No one should invest in NFTs. The main purpose of an NFT is to prove ownership. Imagine musicians being able to sell their music without being price gouged by spotify and the buyer having rights to use their music without copyright violations, if the artist saw fit. There are tons of great use cases, if you're willing to look.
Most of the articles I just posted aren't very recently, and I get where people are coming from with dated articles, but I posted them to show how a lot of fortune 500 companies found some value in trying to release something digital for their consumers. Most of these articles don't highlight great utilities of the technology. The best analogy I can give you is when the internet was coming around, everyone thought we'd just be on bland messaging boards or sharing research papers to different universities. Now, we can literally do anything with it. The whole point of digital assets are to distinguish and solidify ownership.
Not sure, I don't like Starbucks. But, hypothetically, a coffee chain could offer to sell a limited number of NFTs to their customers that would allow those customers to get discounts on future purchases.
The first iterations of anything are typically undesirable. I see, absolutely, no appeal in paying an outrageous amount of money for a digital picture. However, I do see great potential use cases for the technology, in regards to actually owning assets. Now, everything is a subscription based model. You can "buy" movies on streaming services, but do you actually own them? If you stop subscribing to that provider, do you get to take your movies with you? When you buy tickets from Livenation/Ticketmaster, do you really own those tickets if you got them for a family members birthday and they don't allow you to transfer them as a gift?
Thank you for taking the time to comment. <3
Please check the sidebar. If it just popped up on you while you were scrolling through content outside of this community, my apologies.
No one should invest in NFTs. The main purpose of an NFT is to prove ownership. Imagine musicians being able to sell their music without being price gouged by spotify and the buyer having rights to use their music without copyright violations, if the artist saw fit. There are tons of great use cases, if you're willing to look.
Most of the articles I just posted aren't very recently, and I get where people are coming from with dated articles, but I posted them to show how a lot of fortune 500 companies found some value in trying to release something digital for their consumers. Most of these articles don't highlight great utilities of the technology. The best analogy I can give you is when the internet was coming around, everyone thought we'd just be on bland messaging boards or sharing research papers to different universities. Now, we can literally do anything with it. The whole point of digital assets are to distinguish and solidify ownership.
Not sure, I don't like Starbucks. But, hypothetically, a coffee chain could offer to sell a limited number of NFTs to their customers that would allow those customers to get discounts on future purchases.
It makes my eyes sweat.
The first iterations of anything are typically undesirable. I see, absolutely, no appeal in paying an outrageous amount of money for a digital picture. However, I do see great potential use cases for the technology, in regards to actually owning assets. Now, everything is a subscription based model. You can "buy" movies on streaming services, but do you actually own them? If you stop subscribing to that provider, do you get to take your movies with you? When you buy tickets from Livenation/Ticketmaster, do you really own those tickets if you got them for a family members birthday and they don't allow you to transfer them as a gift?
Perceptive