this virtual stock seems logical.

If you believe in all that crap anyway.

I'm still fighting against a cashless society and queuing up at the bank rather than using the ATM so I won't be along for the ride.

[YouRams]

On 18/06/2022 at 08:38, David said:

Still not sure I fully understand NFT’s, from what I can gather is they are like digital one of a kind trading cards.

So say this image:

If Derby County released that as an NFT, I bought it for £5000, I would own that image. Absolutely nothing stopping others from using the image as a wallpaper, in posts and that as copyright laws don’t cover them yet.

It’s just I own that image and can sell the ownership by sticking it back on the market and I guess hope to sell it for more than what it’s worth.

Now Derby wouldn’t just release that, they would add maybe a frame round it, bit of text so it’s not just a stock image.

If all this is correct then I just really don’t understand why anyone would pay big money for any NFT, it’s not a physical collectible that can sit in your house, it’s just an image and from what I’ve seen, it’s mostly Monkey drawings. ?

NFT's will move away from just being a "picture" everything paper based as we know could eventually become an NFT. House registration documents, Uni textbooks, medical records the list is endless.

Its a good time to look at the leaders in NFT and Blockchain tech, invest in the company rather than a digital picture, the ones that have done well selling worthless images will have the capital and infrastructure ready for mass adoption from the "real world".

[PistoldPete]

On 18/06/2022 at 13:26, GboroRam said:

What does fungible mean? 

The ability to be turned into a mushroom.