this post was submitted on 17 Dec 2023
628 points (95.6% liked)

Technology

60058 readers
2443 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The way I read the article, the "worth millions" is the sum of the ransom demand.

The funny part is that the exploit is in the "smart" contract, ya know the thing that the blockchain keeps secure by forbidding any updates or patches.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] RIP_Cheems@lemmy.world 57 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Let me get this straight, you can steal an nft but you can't own an nft?

[–] d3Xt3r@lemmy.nz 36 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You wouldn't download an NFT...

[–] capital@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

No! I forbid it!

[–] RIP_Cheems@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Then what would you do with it? Is it purely for clout? "Hey guys, look, I got an image of this monkey." Yes monkeys are amazing, but you don't even own the picture, so what's the point?

[–] deft@ttrpg.network 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I mean low key it's supposed to be a receipt that can't be copied. The receipt being slapped onto an image is what most associated with NFTs but it's more just like a code that provides proof of purchase/ownership because you can trace the history on the block chain

[–] Traister101@lemmy.today 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It's a receipt with a link to an image. The image is entirely unrelated to the NFT outside of the link that's embedded into the NFT. It's kinda like how you can embed an image from one website onto another separate unrelated website

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago

Except more like a star registry because there's nothing to say you actually own the image. Other people on other blockchains might also claim that they own the image. Other people on the same blockchain might also claim the exact same image, just at a different URL.

[–] Theharpyeagle@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The rub here being that you really only own the receipt, it doesn't confer any legal rights or ensure exclusivity of the content it's attached to. I get why people uninterested in being part of a PNG are excited about them, but I haven't personally seen a use case for them that isn't exploitable or already solved by current technology.

[–] deft@ttrpg.network -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Back with GameStop the hope was the ability to sell/trade digital content like games. Because you actually own the digital content and the proof of purchase, closest to digital ownership I've seen.

PlayStation out here taking games after people bought them and shit is a strong reason for NFTs imo

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

How would NFTs make any difference for Sony losing rights to a game and removing it from their servers? They still know who purchased it from their own records but still removed access entirely.

[–] deft@ttrpg.network 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's not what's being said here. Not Sony losing rights to a game, just entirely being unable to provide proof of ownership on digital content.

I've had Microsoft do this to me for Minecraft during their transition to owning it where they claimed I didn't own the game. I had to legitimately email them a picture of a receipt I owned to get my account back. Had I not had that receipt I'd not have the game.

I've never had Sony do this but I hear they've done this exact thing to people in other ways usually DLCs.

With NFTs there's a third party undeniable proof of purchase and ownership. It takes that whole side away from the distributor giving power to the consumer.

In a better world I could then sell that NFT and proof of purchase and the company would honor it for the person I sold it to allowing for the resale of digital content.

[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 3 points 1 year ago

It seems like this would solve the wrong problem with digital ownership. Even now the problem is not how to prove it, the problem is that you have to prove, and also that it's not ownership

[–] Lanusensei87@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

You very much do own an NFT you purchase, what you don't own is the asset the NFT represents (the shitty RNG generated monkey for example).