Great thread, with the hilarious addition of indignant cryptobros in the QTs of various tweets going "Clearly the OP hasn't heard that sometimes NFT sellers are also selling perks like a copyright or license for the art with the NFT, which means the NFT has value."
If you're selling an album or tickets to an event or a piece of artwork -- that is legitimately yours and that you're actually selling -- and you attach it to an NFT, the NFT adds nothing to the process but waste/expense and hype.
Would I like it if there was some open source system where small venues, even ones that aren't particularly tech savvy, could set up ticketing and sell tickets for events without partnering with a big company? Sure.

NFT techbros who say NFTs are this want to be the big company.
And the two things that NFTs add to the process -- waste and hype -- only make them artificially more expensive, the first directly and the second indirectly.
*crypto voice*

"Obviously this person hasn't heard of CoffeeBase, where if you buy a token (currently trading at $13,739) you can scan it at my local coffee shop and get one small drip coffee for free. You don't have to buy the coffee. The NFT does that."
And if there's an online or offline event you want to participate in and the tickets are in the form of an NFT, the NFT didn't do anything... you were forced to buy an NFT to attend the event, for no reason.
Nothing says "My product has value and uses" like making people buy it in order to get other things they actually want.
Some of the QTs on that thread are touting "digital scarcity" as the future, which gets to what I was talking about the other day: the central failure of NFTs is that they're recreating the flaws and limitations of offline existence.

"There's no scarcity online" isn't a problem.
It honestly makes me dizzy thinking about how they've completely missed that the point of technological process for humanity as a whole is to destroy scarcity, abolish and overturn it. A "post-scarcity society" would be a good thing.
It's basically the original sin of cryptocurrency, in that the whole idea was to reinstate the gold standard but sub in something intrinsically worthless (gold has uses!) for gold, under the magical thinking that says "the value of something is the 'work' of extracting it."
The reason crypto mining/minting is so wasteful in terms of processing power is the foundational myth of crypto being that if you can prove you (your computer rig) worked really hard to produce nothing, this inherently bestows value on the nothing.
Which means the idea that investments in crypto will lead to advancements in computing and energy production that solves the wastefulness is a lie, because if it becomes too easy, they'll just have to make it hard again.
There's something bleakly hilarious about the way the same people who tout NFTs "because they offer decentralization" get excited when a big corporation announces an interest in them.
Money talks even louder in cryptoland than it does offline. You have to buy in to have a voice, and -- adjusting for things like technical savvy and crypto metagame -- the more money you have, the louder your voice is.

So it'll be centralized as soon as money wants it to be.
And honestly, I think most of the cryptobros know this? I mean, they're always crowing about how they imagine all us doubters and haters will be left behind in the cryptofuture.

Which means their future is centralized and stratified.
If the crypto future is decentralized and egalitarian, then it couldn't possibly leave me behind. I could willfully ignore it for fifty years and then, at the age of 91, jump aboard with both feet. Who would stop me? What would stop me?
And sure, if crypto hadn't meaningfully changed in that time (which also presupposes human society as we know it wasn't devastated by climate change or anything else), I could, at the age of 91, mint my own new coin or whatever, but a crypto-world would have no need of it.
In a future where crypto is an established thing, there are established winners who have managed to become THE standard for currency, for event ticketing, for whatever.

And chances are they belong to Amazon, Google, Disney, etc. Why wouldn't they? Who would stop them?
"But we're forming DAOs to get away from corporate control!"

Right, and your cute little bottom-up non-hierarchical organization will have majority control bought up by a giant corporation five seconds after you prove it's worth buying up.
Making your organization bottom-up instead of top-down doesn't prevent centralization. It only changes what an entity needs to buy in order to centralize control of it.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Alexandra S. Pumpkins-Erin

Alexandra S. Pumpkins-Erin Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @AlexandraErin

8 Oct
Randomly popped into my head how different the plot of the Seinfeld episode where Jerry and George steal a limo sent for two VIPs (who turn out to be Neo-Nazi leaders) would go today, when antifa on social media would have immediately figured out who they actually were.
So instead of all the counterprotesters assuming that the two guys who show up to the rally in the fascists' limo must be the fash, they would have been hailed... a Jewish comedian leaving two Nazis stranded at the airport or wherever.
I mean, TV show Jerry's level of celebrity was whatever the plot/gag demanded so he wouldn't necessarily immediately be recognized as "Jerry Seinfeld, the famous comedian", but the crowd today would know what the men they were looking for looked like.
Read 6 tweets
8 Oct
The "radical ideology" that people really fear from trans people is the idea that your body is your own, something that you have, inhabit, own, and can do with as you please.
The latest anti-trans rhetoric is very stark about this, as the example I mentioned the other day where someone was claiming (to general agreement) in a TERF thread that the mind "exists to serve" the body and should be changed rather than altering the body...
...or the increasingly arcane formulation of "simple biological reality" by transphobes, which is now as esoteric and dehumanizing as "bodies are organized around the production of gametes".
Read 10 tweets
8 Oct
So I've been reading the Dishonored tabletop RPG and I think they have my favorite version of the "oh, we're not doing attributes" attribute system that I've seen yet.
If you've closely followed my game design theory threads, you might know that I have a strong disdain for systems that give things players will need to refer to in play cute/twee names that don't convey what they're for, like having a stat named Hot, Cool, Hard, Weird, or Wisdom.
(And if you think "Wisdom" doesn't belong on that list, just wait until people start replying with what they think it *obviously* means. NB: I'm not asking.)
Read 25 tweets
7 Oct
This IS one of the most hilarious things about NFTs, because when the bubble began, the point that got hyped up the most was "guaranteed unique", leading to widespread confusion among the public when, for instance, everybody at a ceremony got "the same NFT" of Chadwick Boseman.
Which is probably why the NFTer-Grifters have moved on from "uniqueness" as a hype point to "scarcity", which I feel is going to backfire on them in a more subtle way, as you can't explain how a digital asset is "scarce" without revealing you just chose not to make more of them.
And if you can choose to make more of them at any time, then nobody's "investment" in your "scarce" asset is actually secure. They're just trusting you not to flood the market and devalue their "holdings". Nothing in the NFT framework prevents this, or even can prevent it.
Read 13 tweets
7 Oct
TFW you have food sensory issues and can only survive on a diet of copypasta and gamer girl bath water.
As someone with food sensory issues, I can tell you exactly what the difference is between Kellogg's frosted mini wheats and the bargain brands (K has thinner biscuits, thus higher ratio of sugar frosting to extruded fiber), and also that it's no reason to cross a picket line.
If you have a need that can literally only be answered by crossing a picket line, I'm not going to tell you to not do it, but... you don't have to make it a public referendum. You're not going to benefit from it.
Read 8 tweets
6 Oct
The most ridiculous "well actually" I ever received on here was somebody who replied to one of my tweets about being "wide awake at two in the morning" to tell me that well actually "morning" refers to the time after the sun has risen, and I meant 2 at night.
Not to get all timecube in here, but... there's more than one morning. That is, "morning" has more than one meaning, and which one a person means -- when they don't overlap -- is clear from context.
Like, day and night are opposites, and when it's night it's not day, but a daily occurrence can take place at night and there are 24 hours in a day.

Words mean things, but they also mean other things, some of which seem contradictory.
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(