This is fascinating[1].

Anyone who knows anything about copyright law laughs their arses off, of course (and here's a primer for anyone who needs it[2]).

But this *is* dangerous. A lot of people have no clue, copyright is byzantine in its complexity, and it just takes a few ill-informed judges to make this into a thing. And coinbros will push their bullshit, whether they know they're wrong or not.

[1] source:
[2] NFTs and copyright:

But it's even more fascinating than that. As the anarchist adage goes: "property is theft". NFTs are perhaps a great exemplification of that.

Basically, for a particular kind of private property to exists, there must be a broad consensus that something *can* be "owned", there must be some kind of record of ownership", and there must be some enforcement of that "ownership".

NFTs pretend to provide a record of "ownership" for something that never really had one: digital art.

Now, bros are trying… 2/?

…to create this broad consensus that on-line images can be "owned" in any real sense of the word. They seem to understand it not the way copyright understands it, but as a more "this specific copy of an image" kind of way. This doesn't make any sense, but who's to stop them?

Once they have that "broad consensus", they will try to find ways to enforce that "ownership".

History of private ownership of things, unfolding in front of our very eyes!


Important caveat: I am *not* saying this is all part of some master plan.

It's just a whole lot of people who don't understand technology, don't understand IP (imaginary property) law, but "invested their money" and feel this entitles them to things.

Like demanding random people don't right-click-save on on-line images. And soon, probably demanding the Internet Police to stop them right-clickers.


tl;dr bros are entitled pricks who demand that their misguided understanding of technology is shared by everyone, just because they put their money in this crap.


Take-away: this is laughable, but also dangerous -- they must not be allowed to normalize shunning the "right clickers" or demanding NFTs are treated as "proof of ownership" or whatever.



Come to think of it, the author of that message screenshot should make an NFT of it and link it in the message back to the coinbro. And let's see what happens. 🍿

· · Web · 4 · 1 · 21

If you enjoyed this thr^Wrant on NFTs, please support an artist with a donation or a commission.

Artists need and deserve your support.

One reason why bullcrap like gets traction is because coinbros can *exploit* that. They are using artists in need as poster-children for their schemes.

Supporting artists directly sucks air out of NFTs and other such hare-brained technosolutionist "ideas".

@rysiek Also works as a hiring/interviewing strategy.
* "Do you own any NFTs?"
* "Did you do any work on 'crypto' or 'NFTs'?"
If either is yes ... 🚩

@tbr oooh next time I am managing a team (Dog forbid...), I might actually steal your idea.

Hope you didn't mint an NFT for it! :blobcatfingerguns:

@rysiek you can even mint a different NFT for the same image, right?

@raboof of course. You can create your own blockchain even, as @makeworld did:

And what gets saved on the blockchain is up to you, too. Not enough space for a base64 of the whole image, usually, so often it's a... link. Which leads to hilarity:

It's just silly on every level.

@rysiek @raboof heh thanks for the shout out. There's no actual blockchain on my site, but the effect is the same ;)

@rysiek @makeworld @raboof Well if you're managing the blockchain manually you don't need "mining" or proof of waste, so you can just manually declare, for each block, what the previous block was.
So, a linked list. A wiki with links to "previous page" would suffice. :)

@rysiek Ahh, yes. A permanent record of them getting owned

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon for Tech Folks

This Mastodon instance is for people interested in technology. Discussions aren't limited to technology, because tech folks shouldn't be limited to technology either!