Read on Twitter
this is so dumb and obvious from how I was yelling about it the other day:
ALL THE NTFS ARE IS A JSON FILE POINTING AT A URL. THAT& #39;S THE PART YOU OWN.
And the URL and fact you own it are PUBLIC, that& #39;s what the bockchian part means. https://twitter.com/QueerSwine/status/1381509975248408576">https://twitter.com/QueerSwin...
ALL THE NTFS ARE IS A JSON FILE POINTING AT A URL. THAT& #39;S THE PART YOU OWN.
And the URL and fact you own it are PUBLIC, that& #39;s what the bockchian part means. https://twitter.com/QueerSwine/status/1381509975248408576">https://twitter.com/QueerSwin...
this means that anyone can inspect the bnockchorn and see who owns it, and what URL it points at.
There& #39;s no way to authenticate that URL, no username and passwords, no security, no hashes to ensure it didn& #39;t change
There& #39;s no way to authenticate that URL, no username and passwords, no security, no hashes to ensure it didn& #39;t change
this means EVERYONE CAN SEE THE THING YOU "OWN" (because the thing you own is the pointer to the URL, not the contents of the URL)
you could, of course, make that URL only be valid behind some kind of authentication system, like you have to log into an account to see it, and it verifies your ownership of the thing before showing it to you
but if you& #39;re doing that, WHY THE FRUCK DO YOU NEED THE ENEFFTEE IN THE FIRST FUCKING PLACE?
JUST DO THAT.
JUST DO THAT.
the user can prove they own it by logging into your website and seeing that it says "thing Foo #2423. Owner: John Smith"
the long and short of it is that there does not seem to be any problem that Not Fungus Showbiz Coins can solve that can& #39;t be solved more easily, better, and cheaper (in terms of energy/carbon usage) by more traditional solutions.
except for possibly the problem of "I want to make money off the hype of this cry typo-art thing people don& #39;t really understand"
it apparently works great for that.
anyway don& #39;t use them. don& #39;t buy them. don& #39;t trade them, don& #39;t sell them, and I won& #39;t be forced to turn them into minions. https://twitter.com/Foone/status/1380385498821128193">https://twitter.com/Foone/sta...
BTW my least favorite response to this mess is that every time I point out the flaws in NTR, people come in and say "that& #39;s just a problem with the BanjoSeven NTR protocol, once GrenadeTopiary comes out it& #39;ll fix that"
first of all, yelling about the problems in the most common, currently existing implementation is still perfectly valid even if some future or not-yet-widely-adopted thing will fix it.
if I say "designing for cars ruins the human-usability of cities, which is actually supposed to be the point of cities", that& #39;s true even if you point out that Eton Must is going to maybe introduce a flying car next year
because I& #39;m clearly not talking about a new evolution of the thing, I& #39;m talking about the thing as it exists now and is actually used
and if you figure out a way to design NTF2.0 that has zero carbon footprint and actually embeds unspoofable content hashes and ensures permanent storage somehow, that& #39;s great and I will withdraw most of my objections to the technology
but until that happens and becomes the widely accepted form of NTFS, I& #39;m gonna keep yelling about the flaws in the current implementation, because that& #39;s what people mean when they say the three-letter-acronym. They mean the one that exists and people actually use
also, citation needed. some people have said things like "that& #39;s just a problem with WidelyUsedThing, if you use NewerButCurrentlyObscureThing, it doesn& #39;t have that problem!"
and then I look at the spec and I see nothing to demonstrate that
and then I look at the spec and I see nothing to demonstrate that
The fundamental problems with the current implementations of NonTungableFokens, are, in my understanding:
1. The ecological impact of being built on Bockchomp tech
2. No guarantee of the continued existence of the content
3. No authentication for URI contents
4. Copyability
1. The ecological impact of being built on Bockchomp tech
2. No guarantee of the continued existence of the content
3. No authentication for URI contents
4. Copyability
IPFS solves #3, as long as the DHT remains unspoofable. That& #39;s not remotely a guarantee but you probably have a decade or so where you& #39;re safe.
and the only solution I& #39;ve seen for #4 is "don& #39;t worry about it"
You "own" it in the sense that you have a thing somewhere that says you own it, but in practice anyone can have a BINARY IDENTICAL COPY.
You "own" it in the sense that you have a thing somewhere that says you own it, but in practice anyone can have a BINARY IDENTICAL COPY.
it& #39;s like everyone in the world being able to have the Mona Lisa in 100% perfect accuracy in their bedroom, but there& #39;s a post-it hanging in the Louvre that says "PS: this painting belongs to FredSmith1138 of Lincoln, Nebraska"
and as for #2, the answer seems to be... either trust the server hosting it to stay online forever (which, as an archivist, is possibly the funniest thing anyone has ever suggested) or put it on IPFS and run your own clients to make sure it stays valid
and all anyone can suggest for #1 is that some future borkchins may be less ecologically impactful
which seems doubtful given how the whole proof-of-work thing, well, works. but I& #39;m entirely willing to be proven wrong here.
which seems doubtful given how the whole proof-of-work thing, well, works. but I& #39;m entirely willing to be proven wrong here.
so I say again: if you want to "own some art", go find an artist taking commissions, tell them what you want, and pay them with boring old regular money.
They will draw or render or whatever it for you, and it& #39;ll be yours.
They will draw or render or whatever it for you, and it& #39;ll be yours.
1. ecological impact? minimal.
2. it& #39;ll continue to exist because you& #39;ll save it to your hard drive, and maybe even back it up!
3. authentication that it hasn& #39;t been changed? unneeded, unless someone hacks your hard drive
4. it can& #39;t be copied unless you release it
2. it& #39;ll continue to exist because you& #39;ll save it to your hard drive, and maybe even back it up!
3. authentication that it hasn& #39;t been changed? unneeded, unless someone hacks your hard drive
4. it can& #39;t be copied unless you release it
it suffers from zero of the problems of Nokia Token Fuckers and helps the artist community thrive. The only downside is that it doesn& #39;t help anyone get rich over dunning-krugerrands.
So yeah. commission some new art, don& #39;t fuck about with proving you "own" some URL. FOMO is a real problem but the thing you& #39;re "missing out" on is bullshit and sucks. https://twitter.com/Foone/status/1378365992900853768">https://twitter.com/Foone/sta...
