Re:Vitalik escalates ETH 2.0 merge as miners plan a 51% attack
by vvillena on Thursday March 25, 2021 @05:55PM
(#26585963)
With both paper certificates and NFTs, their worth depends on the issuer. The NFT craze is stupid, but as you point out, coupling real art with a NFT certificate is a really neat use case for NFTs. A NFT minted by an author and/or a reputable source such as an auction house can act as a unique, impossible-to-duplicate certificate that helps claim ownership of some real-world possession.
It's a given that at some point this will be tested in a court, with favorable results.
Re:Vitalik escalates ETH 2.0 merge as miners plan a 51% attack
by crazydoggers on Thursday March 25, 2021 @06:52PM
(#26586644)
Maybe the litmus test is does the object linked to the NFT have real world value without the NFT. If you wouldn’t pay for the item without an NFT, then perhaps it’s not legit.
They also seem well suited for being able to transfer ownership of physical goods and also transfer things like warranties. With an NFT tied to a serial number, you could ensure only one owner with that serial numbers item can claim warranty coverage, ensure resellers don’t try and pass off something used as new, ensure stolen goods can be tracked as such, etc.