/vt/ - Virtual Youtubers

yeah the NFTs will finance their condoms so i can fuck your oshii

>>12515202
不可替代令牌资产形式的肋三明治

>>12515202
Uh yeah that's when the end of vtuber is happening
I swear retards keep pushing NFT agenda this month

>>12516287
nft is the future, stfu

>>12516411
Shut the fuck up, they literally have no value, i can simply save them with a right click

>>12516287
B-but Kizuna Ai is doing NFTs.....

>>12516411
NFT is the most blatant money laundering operation in the history of humanity, both in size and brazenness.

>>12516411

Cringe fad market of dressup game jpegs pushed by millionaires trying to wring money out of elon musk fanboys. Unfortunately it's just starting to take off in japan, but I can't imagine any applications of NFT would work with a vtuber. selling pekora.png to the highest bidder would just piss off the rest of her fans and cause more drama than the money is worth, I'd imagine

>>12516411
>nft is the future

>>12516529
She was doing crypto bullshit since before NFTs were a thing, pretty sure that project she involved herself ni turned out to be a scam lol

>>12516862
>Unfortunately it's just starting to take off in japan,
Yeah a lot of vtuber artists, including some Hololive artists have gotten into it

>>12516287
anon, japanese love NFTs. they were into bitcoin long before it was ever popular in the US. look at who Yagoo follows on twitter too kek

Hololive is established by retarded techbros
Niji jumps on every single mildly popular trend
Honestly it's a coin toss as to who will go in first

Hell no, if bitcoin ever implements something similar on a 3rd layer i guess it could work but that's unlikely.
Only collectibles we need are physical, anything else is pirateable garbage.

>>12515202
If either do the drama will be terrible. Twitter fags fucking hate NFTs and cryptobros, and just mentioning NFTs will bring those groups into the audience.
Imagine clippers selling Hololive clips as NFTs. Or people starting a vtuber meme coin that turns out to be a scam like every meme coin.

>>12516459
it must be a bait

>>12518346
>NASFAQ scam

Why risk taking part in crypto scam when people are willingly giving the companies money while getting nothing in exchange and it's perfectly legal?

>>12515202
>NFT
isn't this shit a scam?

>>12515202
hololive doing nfts will actually be the "final yab" you guys go on about

>>12518346
Clippers already make money off monetization.

>>12515202
ITSS FUCKING TULIPS
YOUR DIGITAL ASSET DOESNT EVEN EXIST IN THE BLOCKCHAIN
ITS JUST A LINK TO A SERVER URL THAT SOMEONE HAS TO PAY TO MAINTAIN
ITS NOT EVEN REPRODUCTION OR COMMERCIAL RIGHTS
ITS NOT EVEN ROYALTY-FREE RIGHTS
ITS NOT EVEN AN ENFORCEABLE SMART CONTRACT

>>12518953
Noooooo my nftrinoooss.

>>12518723
unironically this, yeah. what's worse is that the talents who know that it's retarded will undoubtedly be obligated by the company to either pretend criticisms of any decisions involving it don't exist or even directly shill nft garbage. it sounds like a fucking nightmare.

cryptofags need to be purged from this earth

>>12519521
Yeah, anything outside of bitcoin is garbage. Even bitcoin maxis, fuck them.

>>12515202
God I hope not.

>>12518675
Yes. Yes it is.

Remember that CryptoCucks need to uniroinically get the rope.

>>12518346
>Vtuber NFT drama
imagine

>>12515202
thank god no

>>12518346
>Or people starting a vtuber meme coin that turns out to be a scam like every meme coin.
Some /biz/man actually tried something like this; dunno if it ever took off or not.

>>12515202
Literally no one but cryptscammers and neets give a single fuck about nft, fuck off.

>>12517601
>>12516862
It's a pretty sweet deal for artists desu

>>12515202
How long until Kizuna Ai does lewd 3D streams? Talk about selling out.

I still don't understand NFTs. Why pay for something that you can right click + save? Is it autism or money laundering?

>>12518953
Imagine if you bought a recipe for a cake but you could only make the cake at someone else's house, and anyone could copy the cake at any time without paying you at all.

>>12525901
>Is it autism or money laundering?
Both

>>12525901
it is similar to pyramid schemes. Objects are bought with the thought that they will increase in value due to scarcity, then they are attractive to speculators. Buying one increases its price and continues the cycle until you want to recover the investment and the last people who buy finance the first ones, these losing their money, because unlike an investment (which also has its problems), the nft do not generate value.

and the positive attributes that nfts could have (such as a purchase record) are totally buried by the cost of energy required to maintain the blockchain.

Totally not money laundering by the way

>>12518953
it's a transferrable autograph

>>12515202
Nft event tickets, but they are collectible.
Theres no downsides.

>>12518346
I see people legitimately get mad over NFTs on Twitter and I just don't get it. But I guess what Twitter people get mad over rarely makes sense.

>>12528754
they should get mad, it's fucking retarded

>>12528754
This is the first time twitter getting mad about something has been useful, I'm sick of this retarded scam getting shilled everywhere

>>12529803
Retards deserve to get scammed

>>12528754
people betting their savings and criminals laundering is one thing, but there's also a sizable environmental impact from all the energy usage
in general I could care less about people losing their "investments" or otherwise being taken for a ride
however I think there is room for "owning" digital autographs, just buy carbon credits when you do
https://davidsuzuki.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/purchasing-carbon-offsets-guide-for-canadians.pdf
a lot of miners try to move to hydro, so you don't need to assume worst-case emissions, but there are a ton on coal too

>>12528754
it's fashionable to hate on
there's legitimacy; crypto has had virtually zero positive social impact, and it's consuming an absurd amount of energy, but most of the nft hate I see is conflating it with copyrights.
NFT buyers are aware it doesn't grant exclusivity, this strawman needs to die already.

>>12531169
even its non strawman purpose is literally only a purpose for schizophrenics. nobody normal thinks you need a record of purchase for a piece of digital art, especially when 99.9% of that art is worthless mass produced token pngs rather than actual art of non cryptard-inflated value any sort of non-falsifiable bill of ownership could even approach mattering for.

NFTs need to die already.

The most retarded thing is that even if you buy the pipedream that it has value, anyone can start their own blockchain and 'own' the same NFT on that one. Conveniently no one mentions why their own selected blockchain will be the one to end up as legitimate. Sure, you paid 5000 bucks for a receipt guaranteed by blockchain54359245, but I have one I paid 5 bucks for on blockchain14556923, suck it up. Both people can just call the other side fake.
It's a triple gamble; your blockchain must 'win', rights to NFT must be seen as legitimate, AND people must want to be seen as owning your art so much that they will pay you money for it. It's even worse than investing in one of the fifty thousand failed cryptocoins.

>>12531519
of course the crypto{cats,monkeys,punks} are just shenanigans,
in theory there's value owning a 5mm-sensei nft.
honestly I'd cherish owning even 1.7% of an Ina nft, if it weren't for the terrible externalities.
I'd give props to cover if they did NFT-lites using an SQLite database.

>>12532713
this isn't a problem, really.
the nft with value will be the one linked from the artists twitter, pixiv, etc.
forgeries could exist and I'm sure they'll pop up, but that's not even a thousandth as hard as securing a wallet in the first place.

we should post /vt/ screencap and chuba dox as nft png

>>12527551
>people actually PAY for things I find no value in?
>I call shenanigans!

>>12515202
When theyre dead like kizuna ai

>>12533712
That 8 bit low quality pixel art image is clearly $7.58M. Hell, i would even pay 10M if i had to bid on it.
Fuck, with how expensive they are how they can afford to do pixel art games anyways?

>>12533712
Being contrarian is fine, but to be one and piss all over Occam's Razor? You're just a shit disturbing retard, congrats

>>12533517
And thus you've hit on the other issue with blockchains - 99% of the shit people try to use them for discards the whole decentralized core concept that is supposed to fundamentally give them value. Once you bring in something else other than the blockchain to serve as an arbitrator of legitimacy, you might as well use that instead and scrape the blockchain. In this case you might as well have gotten a receipt and a certificate of ownership with the artist's signature like people have done for hundreds of years. At least that would be more legally binding.

>>12533712
shenanigans is a nice word for it

>>12534091
It's worth whatever people are willing to pay for it.
>>12534144
I'm not a contrarian, I'm just a capitalist.

>>12534406
Funny how theoretical unfettered capitalism only works when you pretend corruption and collusion do not exist

>>12534182
euhhh, hmm..
at the end of the day you have to know which public key belongs to the artist, there's no getting around that.
to be clear, in general I agree that blockchains are dumb, their tradeoffs are awful and generally awkward overkill, but you wouldn't get the ease of transferability that an nft gives with a physical painting/print.
on top of that you can do more shenanigans like splitting nfts and selling shares.

>>12534823
*when you have safeguards against corruption.
I'm not an ancap, either.

>>12534823
Regulatory Capture (C96)
tags: corruption, mindbreak, netorare, leglock

>>12534911
To elaborate, I don't believe that blockchain is completely useless. Having a decentralized, peer-supported system is an inherently useful concept - see bittorrent. But a good heuristic for such a system being useless is if you can transfer wealth within it, because then it inevitably gets co-opted by the mechanisms of current systems of wealth transfer along with all their assorted weaknesses.

A good starting use of blockchain is as a non-violable, semi-authoritative storage system for the storage of things that 99.99999% of the time have no effective value. This also makes it pointless for people to try and start their own competing blockchains because they wouldn't be able to mine any value out of it. The world has to agree on one (or a few very authoritative ones) and use it.

For example, a good change to that concept is that if you want to have some record of proof that you commissioned an artist? Put the whole contract on the (officially recognized) blockchain with the psd file. It's just data, after all. It's timestamped, so even if someone else might rip the psd file from it they can't put it back on the blockchain with their own bogus contract and claim to be the original commissioner. Of course, you can't sell or transfer this shit, it's just a record. But it's a record that can't be taken down or modified, and it's a hell of a lot better than trying to wave a psd file around you received from the artist which the people you show it to can just copy and change the metadata. The value is the combination of the inviolable timestamp of the blockchain and the data itself in that entry (the psd in particular), and that's all there is. It can't be traded, it can't be sold.

Yes, it's expensive, it's slow, and you can't make money off it. But it's also legally admissible as just another way of storing a document. It would sure as hell better resolve some recent spats over artist commissions without the whole he-said-she-said shit (if you want it to be confidential unless you need to spill everything to the public, keep it in encrypted form and release the key and address for a PR coup). Surely, if ownership is so important, this shouldn't matter, right? But somehow when they are the ones paying money with no hope of turning it into a pyramid scheme, suddenly ownership proof doesn't seem that important.

>>12538179
The issue is that a blockchain record is supervised by the majority holders of the blockchain so if you buy 51% you can alter it as you like without proof of a contract ever having existed.
If one company buys it all then they can be bribed to do whatever.

nino flimbo timbos

>>12533712
Yeah people became millionaires by paying for jpgs. Are you an idiot or something?

>>12538351
Yes. The argument would go that this failure scenario is less likely than the company bribing judges or paying off juries. In any case this is why having the blockchain store things that are valuable to specific users for their personal shared verification purposes, but of no value to most participants, makes it much less likely that a hostile attacker would invest resources for little payoff.

>>12516411
Crypto is already retarded but NFT is another layer of retardation on top of it. What a fucking nightmare.

I just want them to shill doge so I can make money. If all they're doing is making money for themselves then I'm not interested. They can have their NFT orgy if they want. It'll be largely irrelevant to me because NFTs are just the crypto equivalent of selling art. It's money laundering, plain and simple.

For the financially and artisticly challenged, NFTs are effectively a nonstarter unless there's a way for a laymen to make money from it.

>>12538179
idk if you understand the raw mechanics of blockchains and what they offer.

PoW blockchains are basically a huge race for "rare" numbers, when you find enough of those numbers you get to mint a new "block", which gets appended to the chain.
you'll also select some transactions, smart-contracts or whatever to witness alongside, and collect fees.
then you show your chain to other miners and they verify you found those rare numbers, those transactions are legit, and they'll use your chain as the source of truth.
also some algorithms happen and a new "rarity" (difficulty) is decided.
after a handful of confirmations of your transaction you can consider it immutable.

it would take more than 51% of the computing power to dominate the chain and block transactions, but even then you couldn't forge them.
you could censor and double-spend tho.


anyway NFTs are not primarily about record of proof or such, it's about owning an autograph of an asset (in a transferable sense).

you can definitely sign documents and "witness" them with a blockchain, just put the sha256 in an OP_RETURN of bitcoin, I think DocuSign offers this?
not what NFTs are about tho.

>>12538351
no, 51% attacks don't magically give you private keys.
you can censor transactions and potentially spend your coins, then unspend them by making a longer chain without that transaction.

>>12540161
immutability is a drug yo

>>12540418
>have good taste
>buy good art
>???
>profit
that's the bridge I'd sell a laymen

>>12516411

>>12515202
Imagine the shitstorm if agencies started selling off assets of their former talents who graduated.

>>12540909
You wouldn't right click a NFT

>>12540909
>>12540973
it's a cute meme but it's a mischaracterization
>>12531169

>>12518438
>NASFAQ but real
The final yab....

>>12540909
based

>>12540973
wanna bet

>>12519521
Mori is a cryptofag and Kiara talked about invrsting in Bitcoin funnily enough.

>>12516411
i'm not buying the shitty monkey NFT, fuckers

>>12533599
sell randomized rrats as NFTs

>>12516411
NFT IS a scam you retard
Name one thing that NFT good for

>>12540749
Your first part is just talking about why a blockchain is secure and immutable, which that use case takes for granted. A checksum is a good way of securely dating a document without uploading the whole thing.
NFTs are flawed from the ground up because they purport to solve a problem no one cared about. If a perfect supernatural middleman appeared in the world who was incapable of lying and could witness every time an artist said, "okay you now own the rights to my art", what effectively changes? Nothing. No one had any issue with previous methods of proving, transferring or contesting ownership. The only thing that has changed here is that people just realized that this makes it easier to make money off the greed of other people by convincing them that something they both think is worth nothing might be worth something to someone else.

>>12515202
Cover already announced their Metaverse months ago. No doubt it'll include NFTs.

>>12516544
kek