• Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    6 hours ago

    NFTs were created in a code jam and had no intents to become title transfer tools.

    It was and always be limited by the amount of data the NFT can contain. They went with URLs because they are small enough to fit. An actual land deed title document? Too big to fit into an NFT. Simply not enough bytes to go around.

    This was the strict limitation from the very beginning. The only thing an NFT actually verifies “ownership” of is a URL.

    • Mossy Feathers (They/Them)@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      34 minutes ago

      Nfts legitimately confuse me.

      “Why can’t you put the whole image in an nft?”

      “It’s too big”

      “Why is it too big?”

      “It’d take too long to generate.”

      “Okay, but why?”

      “Because nfts can’t hold that much information.”

      “Okay, but why?

      “Because it’d take too long to generate.”

      “Okay, but why would it take too long to generate???

      “Fuck you, stop wasting my time.”

      “Oooookay. I really don’t understand but okay, fuck you too I guess.”

      Does anyone know why nfts are so small? Everything I’ve read says that they’re fucking tiny, but nothing explains why they can’t be larger, why being larger would be too slow, and so on. They honestly seem like a decent answer to the digital ownership problem of “I want to resell this game like I could 20yrs ago but I can’t because it didn’t come on a disc”, however I get sent in a circle whenever I try to figure out what makes nfts so unwieldy and impractical.

      (Not that I think anyone should be able to own a digital good; I pay for digital things because I want to support people, not because I think digital ownership is a legitimate concept. Imo, because digital things can be copied as many times as you want, you can’t truly own a digital item, and nor should anyone be allowed to try and revoke said item unless said item is illegal for other reasons. However… As long as we live in a capitalist society hell-bent on applying the concept of ownership to a system that’s only limited by your hardware, I think people should have the ability to actually “own” their digital goods (in a traditional sense), which includes things like the right to not have a company take them away whenever it feels like it and the ability to sell digital goods like an IRL market.)

    • NateNate60@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      6 hours ago

      While the NFT can’t contain the entire title document, it can contain the hash of the title document, and then the title document is simply recorded elsewhere on-chain.

      • m88youngling@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 hours ago

        I agree with this. A title to land ownership is in itself just a piece of paper, it’s not the land you’re owning. It’s effectively serving the same purpose as the hash idea you’re suggesting