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.
People trying to discuss the topic have their posts pushed down while “lmao nfts” are voted up. How do you see someone saying, respectfully, “I think there’s a benefit to this.” and try to push down their contribution?
Anyone who wants a good discussion about news in this community, must leave this community. If you want to add context or opposing perspectives, better go elsewhere. You build a community like this and you get people who know Hans had a vibrator, because jokes and legit opinions are treated as interchangable.
NFTs are a joke, so it’s totally fine for a topic like this.
Like what is there to discuss? The entire concept is stupid. With NFTs the object isn’t even on the blockchain, the image isn’t there. It’s pretty much just some random information that says image x belongs to you (but you have to store image x somewhere else and can lose it).
When it comes to owning art either physical media or the rights to the image already do a much better job.
The only area where NFTs sound useful (but they aren’t) is things like trading card games. Where you can have a card in a game and you own it, but because it’s an NFT you could sell the card to another player outside the game. But the whole concept again breaks down, the game can simply block the card from being played later on or remove the card and you’re left with nothing (besides “proof” that you own the NFT for a card that existed in the past). It adds nothing of value that a normal entry in a database couldn’t provide.
One thing I’m still positive on: Crypto currency was a great idea, at least until Bitcoin was sabotaged with the 1 MB block size and transacting with it died along the way.
I seem to recall digital trading card games existing long before NFTs were ever thought up, so not even that works. In fact, every “use” for NFTs I’ve ever seen suggested has been something we already had that is actually easier without involving the things.
Well, digital trading card games do exist of course, but often you can’t even trade cards. And much less sell them for real money. With an NFT in theory you could do what you want with the card, like give it to your buddy for 10 bucks and you don’t even have to use the game client for it.
The problem here is that the card itself is in the game code, so you can freely move ownership, but the game could just remove the card and make your NFT worthless.
Maybe it’s because majority of people think that NFTs are a joke and don’t agree that there are any benefits to this? Maybe they don’t want to engage in a discussion because they already heard all the arguments and still think it’s BS? I don’t know, I’m just guessing.
Downvotes should not be used for disagreement… That’s how you make echo chambers
The platform behind the smart contract has to issue a new smart contract and migrate people to it.
Does this post give anyone farker vibes?
Accurate headline:
Millions of dollars lost as NFTs worth a total of $0 stolen
Let me get this straight, you can steal an nft but you can’t own an nft?
Then what would you do with it? Is it purely for clout? “Hey guys, look, I got an image of this monkey.” Yes monkeys are amazing, but you don’t even own the picture, so what’s the point?
I mean low key it’s supposed to be a receipt that can’t be copied. The receipt being slapped onto an image is what most associated with NFTs but it’s more just like a code that provides proof of purchase/ownership because you can trace the history on the block chain
