another reason why folks holding large chunks of ipv4 address space don't want ipv6 - they don't want to see their asset drop in value.

Why do IPv4 addresses even cost money? They're no better than NFTs and don't even have a "token" of their own.

Not sure how they're even comparable on any aspect.

IPV4 addresses are scarce due to lack of foresight and useful.

NFTs are scarce by design and useless.

> NFTs are scarce by design and useless.

That's rich

> NFTs are scarce by design and useless.

So, I know of one real-world usecase that's not useless: Some startups have begun legally selling properties (homes, ranches, plots) via NFTs.

Oh fun, which startups are those?

Real estate on the blockchain is my favourite bad blockchain idea because if someone loses access to their wallet they presumably lose the ability to ever sell their house.

Nah, it just becomes one of those impediments to sale that you wave aside during purchase and earns lawyers a few bucks.

There are a few of these in England, Chancel Repair Liability is the most famous. In theory you could be forced to pay for repairs to a nearby church you never visit and have no interest in, on account of land you own was historically liable for such repairs and this was never cancelled. A real person, this century, had to pay about £350 000 as a result, so that's not inconsequential (although the circumstances were pretty unusual). But that's scary enough that a real estate lawyer might argue they're not sure the property you want to buy is unaffected, you should take out Insurance against the liability, conveniently sold by another lawyer.

The government tried to "fix" this, but the problem with lawyers is, obviously no fix will be good enough to prevent lawyers saying what if the fix didn't work, so chances are you get persuaded to buy insurance even though the liability probably no longer exists because hey, if I'm wrong I'm not going to pay £350 000 so...

Fifty years from now, if the fact there's "an NFT on the blockchain" for a property you want to buy is even something anybody knows about, your lawyer will know, and they'll tell you that another lawyer offers $1000 insurance, buy that and if "the blockchain" ever tries to sue you and take the property back they'll have your back...

You just gotta etch the block into the foundation. Then it's physically part of the house. Maybe make a radioactive label and bury it on the property. That way people now the property they're standing is on actual property.

> Oh fun, which startups are those?

Some are covered in this article: https://archive.is/k3w7F

> ...if someone loses access to their wallet they presumably lose the ability to ever sell their house.

It is software at the end of the day and seems like there is already a solution for it: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Multi-signature

The startups in that article don't seem to be selling entire properties on the blockchain though - it looks like they're doing things like buying a property and then selling fractional interest in that property to different investors as tokens.

I'll believe that multi-sig wallets solve this when I hear frequent stories about regular human beings (not highly sophisticated tech insiders) who both understand them and use them successfully.

Or, do what enterprises do with sensitive documents: Store it with a custodian (or a hardware wallet).

Mutli-sig wallets are but one non-custodial solution.

Not long ago, Signal demonstrated a way to recover passphrases in a way that server compromise doesn't really reveal anything at all about the passphrase itself: https://signal.org/blog/secure-value-recovery/ The OPAQUE standard also has similar properties to Signal's design but much more cheaper to implement: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-irtf-cfrg-opaque... I point these out because Novi (Facebook's Diem wallet) implements the latter. These never require keys to ever leave a client device (which inturn could be a hardware wallet).

Useable security will take time. It was a long road from GnuPG to Keybase/Signal. Given the amount of cryptographers and engs building for "web3", I'm sure something useable will crop up. May be it is Moxie himself who comes up with it, who knows? ;)

So two escrow companies and I each have 2-of-3 keys.

At this point what is the blockchain providing that normal title records don't?

It isn't as much about blockchain, than what NFTs enable. Properties can be sold digitally, like any other goods are on e-commerce websites, for example. Of course, NFTs aren't strictly needed, but could be used as a cryptographically secure (for some definition of secure [0]), publicly verifiable, record of ownership.

[0] https://moxie.org/2022/01/07/web3-first-impressions.html

What does the use of NFTs change in the transaction?

IPv4 addresses have utility. You still need one in order to participate in the largest communication network in the history of the earth. And theirs a limited number of them. Demand + Scarcity = non-zero price.

What utility do NFTs provide other than entertainment/status?

Who enforces the price? I can just advertise any address I want with BGP.

If the address space wasn't assigned to you via a RIR, it won't take long for someone to notice though and get your announcement by enough relevant large tier 1 & tier 2 ISPs that your announcement won't reach most of the Internet. At that point you can of course use the addresses locally, but you can't reach the rest of the internet.

This type of squatting was somewhat easier in the past when less of the IPv4 space was actually in use and when less strict filtering (or RPKI) was in place. Still happens, but it's getting harder and harder.

and be promptly kicked off the internet by your isp... or somebody elses.

Unless you own routers that other ISPs almost depend on, then you can say "take it or leave it"

So lets say Centurylink decide to start advertising blocks they don't own, people like Cogent and Tata drop their links, people with multiple ISPs drop their links (shifting traffic to other tier 1 ISPs), and those with centurylink only change their ISP because they can no longer get to facebook.

That would work if most people had multiple ISPs, but most don't actually. Thus, you have some bargaining power, especially if you have some network advantage or feature nobody else has.

If your local ISP advertises the wrong prefixes they get cut off by transit and peers and their customers complain they can’t get to any sites.

Then that ISP can take it or leave it if their customers are complaining.

The customers dont get internet access, they don’t pay, crappy ISP goes bust.

I'm guessing that crappy ISP is the one that wants to disconnect from my network.

If you are leaking routes you shouldn’t then a decent ISP will disconnect your crappy network.

It happens a lot, usually because of mistakes, it’s typically fixed quickly.

Feel free to null route or redirect any IP you want in your network. Just don’t be surprised when other networks cut you off if you advertise those routes out of your network, and don’t be surprised when your customers are unhappy because you aren’t transporting the packet to the target IP as is your job.

If you really believe what you’re saying, which I find hard to believe myself, I recommend you try doing what you’re saying and report back the results.

They're a scarce commodity, and unlike NFTs, have a real use-case.

Until everyone moves to IPv6, if you want people to be able to reach your service, you need an IPv4 address. If you're an ISP or cloud provider, you need those so your customers can still communicate with v4-only peers.

what?

ipv4 addresses are unique in the default free zone. they cost money because without having a prefix that is unique, you cannot route across the internet.