Kudos for the very good first part. Sad the 2nd part is 100% negative, which I think hurts the whole thing. I think it would be more convincing pointing out that Web3, the Blockchain, crypto currencies and NFTs were, say, 95% percent bad.
2
5
E.g. NFTs would make sense if they conveyed actual IP rights, but most often they are not. Bitcoin-style PoW currencies actually are the only mature answer to a certain set of requirements almost no one has. PoW alternatives address the energy problem, but are not yet used often.
1
1
Yes. The text was for a general public so some weird libertarian niche problem a blockchain might solve wasn't very high on my list. And PoS and other schemes have other problems, it's not like that are good, just less planet destroying
2
OK, let’s assume there existed an NFT-based scheme for, say, music IP rights based on a PoS chain, enabling artists to do away with the old and new music monopolies – wouldn’t that be a good thing? Certainly from a commercial perspective, possibly from an energy view as well.
2
Sure, one could do licensing through blockchain tokens and use DRM to enforce it because what's the point otherwise but I am not a copyright maximalist, I think that the path of "intellectual property" doesn't work we need other mechanisms for culture.
1
Replying to @tante
Totally fair point. Just pointing out that not everyone interested and active in that space is a Ponzi-scheming, environment-hating, ignorant crypto bro

Dec 17, 2021 · 9:01 PM UTC

1
Replying to @stilkov
I didn't say that, that's why I took the time to outline other motivations. Some people are interested in the weird tech, some believe in "decentralization" as a political idea and there is a drive to fix actual problems.
1
It's just that (IMO of course) people kinda decided to use a hammer before looking at the problem so now they're trying to do heart surgery with it and the good intentions don't really help.
1