If all you can see is the hype train, you shouldn’t be making those decisions for yourself.
Hey, the blockchain completely revolutionized everything. /s
Darknet drugs remain revolutionary
AI is not gonna leave. “Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, and you feed him for a lifetime” is a say that have aged like milk.
Give a man an LLM that can churn out poor-quality fish day after day for free until he gets used to not having to think for himself, then start charging for the privilege, and you’ll make money for a lifetime.
You’re going to be waiting until you are dead.
AI, in some form, is here to stay, but the bubble of tech companies shoving it into everything will pop at some point. As for what that would look like, it would probably be like the dot-com bubble.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Don’t forget “THE CLOUD” and “IoT”
AR is already being hyped.
Got my Google Glass pre-ordered
AR was pre-NFT in my mind. Google glasses etc were hyped like crazy before VR took over the hype and was meant to be a “revolution” in gaming…
meant to be a “revolution” in gaming…
If you tried Half-life: Alyx and don’t find it revolutionary then I’d be curious to know what’s enough for you. It’s not popular, sure, but it doesn’t mean the quality of the few experiences that do exist aren’t legitimate.
You are right, I’m just seeing renewed interest.
AR is going to become a big thing, the hardware just needs to get there first (and it is indeed getting closer)
This has been the case the entire time, it’s always been a promising technology. It’s not a new thing at all (then again, neither were LLMs, really. Most people just didn’t have this insight into the field)
Augmented Reality? Wasn’t that like a 00s thing?
It’s a 40s thing that companies in the 00s decided to preemptively suck up all of the IP required to make it work.
Once the technology becomes cheap enough to sell to smartphone users there will only be a few companies who’re legally allowed to create the devices so they can have a free monopoly.
Kind of like how Apple tried to patent everything related to multitouch screen smartphones and then sue all of their competitors out of business.
We don’t have the available technology to make good AR that’s cheap enough for consumers. But, when we do, you’ll find that a few tech companies will claim ownership of key components because of products that they briefly made back in the 00s.
Google’s Glass headset wasn’t a product, it was an IP squatting strategy that sold a few units.
Every day we grow closer to cyberpunk dystopia and the corporation wars.
NFT was the worst “tech” crap I have ever even heard about, like pure 100% total full scam. Kind of impressed that anyone could be so stupid they’d fall for it.
The technology is not a scam. The tech was used to make scam products.
NFTs can be useful as tickets, vouchers, certificates of authenticity, proof of ownership of something that is actually real (not a jpeg), etc.
NFT’s are a scam. Blockchain less so but still has no use.
NFTs were nothing but an URL saved in a decentralized database, linking to a centralized server.
That implementation of NFTs was a total scam, yes. There are some cool potential applications for NFTs … but mostly it was a solution looking for a problem. Even situations where it could be useful - like tracking ownership of things like concert tickets - weren’t going to fly, because the companies don’t want to relinquish control of the second-hand marketplace. They don’t get their cut that way.
But where specifically does it help to not have approved central servers?
Wouldn’t entertainment venues rather retain full control? How would we get out from under Ticketmaster’s monopoly? If the government can just seize property, then why would we ask anyone else who owns a plot of land?
Wouldn’t entertainment venues rather retain full control?
Pretty sure ticketmaster has all the control.
How would we get out from under Ticketmaster’s monopoly?
Using a decentralized and open network (aka NFTs).
If the government can just seize property, then why would we ask anyone else who owns a plot of land?
It’s not about using NFTs to seize land. It’s more that governments are terrible at keeping records. Moving proof of ownership to an open and decentralized network could be an improvement.
FWIW I think capitalism with destroy the planet with or without NFTs. But it’s fairly obtuse to deny that NFTs could disintermediate a variety of centralized cartels.
I know people TODAY that collect limited release, hard to get into, exclusive NFTs. The grift is still grifting, but it’s hidden in the corners of the Internet.
We got to use the word fungible a lot though, so that was cool
I always liked the response “go funge yourself.”
You know what? Fuck you!
Funges all your tokens
But it has no relation to fungi, which is not cool
You know, I’m something of a fun guy, myself.
NFTs could have been great, if they had been used FOR the consumer, and not to scam them.
Best thing I can think of is to verify licenses for digital products/games. Buy a game, verify you own it like you would with a CD using an NFT, and then you can sell it again when you’re done.
Do this with serious stuff like AAA Games or Professional Software (think like borrowing a copy of Photoshop from an online library for a few days while you work on a project!) instead of monkey pictures and you could have the best of both worlds for buying physical vs buying online.
However, that might make corporations less money and completely upend modern licencing models, so no one was willing to do it.
I think there’s a technical hurdle here. There’s no reliable way to enforce unique access to an NFT. Anyone with access to the wallet’s private key (or seed phrase) can use the NFT, meaning two or more people could easily share a game or software license just by sharing credentials. That kind of undermines the licensing control in a system like this.
I mean, the same goes for a login. People share Steam accounts too.
two or more people could easily share a game or software license just by sharing credentials
So like disks? Before everything started checking hwids. Just like the comment said, it would make corporations less money so they wouldn’t do it.
Well, that’s the point. In order for that system to work as described, you would need some kind of centralized authority to validate and enforce it. Once you’ve introduced that piece, there’s no point using NFTs anymore - you can just use any kind of simpler and more efficient key/authentication mechanism.
So even if the corporations wanted to use such a system (which, to your point, they do not), it still wouldn’t make sense to use NFTs for it.
Blockchain with a central authority.
Yeah IDK…
Exactly. That’s why it’s so pointless.
There is nothing you mentioned which couldn’t already be done, and is in fact already being done, faster and more reliably by existing technology.
Also that was not even what NFTs was about, because you didn’t even buy the digital artwork and NFTs would never be able to include it. So it would be supremely useless for the thing you are talking about.
Existing solutions are always centralized.
If said Photoshop had a nft licensing service, it could’ve stayed online for longer. Legit old versions of Adobe software that had one-time purchase licenses can’t be activated anymore due to servers being brought down. And that’s how they want it while pushing subscriptions for 10+ years.
The exact same thing would have happened with an NFT licensing service. They would still link to obsolete servers. The problem is not a problem which NFT would solve, the problem is the problem of obsolete servers, which are very easy for adobe to fix without any useless NFT technology, if they really wanted to (but of course they don’t)
Trying to find any application for NFT, I came to the conclusion that it would work IF you and me could be the servers there, having a copy of blockchain and verifying validity of keys until we get bored and quit that. It would target one particular issue - cantralized validation on Adobe side. It’d be inefficient and all, but it may deny them some power over usage of their legitly purchased product.
Sure, but what do they get for using that system and giving up control? If they don’t agree to use it then it’s an illegal copy and you might as well pirate it.
The issue is this doesn’t solve a problem that isn’t already solved. One of the big arguments I always heard was an example using skins from games that can be transfered to other games. We can already do that! Just look at the Steam marketplace for an example. You just need the server infrastructure to do it. Sure, NFTs could make it so the company doesn’t control the market, but what benefit do they get for using NFTs and distributing the software then?
99.9% of the use cases were solutions looking for a problem. I could see a use for something like deeds or other documents, but that’s about it.
Yeah, Sort of.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a huge fan of NFTs and do think there’s easier ways, but I would agree that taking market control away from the companies owning it would kind of be the point (but I do think you can probably still do this concept without any NFTs).
Sure, steam could allow game trading right now with no need for NFTs whatsoever, but the point would be that I can trade a game I bought through Xbox, to someone on Steam, and then go buy something on the Epic store with the money.
And all of it without some crazy fee from the involved platforms.
But that also would probably still require government intervention to force companies to accept this. Because, again, none of the companies would actually want this. NTF or not that doesn’t change.
Yeah, it only works if they agree to honor it, which they have no obligation to do. If the government wants to step in and force them to, there’s still no need for NFTs. There could just be a central authority that the government controls that handles it. Why would NFTs need to be involved? NFTs are only as useful as the weakest point in the chain. As soon as whatever authority (the government, Steam, whatever) stops working or stops honoring it then it’s useless.
The whole NFT/crypto currency thing is so incredibly frustrating. Like, being able to verify that a given file is unique could be very useful. Instead, we simply used the technology for scamming people.
But it’s totally legit brah, it’s just like trading cards but on a computer bro, you can make jay pegs totally unique bro, nobody else in the world can have the same image as you brah, it proves you’re the only owner of it bro, trust me bro it’s super secure and technological bruh
I don’t think NFTs can do that either. Collections are copied to another contract address all the time. There isn’t a way to verify if there isn’t another copy of an NFT on the blockchain.
I didn’t know this and it’s absolutely hilarious. Literally totally undermines the use of Blockchain to begin with.
No, it doesn’t, it just means that Non-Fungible Tokens are…
Fungible…
So, they’re FNFT? Or just T?
wouldn’t it be just FTs?
Copying the info on another contract doesn’t mean it’s fungible, to verify ownership you would need the NFT and to check that it’s associated to the right contract.
Let’s say digital game ownership was confirmed via NFT, the launcher wouldn’t recognize the “same” NFT if it wasn’t linked to the right contract.
But you would need a centralized authority to say which one is the “right contract”. If a centralized authority is necessary in this case, then there is less benefit of using NFTs. It’s no longer a decentralized.
Yes and no, with the whole blockchain being public it’s pretty easy to figure out which contract is the original one.
Lets say you don’t have a central authority declaring one is official. How would you search the entire blockchain to verify you have the original NFT?
The NFT is useful with a central authority though, it’s used to confirm the ownership of digital goods ex: if it’s associated to digital games then the distributor knows which contract is the original since they created it in the first place
NFTs if anything are basically CryptoCurrency-based DRMs & we should always oppose DRMs
Good, now read it
NFTs are a row in a database.
They are not, in any way, DRM.
There isn’t a way to verify if there isn’t another copy of an NFT on the blockchain.
Incorrect. An NFT is tied to a particular token number at a particular address.
The URI the NFT points to may not be unique but NFT is unique.
The NFT is only unique within the contract address. The whole contract can be trivially copied to another contract address and the whole collection can be cloned. It’s why opensea has checkmarks for “verified” collections. There are a unofficial BoredApe collections which are copies of the original one.
Yes, the URI can point to the same monkey jpg. But a different contract address means it is a different NFT.
Completely agree, but the guy I responding to thinks the monkey jpeg is unique across the whole blockchain, when that isn’t true. The monkey jpeg can be copied. There’s no uniqueness enforced in a blockchain.
The key point is that the jpeg is not the NFT
It’s crazy that people could see NFTs were a scam but can’t see the same concept in virtual coins.
I’m not defending other cryptocoins or anything, they might be a ponzy scheme or some other form. But in the end they at least only pretended to be that, a valuta. Which they are, even though they aren’t really used much like that. NFT’s on the otherhand promised things that were always just pure technical bullshit. And you had to be a complete idiot not to see it. So call it a double scam.
because there are some buisness that accept some crypto, mostly grey or black market ones, but respectable companies none the less.
A large majority of “real” money is digital, like 80% non-m1 m2. The only real difference between crypto and USD is that the crypto is a public multiple ledger system that allows you to be your own bank.
I’ve heard the sales pitch, it’s a ponzi scheme with receipts. An open pyramid, so to speak. At best a volatile store of wealth.
So is fiat.
You’re not sold on the concept of money? I guess that fits right in on Lemmy.
Potentially volatile right, since who knows if/when various stablecoins might depeg
What do you mean with being your own bank? Can you receive deposits from customers? Are you allowed to lend a portion of the deposists onwards for business loans/mortgages? If not, you are not your “own bank”.
I think you mean that you can use it as a deposit for money, similar to, say, an old sock.
Banks have multiple ledgers to keep track of who owns what and where it all came from. They also use ancient fortran/cobol written IBM owned software to manage all bank to bank transactions, which is the barrier for entry.
Blockchain is literally a multiple ledger system. That is all it is. The protocol to send and recieve funds is open for all.
Locally stored BTC is when you’re the bank. For all the good and bad that comes with it.
That sounds super cool and stuff, but it has nothing to do with the essence of banking. Banks are businesses that take deposits for safekeeping and that provide credit. Banks in fact outdate Fortran by a 1000 years or so.
Oh, my apologies for not taking note of your 0.18% savings account interest rate.
It’s crazy that people see crypto as a scam but can’t see the same concept in fiat currencies.
Governments don’t accept cryptocurrencies for taxes. They’re not real currencies.
They don’t usually accept other nation’s currencies in general.
No, but for every real currency it’s accepted (and required) to pay taxes somewhere.
“Real currency” also gets created or destroyed by a government at whims. Anybody clutching their USD rn isn’t going to benefit in the long run.
Because the pyramid scheme is still going strong with them, exactly because new victims are continually falling for them. NFTs lost their hype so quickly that the flow of new victims basically completely stopped, and so the bottom went out of them much faster.
I think a big part of the problem with NFT is that they are so abstract people don’t understand what they can and cannot do. Effectively, with NFT, you have people that hold a copy of a Spiderman comic in hand and believe they own all forms of spiderman.
Essentially, when you boil it down, you can turn this into “it’s provable that individual X has possession of NFT identifier x,y,z”. It’s kind of like how you can have the deed to a piece of property in your desk, but that doesn’t prevent 15 people from squatting on it.
It’s so abstract you can use it to fleece people. Even after 2 years of hype, people STILL do not understand them properly.
Essentially, when you boil it down, you can turn this into “it’s provable that individual X has possession of NFT identifier x,y,z”. It’s kind of like how you can have the deed to a piece of property in your desk, but that doesn’t prevent 15 people from squatting on it.
It isn’t even that. It’s is identifying which drawer in your desk the deed is placed, but there is no guarantee that the drawer contains the deed.
Now imagine trying to explain all this to the unwashed masses… it’s no wonder the explanation they got was “buy this, it’s going to the mooooon!!!”
Non-technical people believing in magic that can make them rich.
Hey, A1 is great so long as you have it on the right dish. I dunno that I’d call it a “hype train” either, because it’s been around for years!
/s
These are amazing years to take notes on who is saying “this will disappear” or “this will be the future” and making sure to stop listening those who assured something as certain and that did not end up happening.
Another banger from lemmites
Mate, you can use AI for porn
If literally -nothing- else can convince you, just the fact that it’s an automated goon machine should tell you that we are not going to live this one down as easily as shit like NFTs
deleted by creator
you’re about 5 years too late
deleted by creator
Has anyone actually jerked off to AI porn? No shaming but for me there’s this fundamental emptiness to it. Like it can’t impress me because it’s exactly like what you expected it to be.
ai porn is all trash tho.
Yet it will only improve with time
Imagine your fursona getting freaky with your waifu without having to commission them. And having infinite different ones come up.
waifu
you completely lost me here.
If someone on pawb.social is saying it, I’ll trust them for sure
Mate, you can use AI for porn
A classic scarce resource on the internet. Why pick through a catalog of porn that you could watch 24/7 for decades on end, of every conceivable variation and intersection and fetish, when you can type in “Please show me naked boobies” into Grok and get back some poorly rendered half-hallucinated partially out of frame nipple?
just the fact that it’s an automated goon machine should tell you that we are not going to live this one down
The computer was already an automated goon machine. This is yet one more example of AI spending billions of dollars yet adding nothing of value.
Not that I disagree with you on how idiotic it is, but with AI you can give it very precise requirements on what you want to see.
There are people who would pay to have porn videos created to their taste. User fuckswithducks on reddit explained this a few years ago. Now people who have such extremely specific desires don’t have to shell out thousands for a private video from their favorite star.
with AI you can give it very precise requirements on what you want to see
Setting aside the fact that you could do this already with a sufficiently well-tagged library of traditional pornography, you’re neglecting two big caveats
-
People’s porn tastes are so rarified that they need exacting specifications in order to enjoy it
-
AI consistently and faithfully delivers on queries, rather than pumping out a bunch of vague approximations full of uncanny valley graphical artifacts
There are people who would pay to have porn videos created to their taste.
And they can already do that with Cam Girls, for infinitesimally less than it costs to run a high end AI model.
Now people who have such extremely specific desires don’t have to shell out thousands for a private video from their favorite star.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veblen_good
The high price is what makes the luxury good appealing. If everyone can get it, then it isn’t what a handful of high rollers are after.
The real “money in AI porn” isn’t reshuffled budget-tier bulk content. It’s the promise of exclusive ultra-high-end luxury taboo. And the end of that road is just the porn version of Star Citizen. Someone who has baited a bunch of 4chan stogies with more money than sense into putting up $40k for the opportunity to have a five-way with Leia Oregon, Jessica Rabbit, and Rhea Ripley in six months to a year, once we’ve tuned the prompt just right.
But that’s not any kind of industry. It’s just scams.
The running cost of the AI model is shared between users. cam girl donations - technically also, but if too many people donate, you get less attention personally.
Personally I’m just going to keep on watching free porn. The gambling ads at least pay out to real people instead of fossil fuel companies.
-
Not that I disagree with you on how idiotic it is, but with AI you can give it very precise requirements on what you want to see.
Which brings up ethical issues that the techbros seem to handwave away.
What’s more ethical - paying someone to record and rape a duck, or making a computer play pretend?
To be clear, u/fuckswithducks had a rubber duck fetish, so no actual ducks were involved in that specific case. Though I get your point.
what if, and hear me out… you combine both and use ai porn to get nft
My biggest frustration is how confidently arrogant they are about it
AI is literally the biggest problem technology has ever created and almost no one even realizes it yet
The main difference is that crypto/NFTs actually exist and work as advertised while “AI” doesn’t exist.
It’s pretty incredible to see people be so critical of crypto/NFTs while pumping phony “AI” hype at the same time.
I wonder what the next empty hype will be about…
