Seth Green gets scammed out of his NFT and it tanks his new show.

[Tonguez]

This is where I am. I don’t see how property KNOWN/ALLEGED to be stolen can block a show like this. Anyone trying to muck with its creation based on the pilfered NFTs would be outing themselves as either the thieves or recipients of stolen property, neither of which grant you any rights in the stolen goods.

Not that- as was pointed out- NFTs give you any IP rights anyway,

Something’s fishy.

I’m guessing its either a publicity stunt to get some press for the shows ‘delayed’ launch OR Seth is concerned about the potential to be sued by the NFT holder? Which would work if the theif has been able to trade the NFT on to some 3rd party …
of course I dont know how NFTs work either

 

[Staffan]

I am MASSIVELY into crypto. I think privacy is only going to get more and more important as time goes by, and the only way to ensure it in the face of increasingly draconian government and corporate surveillance is to invest in cryptographic technologies.

Cryptography good.

Cryptocurrency bad.

 

[Mannahnin]

NFTs = Scams. Greater fool investment trash.

Cryptocurrency = Potentially useful, but so far no proven use cases. Closest seen was The Silk Road, but that didn't work out so well. Jury's out but not looking good, especially given the significant negative externalities in terms of energy consumption and chip shortages.

Cryptography = Massively important to privacy and securing human rights from authoritarian intrusion.

 

[Yora]

It may be because I'm from New Jersey, but I immediately assume some form of grift. Maybe the show needs a PR boost in visibility? This article is the first I've heard of it...

It involves NFTs. That automatically makes something a grift.

 

[Jer]

I am MASSIVELY into crypto. I think privacy is only going to get more and more important as time goes by, and the only way to ensure it in the face of increasingly draconian government and corporate surveillance is to invest in cryptographic technologies.

Cryptography, sure, but you do realize that the current model for cryptocurrency involves making every transaction public, right?

Cryptocurrency transaction logs have been a major boon to every plugged in police force on the planet. There have been major child sex abuse material and narcotics busts that basically couldn't have happened without the blockchain being a publicly available log of every transaction made. Putting your purchases onto the blockchain makes it easier for governments and corporate actors to track what you're doing, not harder. They don't need warrants, they don't need to have partners in the banks reporting on transactions - they don't need to do anything but download the ledger and read it. And then do the work of tying those transactions back to the people who made them (which is far, far easier than anyone in the cryptocurrency sphere wants to admit).

If you're into cryptocurrency for the privacy aspect you should dump it quick. In all honesty as a Computer Scientist if I were trying to develop a model that provided maximum benefit for surveillance for transactions something like blockchain would be right at the top of my list - the entire basis of the model is that all transactions are public and anyone can read them at any time. You don't get more maximally surveillant than that.

 

[Maxperson]

Any time I hear about someone being into crypto my respect for them goes down...

I always liked Krypto.

 

[Willie the Duck]

I am MASSIVELY into crypto. I think privacy is only going to get more and more important as time goes by, and the only way to ensure it in the face of increasingly draconian government and corporate surveillance is to invest in cryptographic technologies.

I mean, there are a few more common complaints about crypto-ventures (cryptocurrencies, NFTs, etc.) -- like the environmental issues most current cryptocurrencies have and the whole 'it's just a fad on an inflationary investment bubble as opposed to an actually profitable market product' concerns -- but overall the biggest complaint about them is specifically that it is a series of confidence games being played upon people with government/corporate domination concerns who have been falsely convinced that investing big in Whatchamadinger-coins is somehow a political statement and/or investment in the future they would like to see happen (as opposed to, y'know, just a poorly thought through market venture for which they're someday going to be holding the bag).

 

[RealAlHazred]

I was making something of a joke, in that several scam artists who've communicated to me tout the cryptography aspects of their cryptocurrency scam. I love the circular reasoning for some of the schemes.

"Every transaction is public, so you can have accountability!" So, you can identify every participant in a transaction? "No, participants are identified with a randomly-generated identifier." So, how does THAT provide accountability? "Because, every transaction is public!"

 

[darjr]

Oof!

web3 is going just great (@web3isgreat@indieweb.social)

Attached: 1 image btfo

indieweb.social

 

[Guest 7034872]

I was making something of a joke, in that several scam artists who've communicated to me tout the cryptography aspects of their cryptocurrency scam.

Yeah, I definitely prefer to stick with something less jargon-y and more tested and reliable, like credit default swap derivatives.

"Every transaction is public, so you can have accountability!" So, you can identify every participant in a transaction? "No, participants are identified with a randomly-generated identifier." So, how does THAT provide accountability? "Because, every transaction is public!"

Logic so impeccable that it has become impenetrable. P. T. Barnum would grin.