• aesthelete@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The unsexy use cases for NFTs (using them for things that are currently traded or otherwise transferred digitally with manual, disconnected, and/or opaque back-ends) is likely the one that will endure, just like everything else.

    Who is actually or supposedly will be in the future using them for this purpose?

    Digital scarcity is in and of itself kind of a niche concept.

    • Maturin@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      You are right on. The idea of artificial scarcity is a scam. I replied to someone a little higher up about the securities use case, but the short version of that is, for things like stock in a company, stocks are already scarce (there are only as many shares as the company issues - or there is only supposed to be that many). It’s the scarcity of the underlying asset, not the “digital” aspect of it, that creates value. Each share is issued by the company as a single NFT token and there are only as many NFTs as they issue shares.

      • Natanael@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Who really wants to buy shares and then trade and sell in significant numbers outside exchanges?

        • Maturin@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The idea is that this would be the software used to run the actual transfer of shares traded on the exchanges rather than what is used today which is just closed ledger entries on books of all the participants. But the current manual process takes multiple days to settle each transaction and this would be instantaneous, and in one transparent distributed ledger.