BEWARE of fake EEVblog NFT's

[cdev]

I have a huge collection of mix tapes of sets done by house and techno DJs in San Francisco in the early 90s, I was at many of the events, which were often held in amazing places like on beaches, in forests and other secret locations, and now are kind of legendary.. (Many are also on internet, and the digital files sound better than my old cassette tapes.) But I wouldn't sell them for anything.

I still remember these events.. The events were often recorded on DAT tapes by friends. It seems kind of weird to value an "original" DAT higher now because the hardware to play them is now rare (obsolete, probably) and well recorded MP3s sound just as good, and much better than Miles' handlabelled cassetes. Some of the DJs are still playing in the US, but several who were from the UK have moved back there. I guess I could see some of the artifacts of those amazing events having value as collectibles if one had been there. Otherwise they would be just other mix tapes. Exeptional mixes, yes, but worth large sums of money? I doubt it.

More like the tapes that Grateful Dead fans used to (perhaps still do) trade around. Many are now findable on archive.org

[bdunham7]

I quit buying music & video in physical form years ago. For me it is much easier to play music from my PC than having to change CDs all the time. But the thing is: when I buy a music file, I get a file without anything. Selling it on is hard since I have no way to really prove I own a license  to the file or anything ((you don't own music, video, etc; just a license to listen / watch). Maybe the receipt could help but it is easy to fake. Now, if I had some kind of unique and traceable digital token attached to the file that would indicate that I own some form of license, I could sell it on. And that is the void that NFTs are filling.

This is vastly overcomplicating things by replacing simple, solved solutions with novel 'technology' for technology's sake alone.  Buy a CD, rip it to your PC, retain the CD as your proof of ownership.  Or, sell the CD if you like.  But   reselling your audio or video files isn't really a big issue in real life, is it?

[eti]

The population of this planet is insane.

Like we needed a reminder 😂

[thinkfat]

I still don't really understand what the heck an NFT is, given we already have copyright, patents, property ownership, domain names etc. Why do we need NFTs as well ?

Digital collectible bragging rights. And the hope that you can sell it onto someone else who wants to brag even more than you.

There are legit uses of course, but it's mostly just a mass hysteria digital art speculation fest right now.

Sounds like a "Greater Fool" economy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_fool_theory

[rsjsouza]

I quit buying music & video in physical form years ago. For me it is much easier to play music from my PC than having to change CDs all the time. But the thing is: when I buy a music file, I get a file without anything. Selling it on is hard since I have no way to really prove I own a license  to the file or anything ((you don't own music, video, etc; just a license to listen / watch). Maybe the receipt could help but it is easy to fake. Now, if I had some kind of unique and traceable digital token attached to the file that would indicate that I own some form of license, I could sell it on. And that is the void that NFTs are filling.

This is vastly overcomplicating things by replacing simple, solved solutions with novel 'technology' for technology's sake alone.  Buy a CD, rip it to your PC, retain the CD as your proof of ownership.  Or, sell the CD if you like.  But   reselling your audio or video files isn't really a big issue in real life, is it?

The whole shebang of digital watermarking and tokenization is to ease transactions without the physical media, while keeping close track of its life in the digital ocean. In days like these, where everything is a bitstream, this makes sense to some. To me, I take the physical token of ownership granted by a CD/DVD anyday - not only I can have a "master copy" with artwork and such, but it is one less venue to be tracked.

[nctnico]

I quit buying music & video in physical form years ago. For me it is much easier to play music from my PC than having to change CDs all the time. But the thing is: when I buy a music file, I get a file without anything. Selling it on is hard since I have no way to really prove I own a license  to the file or anything ((you don't own music, video, etc; just a license to listen / watch). Maybe the receipt could help but it is easy to fake. Now, if I had some kind of unique and traceable digital token attached to the file that would indicate that I own some form of license, I could sell it on. And that is the void that NFTs are filling.

This is vastly overcomplicating things by replacing simple, solved solutions with novel 'technology' for technology's sake alone.  Buy a CD, rip it to your PC, retain the CD as your proof of ownership.  Or, sell the CD if you like. 

Why would I buy a CD? Nowadays I buy specific songs from websites that sell music. I can download them directly onto my computer ready to play. It is way more convenient than ordering a CD and getting rid of the songs I don't like. Last time I bought a CD must be 15 years ago. But that is besides the point I want to make.

But   reselling your audio or video files isn't really a big issue in real life, is it?

There are enough cheap ways to get music / video nowadays that there hardly is a second hand market. But if there was, then NFTs would make it easier to prove ownership. That is the point!

[EEVblog]

FYI, the NFT has been removed.

[MK14]

FYI, the NFT has been removed.

I wonder why/how that has happened, I'm curious ?

[EEVblog]

FYI, the NFT has been removed.

I wonder why/how that has happened, I'm curious ?

I reported it.

[tom66]

Does that mean its value has gone from "essentially worthless" to "completely worthless"?

[pardo-bsso]

FYI, the NFT has been removed.

Many of us reported it.

It's interesting that for being a decentralized network one big player has still control over what that "creator made".

(on a tangent, I saw the B52s live and doubt that any of my peers would like to know or understand it)

[MrMobodies]

I see not just the NFT but the scammers account has been closed.
https://opensea.io/StakeTheWeb

404
This page is lost.
We've explored deep and wide,
but we can't find the page you were looking for.

Good they took action.

[nctnico]

FYI, the NFT has been removed.

Many of us reported it.

It's interesting that for being a decentralized network one big player has still control over what that "creator made".

Opensea (or any other) market place only has control over what is listed on that market place. For example: Ebay may choose to remove a listing of an item but that doesn't mean the item can't be sold at all.

[MrMobodies]

Just found a news article on it:

https://www.nme.com/news/gaming-news/gaming-youtubers-are-having-their-likenesses-stolen-and-turned-into-nfts-3139754

Gaming YouTubers are having their likenesses stolen and turned into NFTs
"I cannot wait for the lawsuits"

By
Matt Kamen
17th January 2022

Video game focused YouTubers are having their likenesses stolen and “minted” as NFTs, with the images being sold for profit and without their consent. Many of the affected YouTubers find their identities have been included as part of an NFT assortment called the “Top YouTubers Collection”, seemingly uploaded by a user calling themselves “StakeTheWeb” and sold on the NFT marketplace OpenSea. Despite NFTs – or Non-Fungible Tokens, effectively digital receipts that can point to a particular image but which confer no real ownership – being something of a buzzword at present, many creators are deeply opposed to them, citing the environmental destruction associated with the energy costs of processing transactions and the exploitative nature of the market.

YouTuber “DreamcastGuy” highlighted the problem of likeness theft for NFTs in a video posted over the weekend (January 15), though many other creators have been experiencing the issue.
As highlighted by Eurogamer, other creators including Jim ‘Caddicarus‘ Caddick, James Stephanie Sterling’s The Jimquisition, and Alanah ‘Charalanahzard‘ Pearce have all had their likenesses used without their permission. On Twitter, Sterling said they were “frankly not surprised that some freeloading leech turned my channel into an NFT”, adding “I did not consent to this, I do not want this, and it demonstrates everything I’ve said about how disrespectful and exploitative this market is”, and calling the uploader “scum”.

Jim ‘Caddicarus’ Caddick said, “At least, AT LEAST, if you stole my shit and tried selling it off, make it a t shirt. A mug. A clock. A thing. That you can use. And enjoy. Shilling off a profile picture for a collection you can just make yourself on a Facebook photo album is honestly a new level of pathetic lol”. Charalanahzard – who is also a writer for Sony Santa Monica – has also seen her own photos stolen and sold on OpenSea with a porn logo added to the image, all without any involvement or agreement. Pearce says, “I cannot wait for the lawsuits”.

The practice is undeniably theft, and due to the largely anonymous nature of blockchain technologies, it can leave those affected without recourse.  While an OpenSea representative told TheGamer that “it is against our policy to sell NFTs using plagiarised content, which we regularly enforce in various ways, including delisting and in some instances, banning accounts (as was the case in this instance)”, there is little to stop thieves uploading another “collection” of NFTs and profiting in the short term.

I like that, freeloading leech.

[WA1ICI]

At least Dave Jones is considered to be in the “Top YouTubers Collection”!   

- John Atwood

[Nusa]

So what's the word used for a bunch of top youtubers? Flock, herd, horde, swarm, etc...

My idea would be a stream of youtubers.

[nctnico]

So what's the word used for a bunch of top youtubers? Flock, herd, horde, swarm, etc...

My idea would be a stream of youtubers.

The modern word would be 'Influencers'. Although cow's rears would also be applicable in many (not all, but many nevertheless) cases.

[tszaboo]

FYI, the NFT has been removed.

Many of us reported it.

It's interesting that for being a decentralized network one big player has still control over what that "creator made".

(on a tangent, I saw the B52s live and doubt that any of my peers would like to know or understand it)

Well, this is just the general confusion about what NFTs are.
You see, most NFTs sold today is not the underlying picture. It is also not the artwork, or even the ownership of the artwork.
Most NFTs that are sold today is just a link to some picture, that is hosted on some server. The image is not even stored on the blockchain. And it happens often times, that the picture gets changed, after selling the NFT (for example to a poop emoji).
There are a few NFTs that are legit stored on a blockchain, but those are simplistic, often times then need some third party tool to actually generate the picture for it. And IMHO the artistic value of these generated "yellow monkey holding a blue banana with a hat" NFTs is zero.

FYI, the NFT has been removed.

Many of us reported it.

It's interesting that for being a decentralized network one big player has still control over what that "creator made".

Opensea (or any other) market place only has control over what is listed on that market place. For example: Ebay may choose to remove a listing of an item but that doesn't mean the item can't be sold at all.

Most of the NFTs that are listed are not even minted.
Minting this EEVBlog NFT would cost anywhere around 150 USD. And it would take a ton of CO2 production and energy waste to do it. ETH is ridiculous, the sooner everyone goes to more modern networks the better.

[not1xor1]

NFT and cryptocurrency madness are just a modern digital form of tulip mania
unlike tulips though they cause a great deal of environment damage both from energy waste and fast hardware turnover

Frankly, in general, this is a silly comment. It would be same as saying brand bames and trademarks are just digital bullshit. In case you do not know, look up how much CocaCola brand name cost.

silliness is in the eye of the beholder 
I never judge or buy anything by the brand name and nowadays lot of brands have changed owner, e.g. Philips now is Chinese, so brand names are even less indicative of the quality of a product then they used to be (sometimes).

Edit: and by the way, i've never seen anyone claiming "environmental damage" from digital currency operation.

science magazines and web sites have been writing about that subject since years.
You might be surprised by the fact that there are lot of things you ignore (or I do ignore as well) but are anyway real 
Just google for «environmental impact of cryptocurrencies»

[not1xor1]

That makes me wonder: do you still buy music & video in physical form? And if so, what do you actually own?

That's what is wrong. People who are obsessed by ownership. To be or to own that's the question. 
While I really enjoy listening to music, I will never enjoy owning something that will not serve any real purpose or even owning much more than other people.

[Nominal Animal]

That's what is wrong. People who are obsessed by ownership.

No.

Remember that 'ownership' is about control among humans.  When you own a copy, nobody can legally take that copy away from you.
If you are subscribed to a service, you can only access whatever is provided by that service.  As a renter, access is controlled by the owner, regardless of whether you are willing to pay for it.  That is a serious difference indeed, even though many consider it equivalent to ownership.

You still don't 'own' the original song/movie/whatever, of course; the above only applies to the copy only, and not to the intellectual rights or copyrights associated with it.

I fully expect the term 'own' or 'ownership' to split into its different variants in various languages, since that is what our cultures need, within a few generations.  For now, we just have to deal with the mess of having one term describe many different things.

[eti]

FYI, the NFT has been removed.

Many of us reported it.

It's interesting that for being a decentralized network one big player has still control over what that "creator made".

(on a tangent, I saw the B52s live and doubt that any of my peers would like to know or understand it)

“Love shack, baby looooove shack!” 😃🎵🎶🎼

Reminds me of listening to Seal, Adamski and Björk, those days.

[ROT]

The worst part of this NFT hype is the fact that even the people who thinks what NFTs are, are completely wrong.
The "Non Fungible Token" of the NFT is just a code, a number, when you buy an NFT you buy a custom slot in a database, it has nothing to do with the picture or GIF associated with it.

You do not own the picture, you do not own any rights, the picture can be reproduced as many times as some wants.
What you buy is just a piece of code what happens to have a picture attached to it, because of course it makes it a lot more appealing than "hey, buy this random number in my random database".

If anyone is more interested in how this scam works, I recommend the video made by youtuber JoshStrifeHays on this topic.

[Nominal Animal]

I have been waiting for a while now for a crypto ledger covering the entire world.  For a small nominal sum, you get to own a non-fungible token referring to a region on this planet.  Want to own the token corresponding to the acre of land at the center of Manhattan?  No problem!

Just like NFT's, the ownership of the token has nothing to do with the thing the token refers to.  You own the reference in the ledger only.

It is beautiful in its own way, really.  Like the ramblings of insane psychotic people talking about the nostril people who use your nose hair to weave bridges in your dreams, unless you pick your nose too often, in which case they steal your fingernails and build castles and shields out of them to attack the back of your eyeballs and do war with your eyebrow mites.

I'm especially waiting for exclusive ledgers, like ledgers for Swedes only for owning tokens referring to land in Finland.  You know, for historical reasons.  Or for Brits only for owning tokens referring to land in Australia.  You get the drift, I'm sure.  The monetization opportunities are endless!

[nctnico]

science magazines and web sites have been writing about that subject since years.
You might be surprised by the fact that there are lot of things you ignore (or I do ignore as well) but are anyway real 
Just google for «environmental impact of cryptocurrencies»

There are two seperate things here:
1) energy wasted due to mining cryptocurrencies which is just insane (*).

2) energy wasted due to inefficient distributed ledgers (block chain). That is a problem that needs to be solved because distributed ledger is a useful technology. Actually, a specification for bidirectional EV - grid charging (https://www.smart-energy.com/industry-sectors/new-technology/first-blockchain-based-ev-grid-integration-standard-released/) is using distributed ledger technology to make the system more robust and increase availability.

* Today there was an article in the news that someone in the NL had a 600A mains cable (likely 3 phase / 3x 400V) installed to supply their home. The article says it is for mining Bitcoins but I don't see how that can be made profitable. For reference: a typical home in the NL has a mains connection like 40A / 230V or 3x 25A / 400V.

I fully expect the term 'own' or 'ownership' to split into its different variants in various languages, since that is what our cultures need, within a few generations.  For now, we just have to deal with the mess of having one term describe many different things.

IMHO people need to wrap their head around the fact that you can own something that doesn't physically exist. Think about something simple like the money in your bank account. That is a number stored in a database in a slot with your name on it. Technically you don't even own that database but you rent a slot in it.