Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
Can someone who knows explain what exactly happened here? I dont really get it at all
Royalties from selling their music as an nft instead of basic streaming
so he got $158 per sale for a royalty? the royality cant be worth more than what 10% of the sale right so is the idea here that everyone pays 1.6k for an alnum listens to it then sells it on for 1.6k, gets to keep idk probably 1.25k after gas and royalties, and takes a $350 hit to listen to the album? or is this just supposed to be a speculation play like the Apes or punks are now.
Royalties from selling their music as an nft instead of basic streaming
so he got $158 per sale for a royalty? the royality cant be worth more than what 10% of the sale right so is the idea here that everyone pays 1.6k for an alnum listens to it then sells it on for 1.6k, gets to keep idk probably 1.25k after gas and royalties, and takes a $350 hit to listen to the album? or is this just supposed to be a speculation play like the Apes or punks are now.
Honestly no clue. Just saying what they said happened
you hit the nail on the head. blockchains are shitty, un-editable databases. storing actual data on them is incredibly inefficient, that's why most of the NFTs exist as basically hyperlinks to centralized entities. so in this instance, the actual files for a house title will have to be stored in a centralized database anyways, what's the point?
I don't know which is why I questioned whether there was any benefit to an individual's purchase of a home in a real estate transaction going the way the first NFT one did in Florida. I do know a couple things about the real estate side, and I don't see a benefit. Maybe the indexing is better or something? Right now, if I have any relevant information on a property (address, owner's name, tax parcel number, etc.) I can pull up a couple of decades worth of information on taxes, who paid them, deed/property transfers and any other encumbrance affecting title. If the argument is that NFT's in some way can make this process better, I'd like to hear it. It seems like more work than it's worth if every piece of real property in Escambia County, Florida would have to be analyzed and input into a new system. An example is 108 Via De Luna Drive in Pensacola Beach, Florida.
Prior tax bills, prior tax payment history, parcel details and map, assessed value, a link to the assessor's website (see next link) which has all improvement data, photos, maps, .PDF's of all prior transfers going back to 1975. How and why would this be ported to a blockchain and how labor intensive would it be even if it was a good idea? i don't see it.
The reality is that many (most?) real estate records are not currently digitized, and many digital records are incomplete. And the process by which land is sub-divided or given liens or easements is paper intensive. If everything isn’t recorded and stored just right, those records are easily lost. After Katrina, Louisiana flew in 100s of lawyers who worked for months to literally sort out just who owned what in the areas had been damaged.
All these inefficiencies are why you have to pay big money to title insurers when you buy a house. Blockchain would give you a standardized system that could allow you to trace every owner or subdivision of a parcel of land with a much higher degree of confidence than is currently possible. Obviously the transition costs would be high (although long run we could eliminate title insurance so cost could be a wash), and getting every state and county on board would be a nightmare (although this also speaks to how inefficient the current system is).
I don't know which is why I questioned whether there was any benefit to an individual's purchase of a home in a real estate transaction going the way the first NFT one did in Florida. I do know a couple things about the real estate side, and I don't see a benefit. Maybe the indexing is better or something? Right now, if I have any relevant information on a property (address, owner's name, tax parcel number, etc.) I can pull up a couple of decades worth of information on taxes, who paid them, deed/property transfers and any other encumbrance affecting title. If the argument is that NFT's in some way can make this process better, I'd like to hear it. It seems like more work than it's worth if every piece of real property in Escambia County, Florida would have to be analyzed and input into a new system. An example is 108 Via De Luna Drive in Pensacola Beach, Florida.
Prior tax bills, prior tax payment history, parcel details and map, assessed value, a link to the assessor's website (see next link) which has all improvement data, photos, maps, .PDF's of all prior transfers going back to 1975. How and why would this be ported to a blockchain and how labor intensive would it be even if it was a good idea? i don't see it.
The reality is that many (most?) real estate records are not currently digitized, and many digital records are incomplete. And the process by which land is sub-divided or given liens or easements is paper intensive. If everything isn’t recorded and stored just right, those records are easily lost. After Katrina, Louisiana flew in 100s of lawyers who worked for months to literally sort out just who owned what in the areas had been damaged.
All these inefficiencies are why you have to pay big money to title insurers when you by a house. Blockchain would give you a standardized system that could allow you to trace every owner or subdivision of a parcel of land with a much higher degree of confidence than is currently possible. Obviously the transition costs would be high (although long run we could eliminate title insurance so cost could be a wash), and getting every state and county on board would be a nightmare (although this also speaks to how inefficient the current system is).
the way I see it is that where blockchain can win is in places where there are a lot of lawyers currently involved with the sole purpose of confirming that things are correct. not like writing contracts and doing mergers, that cant really be replaced.
The reality is that many (most?) real estate records are not currently digitized, and many digital records are incomplete. And the process by which land is sub-divided or given liens or easements is paper intensive. If everything isn’t recorded and stored just right, those records are easily lost. After Katrina, Louisiana flew in 100s of lawyers who worked for months to literally sort out just who owned what in the areas had been damaged.
All these inefficiencies are why you have to pay big money to title insurers when you by a house. Blockchain would give you a standardized system that could allow you to trace every owner or subdivision of a parcel of land with a much higher degree of confidence than is currently possible. Obviously the transition costs would be high (although long run we could eliminate title insurance so cost could be a wash), and getting every state and county on board would be a nightmare (although this also speaks to how inefficient the current system is).
That all makes sense. Eliminating the need to purchase title insurance (or drastically lowering costs) was really the only tangible thing I could come up with. If I remember right, There are something like 2900-3000 counties in the country, so it would definitely be difficult to get everyone on board. I mostly only deal with real estate from TX-FL, and for about 10 years following the crash in '08, it was primarily Florida who is more advanced in their on-line systems than other states. Different counties, especially the podunk ones, were slow to adopt the online systems, and there are several different systems from in-house to Q-Logic that different counties use since they all administer their own records.
Speaking of NFTs. Coinbase just launched a waitlist for their own nft exchange if anyone wants to sign up
I think the most interesting aspect of this announcement is the push to decentralization instead of coinbase tech. Obviously, since this looks to be mainnet, I’d imagine the gas fees will be still be significant compared to other current solutions; interesting they conveniently tout they wont charge additional “transaction” fees for now, however they fail to mention that L1 gas fees will still apply.
It’s 45 minutes parroting some of the most basic and stupid anti-NFT messages.
He spends literally almost 10 minutes saying: NFT bad because fraud, rug pulls, pump and dumps, manipulation, etc. Welcome to our existing world. People in the 90s said internet is bad because people can use it to launder money. This argument is useless.
He also rails on whether NFTs are securities like this decision is somehow going to ruin things.. Like who cares, people are already tracking and paying cap gains on their crypto. Again, this really doesn’t change a whole lot or stop the technology.
He also holds up NBA Top Shot as an example of the issues yet doesn’t realize he’s pointing out the perfect example of a centralized NFT platform that is a walled garden (he even mentioned the term). Yeah, if you build your own blockchain (Flow) without the right rules and they aren’t able to be integrated (interoperable) with the rest of the cryptoverse.
There’s a reason why the vast majority of NFT work is happening within the Ethereum space.
Additionally, throughout the video he continues to swing back to the concept of how smart contracts can possibly be enforceable, insinuating it’s not. Yet he spends zero time discussing Ethereum, layer 2 functionality, token types like ERC-21, ERC-721, ERC-1155. The few examples he tries to use to justify some of his points are laughably bad. Smart contracts are bad because you could allow a meet-n-greet for every fan. Lol.
If you actually pay attention, it’s just a bunch of fancy phrases strung together. At one point towards the end he just starts rattling a list of largely unrelated issues off without answering anything. Also, it’ll just be like beanie babies. Lol again.
And he ends with this:
“But people don’t realize there’s real liability NFTs could be incredibly dangerous if not outright terrible for creators.”
Priceless. Saul Goodman could make a better video in front of a bookshelf and pretentious lamp…
TLDR: The video is the equivalent of a conservative using a Ben Shapiro video; high production value, dresses nicely, says big words but is full of shit.
Speaking of NFTs. Coinbase just launched a waitlist for their own nft exchange if anyone wants to sign up
I think the most interesting aspect of this announcement is the push to decentralization instead of coinbase tech. Obviously, since this looks to be mainnet, I’d imagine the gas fees will be still be significant compared to other current solutions; interesting they conveniently tout they wont charge additional “transaction” fees for now, however they fail to mention that L1 gas fees will still apply.
Coinbase NFT is a big ole flop so far. LooksRare>>>>>>>
I think the most interesting aspect of this announcement is the push to decentralization instead of coinbase tech. Obviously, since this looks to be mainnet, I’d imagine the gas fees will be still be significant compared to other current solutions; interesting they conveniently tout they wont charge additional “transaction” fees for now, however they fail to mention that L1 gas fees will still apply.
Coinbase NFT is a big ole flop so far. LooksRare>>>>>>>
Yeah, I’m not surprised. L1 gas is not sustainable. Just look at BAYC’s virtual land sale from this weekend. Clogged this shit out of Ethereum and caused some of the highest gas fees ever.
Loopring’s PR hype man had a nice retort to the flop of Coinbase NFT:
Coinbase NFT is a big ole flop so far. LooksRare>>>>>>>
Yeah, I’m not surprised. L1 gas is not sustainable. Just look at BAYC’s virtual land sale from this weekend. Clogged this shit out of Ethereum and caused some of the highest gas fees ever.
Loopring’s PR hype man had a nice retort to the flop of Coinbase NFT:
I had to pay 1.9 ETH in gas for two Otherdeeds each. It was insane.
I need to look more into Loopring. I do find it odd the GME/WSB crowd hates NFTs but loves Loopring/GME marketplace/etc.
Yeah, I’m not surprised. L1 gas is not sustainable. Just look at BAYC’s virtual land sale from this weekend. Clogged this shit out of Ethereum and caused some of the highest gas fees ever.
Loopring’s PR hype man had a nice retort to the flop of Coinbase NFT:
I had to pay 1.9 ETH in gas for two Otherdeeds each. It was insane.
I need to look more into Loopring. I do find it odd the GME/WSB crowd hates NFTs but loves Loopring/GME marketplace/etc.
So the GME / r/Superstonk crowd are definitely pro-NFT because it’s been confirmed Gametstop is utilizing Loopring’s protocol as part of their NFT expansion (in addition to the gaming NFT marketplace with Immutable X). Plus the GME community understands that NFTs could be utilized in place of our current stock market / market structure so they see the potential utility behind them. AMC apes are already seeing ticket purchases as collectible NFTs as well.
WSB is largely a bot / meme echo chamber now and doesn’t really get involved with GME / AMC anymore.
I’d say the vast majority of Reddit investing / finance / gaming subs are anti-NFT as I see the same “just a jpeg” and other horrendously inaccurate and lazy arguments.
Interestingly, the main crypto sub r/cryptocurrency bans discussions of Loopring…
Last Edit: May 3, 2022 16:02:27 GMT -5 by ZIG - Back to Top
The Twitter guy @macro_diary I posted above is a great resource. Obvs he works for LRC and provides a lot of hype but he also provides a lot of long and detailed explanations.
I’d also look at @daniel_loopring. He’s their former CEO and co-author of the white paper.
@finestonematt is one of the co-authors of the white paper and now head of blockchain at GameStop. As well.
Anyone have a good idea when to jump back in on chainlink? It’s 9.08 which is way below how far I thought it would fall considering it’s constant rebounds back over $13.00 every time it fallen below 12.00.
Anyone have a good idea when to jump back in on chainlink? It’s 9.08 which is way below how far I thought it would fall considering it’s constant rebounds back over $13.00 every time it fallen below 12.00.
IMO, we will see even lower prices over the next 6 months.
Edit: clarifying, I don’t really pay attention to individual crypto pricing, however the entire market should continue to go lower and crypto will continue to follow.
Last Edit: May 9, 2022 11:57:29 GMT -5 by ZIG - Back to Top
Anyone have a good idea when to jump back in on chainlink? It’s 9.08 which is way below how far I thought it would fall considering it’s constant rebounds back over $13.00 every time it fallen below 12.00.
Gonna wait for a confirmation bottom. Alt coins bleed against bitcoin during bear markets so it’s best to just dca into BTC or hoard USD
Anyone have a good idea when to jump back in on chainlink? It’s 9.08 which is way below how far I thought it would fall considering it’s constant rebounds back over $13.00 every time it fallen below 12.00.
Gonna wait for a confirmation bottom. Alt coins bleed against bitcoin during bear markets so it’s best to just dca into BTC or hoard USD
Yeah, I figured play it safe 'vine. It's just that the last 5 times I watched it drop, every damn time I could have been peeling off a ton. It's literally down to 8.53 or 16.6% in the last 24 hours. There's some value - which I haven't decided yet - that I'm willing to sink some cash in hoping I'll be able to at least double up next rebound.
FYI Silver Surfer and anyone else with assets on a CEX, Coinbase included language to their 10-Q this week (tldr: if we go bankrupt, your coins may be gone) and loopers started withdrawing LRC en masse today. Interestingly, Coinbase and Layerswap stopped withdrawals because Coinbase “ran out of liquidity”.