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.

        • IWantToFuckSpez@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          Love how the NFT hype was a big wealth transfer event. So many rich people, like wealthy oil Arabs, bought into the scam and moved so much money into artists pockets while they essentially got nothing in return.

          • triptrapper@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            26
            ·
            1 year ago

            Is there any way to confirm this? Or are there examples of artists who made a significant amount of money from NFTs? I understand its potential benefit for artists, but I mostly remember already-rich corporations (e.g. UFC) using them as another way to extract money from consumers.

            • IWantToFuckSpez@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              There are curated NFT auction sites where only selected artists are allowed to sell their work. And you can see for how much they sell their pieces. During the hype many sold items for thousands to tens of thousands or more. Also there is Beeple who rode the hype early from the start and he became a millionaire.

          • merc@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s not really what happened. Some people who had invested in companies that would make money if NFTs went up in value chummed the waters by buying NFTs for huge amounts, convincing a lot of people that NFTs were going to be great investments. Then celebrities with an interest in the scheme pumped up the value too.

            That convinced a lot of idiots to “invest” in NFTs, then eventually the bottom fell out of the market.

            As for artists, some made some money, but most of the money went into shit like “bored apes” which were algorithmically generated.

        • shortwavesurfer@monero.town
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          17
          ·
          1 year ago

          I do see potential use for them, but not in the way they are currently being used. I could see uses like door keys, tickets, memberships, etc being of practical value, but not stupid little pictures.

            • shortwavesurfer@monero.town
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              11
              ·
              1 year ago

              Besides the obvious of your door lock needing to be connected to the internet, and that could be a problem, what else do you see as being an issue with using it for door keys?

              • logan_berries@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                13
                ·
                1 year ago

                Another question is: why would you need it for a key?

                Long-established public/private keys and signatures are used in this way all the time to control access to servers around the world. No blockchain needed. Blockchain is helpful when we all need to agree on a series of events.

                Homes are a nice example of where you can have an isolated system which knows what it needs to about you (e.g. a public key) without sharing or cross-checking anything with the world.

              • bahbah23@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                13
                ·
                1 year ago

                How exactly would that work? Keep in mind that the blockchain is by necessity not secret.

                • shortwavesurfer@monero.town
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  15
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Right, but all the lock is doing is checking whether you own the NFT or not. If your house was in NFT, people could see that you bought a house, but not where it was as long as it was generic like house #40000

          • notthebees@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I thought of it as a good way for artists to earn a living by more tokenized artworks, but then it gets hijacked by this shit.

          • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Just like with everything else, all those things you suggested are already done much more reliably without NFTs.

            If you still want to see a more “pratical” use of it, look no further than Decentraland, where it’s used as “ownership” of digital “land” and other “goods”.

          • AA5B@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think of it like timeshare values. They’re really high …. Until you try to find someone who will actually buy it

        • CaptainSpaceman@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Better than the current money laundering techniques? Using art appraisals to inflate assets and move dirty money, or straight up using banks like Deutsche or Credit Suisse (RIP) to move dirty money?

        • shortwavesurfer@monero.town
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          Mmm, considering NFTs are all on transparent blockchains, I don’t know that I would choose that particular method to accomplish that.

          • Starbuck@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            29
            ·
            1 year ago

            The transparency is the feature that makes it great. I can buy drugs or whatever, and exchange you buy an NFT from me of equal value. Now when the bank comes and says “where did this >$15k transaction come from?” I can point to the blockchain and say that I sold my fancy monkey pic.

            This has been a thing in the physical art world for a while, https://complyadvantage.com/insights/art-money-laundering/, this just made it easier.

            • shortwavesurfer@monero.town
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              18
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yeah, I know it’s happened for a while, but my big question would be why are you having to put your money back in the bank instead of leaving it on a blockchain such as Monero. The dollar is about the biggest scam around along with all other government fiat currencies.

              • Starbuck@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                20
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Because sometimes even criminals need to buy things that aren’t illegal, I guess. And the legitimate people who have those things don’t want to play games dealing with fake internet money.

                If I want to buy a jetski, the place I buy it from isn’t going to take crypto because the people that sell the parts for it don’t take crypto and the people who build it can’t pay for food in crypto.

                Crypto is only useful for rug pull scams, money laundering, and black-market transactions. It’s real innovation is undoing centuries of banking regulations so that people can learn the hard way why all those regulations exist.

                • merc@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Because sometimes even criminals need to buy things that aren’t illegal

                  Money has value basically because people need to pay taxes. The shop owner sells things for Euros or USD partially because eventually at the end of the year they need to turn over Euros or USD to the government as taxes. If they sold things for bitcoins, they’d eventually have to convert those bitcoins to USD to pay taxes.

                  Other than speculation, the only reason bitcoin has any value is that sometimes people need to pay ransomware ransoms. That means they need to buy bitcoin somehow. And, even the criminals who receive that bitcoin will launder it and change it back into real assets because it’s not useful to them as bitcoin. Eliminate ransomware and suddenly the only value for bitcoin is people who hold it hoping there’s a greater fool out there who will buy it from them for more than they paid.

                • shortwavesurfer@monero.town
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  12
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  For now, sure. However, i will say that i have been buying food woth crypto for over a year now and havent starved yet. And if i wanted a jetski and wanted to pay in crypto i could do so. Fundamentally, crypto and banking are two totally different things because with a bank somebody holds your money. With crypto, you hold your money.

              • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                10
                ·
                1 year ago

                why are you having to put your money back in the bank instead of leaving it on a blockchain such as Monero.

                Because my mortgage company, supermarket and power company only take real money.

              • ElectroNeutrino@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                1 year ago

                Good and services are still primarily purchased with fiat in most of the world. You need to be able to actually use it for it to be useful, so whether or not blockchain is theoretically better doesn’t matter there if there isn’t wide enough adoption.

                • shortwavesurfer@monero.town
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  7
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  True, thanks to the internet if the good is not immediately available in my local area for crypto i can order it online and have it delivered. Depending on exactly what the service is makes that an option too.

              • chunkystyles@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Hahahahahahaha!

                I’m being serious when I say this: you don’t understand what you’re talking about. I know that’s dismissive, and I’m sorry.

      • MonkderZweite@feddit.ch
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Those who buy art and pack it in a safe until it’s worth more?

        Im glad that doesn’t work as well in digital.

    • SCB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      People buy them for millions or their value would not be in the millions

      • Andy@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        1 year ago

        First, DO people buy them for millions, in the present tense? I know that people did in the past, but I thought the price on most of these took a huge hit.

        Second: do people BUY them for millions, in the sense that they trade things of well-measured value (like fiat currency or gold) for coins to buy these? Or do they buy them for millions of dollars in equivalent coins that they already have, and don’t want to actually sell for real goods or money because they’d realized huge losses if they actually cashed out, so they have to keep them circulating within the blockchain to maintain a hope that they’ll return anywhere near their previous value? Because if you have 10 million dollars worth of etherium that you bought at 20 million and an NFT of questionable value, can’t you just buy and sell it to a few wallets you own to make it look like it’s recently been purchased for a few million to create the illusion of value without actually ever giving or receiving anything?

        • xep@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’ll get my friend to buy it from me for millions, then he can give the money back to me and when it sells again, we can split the profit. It’s win-win!

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

          This seems like kind of a meaningless distinction when the comment was speaking about the relative value of these. How some pays is irrelevant.

          This feels like you’re trying to shit on them so just refuse to believe that the concept of value has any meaning. Things are worth whatever someone will pay for them.

          That doesn’t make the people willing to pay for it smart.

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

            The distinction isn’t meaningless, it’s actually vitally important. The thing is, we’ve been here before, hundreds if not thousands of times, with the stock market and other speculative bubbles. Once a big enough entity decides to cut their losses and bail with whatever they can get, all that “value” disappears and there’s no inherent value of the asset itself to fall back on. So it has been with other crypto crashes in the past few years.

            Granted, this is generally true of fiat as well, we just have a lot more people and hopefully some safeguards and, vitally, an active economy holding up that value.

            • SCB@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              All art is inherently without value, and it’s value is entirely speculative.

              I think NFTs are dumb as fuck, but they’re worth what people will pay for them. Same shit with tulips in Denmark famously spiking - bubble or not, things are literally worth what someone will pay

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

            I’m sorry it feels that way, that’s not my intention.

            I think it’s a meaningful distinction because my understanding is that many large matter holders are early adopters who acquired coins at at basement prices that them became highly valued when crypto took off. These people, as I understand it, have a different spending pattern than we associate with conventional wealth. They may shuffle their coins between digital assets with limited conversion into real world good and services, because inside the block chain they’re billionaires, but if they tried to buy a house or a vacation they’re forced to find buyers at prices that are reflective of the value among crypto holders, but not nearly as high to those outside the system who they’d need to complete cash transactions.

      • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, and that is exactly the problem.

        They artificially inflate the price to make it seem more worth than it actually is.

        It is a type of fraud

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

          Things are worth what people will pay. People pay out the nose for diamonds and they are just shiny rocks and not particularly rare.

  • StupendousMan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    81
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Sounds like a great way to make an insurance claim on a bunch of NFTs worth “millions” that you could not convince anyone to buy.

  • Aceticon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Another interpretation is that it’s all an insurance scam were something worthless is “stolen by hackers” and then claimed to be worth millions for the insurance claim.

    But surely nobody in the “well known as impeccably honest” NFT world would ever do something like that!

  • Cyber Yuki@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    1 year ago

    “Potential losses”. I get the feeling that NFT owners got bit by the same bug that bit RIAA executives.

    • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      And why should any sane person care if you did?

      It’s a digital file. Copies are exactly the same as the original.

  • Margot Robbie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 year ago

    One of the great thing about the AI revolution is that since generating infinite number of unique random (and commonly, bad) pictures of literally anything you can think of takes only seconds, the entire concept of NFT has become completely worthless as it completely destroyed the value-from-scarcity argument. Not that it ever was a good argument to begin with.

  • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m having difficulty with the word “worth”. It appears to be doing an awful lot of heavy lifting

  • Etterra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    Just because the suckers that bought them paid millions doesn’t mean that the NFTs are worth millions.

  • crashoverride@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Think of it like this, when people make drug busts and they find huge amounts of cocaine or whatever and they say oh this is 300 something mod a million is worth of stuff. No it’s not. It’s maybe like not even half that not even a quarter of that, they just make it up just to make their bust even bigger

    • DerisionConsulting@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I also like the “10 Kilos of product was taken off of the street” which means like 12 grams of weed was turned into brownies