I think NFTs could ease and lubricate the trade of original limited edition art - but only for the traders: people who invest in art for its transfer of value over time. The enjoyment of said art is totally out of the equation here, which sounds a little weird when speaking about art. Besides, the applicability of these tokens to mass market production such as digital music or desktop pictures seems dubious at least.

More useful if it comes to adoption for other physical/semi-physical assets: stocks and gold are prime examples, as I said. Wherever re-hypothecation can be a problem. The tech should be much more refined to allow the tracking of each "item" (be it a single stock ar a specific ingot) singularly and in batches in a mathematically clever way.

Interesting times ahead, gentlemen.

You: What a bleak future. No more than 21 million weeks' worth of bread on the planet! How many humans left?

How caring, to check how women dress (not men, oh dear, of course) before they do something they might regret. The poor young ladies risk a personal punitive lightning thunder or something even worse, such as the confirmation getting unconfirmed.

Assuming a 100% fungible bitcoin (which is still not the case - which I must concur is unfortunate enough), it is simple enough to add a level of non-fungibility, and as Elwar has pointed out several times, it has been done with colored coins. However, they came at a time when bitcoin still had to "prove" itself - so to say - to the normies, so the focus was elsewhere.


Indeed. I can see a possible bright future for NFTs - including colored bitcoins, which I won't even mention from now on - they perfectly match the definition, so are included in the discussion; indeed, they've been the first of all NFTs. These tokens can be used to create unforgeable, easy to verify titles of ownership. These titles would not be restricted to digital items. On the contrary, I see the digital use case as more remote and less interesting for the time being.

Personally, here are a few use cases I would love to see implemented.

- Stock certificates. Once, certificates were ubiquitous, and you didn't "own" a stock until you had the paper in your hands. Now you can't really "own" a stock. It's just an entry in a ledger, and the broker/custodian is the only entity that can actually do some things with the stock, such as lending it to a margin shorter. If stock certificates were digitized by NFTs, naked shorters would have a hard time, as auditing would be quick and easy. With NFTs based on a permissionless blockchain, an additional property of auditing would be: available for anyone to see.

- Gold. The problem here would be matching ingot and NFT at the source, of course. But the total amount of NFT (and therefore, of ingot) would be much easier to... again, audit. Bye bye, paper gold.

Of course, real estate etc. could also benefit from something similar, although re-hypothecation of RE is much less of a problem in practice.

I agree that the following points are moot, and mostly come from lack of understanding.


With one exception: “The scarcity is artificial.  Anyone can make perfect copies of it.”

The scarcity of ownership is artificial, but it's as real as physical scarcity. There can only be one owner. So this point is moot/baseless too, BUT my objection pertains to those goods where ownership is not needed to be able to enjoy the good. As in, picture files, digital music or similar items. The issue here is enforcing DRM based on NFTs. This could be a thing, right, but then apart from the technical details, the creator, too, should be prevented from making additional copies ("reprints") of the creation. So you release, say, a tune as a NFT, and as a consequence no radio can legally broadcast it? Or can they? You sure shouldn't be allowed to release more "declassified" copies, or you are "inflating" the supply. Or I can use the song even if I don't "own" my copy's NFT? So you decide once and for all how many copies you are releasing? Shaky technical terrain. Shakier legal terrain. IANAL. Some legislation will be needed. No, not the SEC, that's right.

Right vroom, I forgot the "going to zero" part. Silly me.

Stimmy hitting the exchanges, or is it just wishful thinking?

Looked? I'm sure he must be blind too.

I smell an engineer 

The board periodically discloses the assets in btc coffer (Usd, Eur, UK Pound, Yen). The CEO signs the document, so it becomes official. At this point, anyone can check the value of btc against its coffer - although it's not a simple calculation: it requires lots of math and science.

+1 WOsMerit

Yes Elwar, I duly noted your previous post - and appreciated it silently while bookmarking it for future study. I'm always on the lookout for alternatives though, because not all systems are equally accessible depending on individual cases.

Thanks for your informative reply! 

+1 from the other Eddie.

We need to figure out ways to use our present or forthcoming wealth. Being rich doesn't come easy, and staying rich isn't a piece of cake, either.

Done

Fucking the shorters
Hard work, she's tired, till Wednesday...
...stim! Figure the rest.



#haiku

Your new hobby is writing OTM calls with  whimsically variable strike date/price, but no premium?

Thank you. You got me thinking, especially about the loan thingy. I'd be glad to know more about that. Any pointers will be welcome.

Biodom, it's not the first time you use the word 'bearish' to define JJG's ladder system. Why would you characterize it so? It seems to me that such a system only works if the underlying asset goes up. It could even be argued that mere use of this ladder implies fundamentally bullish beliefs (number go up). Otherwise, there would be no need for "suicidal buys" on the way down to zero.

Care to explain?


I think I see what you mean here. There are other, possibly more sophisticated ways to put the corn to work - for example, arbitrages or option plays - which however often imply ultimate movements that are essentially sales, or very akin to sales - but I digress. How, if even, does this imply that the more intuitive system is "less bullish" or even "bearish"?

Oh YEAH!! Copter going UP! I've been hoping for such a redesign for a long time.

+1 WOsMerit!

That's how we know your wife reads the WO too.  

Smell any tuna, serveria?