NFT and the Future of Digital Content
This discussion has been closed.
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
So were just looking for rubes to buy things that are completely worthless.
If someone counterfeits a $100 bill perfectly, using the same paper even, it would still be a counterfeit. If someone downloads the file a million times, but still doesn't own proof of that limited run, it's worthless. Look, I don't get it. I don't get bitcoin either, but there are people out there who are willing to pay $50,000 dollars for it, so who am I to argue. Just because I wouldn't pay $75 dollars for a digital asset, doesn't mean that others won't. There are a lot of people out there with a lot of money to waste.
Less rubes and more memelords who can waste money on pointless bragging rights.
Psssst...I have some snake oil I'd love to sell you. *twirls imaginary mustache*
I'd say they're still rubes tho, lol. Memelords and rubes.
Do people even buy prints from DA? What would you do with them? You can only buy some many unless you live in a mansion or want to stick them in a closet. Seems like it would be a very limited thing. I bought a digital frame for less than one NFT, and now I can see hundreds of renders.
I totally missed out on the hype and such (because I tend to steer clear from hypes because... it's all about $$$ in the end) and so I just got into contact with the whole NFT scheme, and truth be told I never laughed so hard at seeing how this is being treated seriously (by Daz mind you). It's very simple: like most crypto's the actual value depends on what people are willing to put into it. Personally I intend to avoid this like the plague because - in my opinion - this has "scamming" and "inflation" plastered all over it. People preach "blockchain" as if that's the ultimate failsave while in fact, it's anything but that. It has its uses, sure, and also applies security (no arguments there) but it's also very easy to avoid. Which in its turn leads to possible abuse again.
SO now we can pay $500 for a vague image? Yah... sure, I guess the Corona crisis is really getting taxing for some people.
I suppose some do? I guess it all depends on the kind of stuff you like to hang on the wall. My living room has paintings. My office has movie posters. So I dunno...I don't really see room for even my type of artwork on my walls, lol.
This is the reason for it being in store credit instead of actual cash, but more legal work would be done to see if that is far enough from actual cash so that tax forms, withholdings and all that don't have to be done. If the legal groundwork is there for "Daz sold a print of an image I told them they could sell prints of so I got a $5 discount on a future purchase (via store-credit)" instead of treating store credit as something equivalent to cash it could be possible. If tax forms and withholdings and all that still need to be filled out I don't think we would want to add enough extra accountants to make that happen.
I'm pretty sure Store Credit is still consider compensation. And is still taxable. The Store Credit isn't being given as a refund, it's being given as a payment.
https://www.quora.com/If-company-X-issues-me-1000-worth-of-store-credit-am-I-required-by-law-to-claim-it-as-income-to-the-IRS
"It depends what you did to receive the credit. Did they issue the credit because you returned merchandise you had purchased or received as gifts? Then no, you aren't required to report this as income to the IRS. Did you receive the store credit because you performed a service for the store? Then yes, you are generally required to report this as income to the IRS."
Whether DAZ is required to provide forms to prove this, I don't know.
When you buy stock photos, you are buying the rights to use that image, and not the image itself. I think the only way that this new scheme could have real value is if you were able to sell the full rights and ownership of the image. You sell one, charge whatever you think it's worth, and the other person takes full ownership of it, verified and recorded on the blockchain. They can do whatever they want with it, including selling it again. I would happily list a few images if I could do that.
I'm pretty sure that would be seen as tax evasion in the EU.
That I get. And I've done it. It's not worth the hassle to be honest.
All the value in these NFTs seems to be locked up in who you can sell it to next. If DAZ has already glutted the market with their own products (i.e. 200 viable copies of each video) then who would be left to buy as second hand?
I lived through the variant comic book cover craze of the 90s. Watching more that one store go out of business and a few people go backrupt on items that were "supposed to be worth something" but ended up having no intrinsic value. Granted that most of those people were out to get rich quick and weren't thinking through what they were doing...
I do have a stack of "Death of Superman" comics still in their sealed black bags though.
While both are not smart, there's a distinction between the two kinds of not smart. Calling someone a 'rube' implies a lack of sophistication, a hick, who's too dumb to realize somebody is swindling them. Whereas the memelords who obsess over NFTs and crypto- are convinced we can transcend our frail flesh through digital Satori and join in perfect harmony with the transcendant blockchain. They're technically smart, but ideologically stupid.
I am so NOT buying into this.
It also makes me regret purchasing that gift card, despite the rediculously good percentage off.
Since the moment I heard about NFTs, I became convinced it was a premonition of the nightmarish, dystopian evolution of Austrian School economics.
"Value is whatever you want to pay for something!"
*jazz hands*
I'll give you $5 USD for those jazz hands.
It reminds me of the Encrypted Daz Connect (much better described as DRM - Digital Rights Management).
Time will tell if this is as horrible as that was.
Sold!
Here's your blockchain ID:
Why not just re-name the " collection" the Barnum collection, cuz that's what it is.
I would attach a picture of a $5 bill, but I think that's illegal. So just imagine that I did it. :)
How, other than being unpopular with at least some people? There does seem to be a belief that NFTs are in some way an opening for copy-protection but they don't do that as far as I can see.
The use to provide 1099 income info back in the day for American PAs at least when I was one years ago (Dan Farr era).
Hey man, I'll mint you an NFT for that $5 bill for another $5.
In my best Kermit the Frog voice: "Good grief, it's a runniing gag."
We're talking about NFTs, which are a running gag in-and-of-themselves, so it seems appropriate.
All I see is a tulip scam.
Yeah but what does daz make out of all of this? You aren't doing it for free.
II have a basic question one NFT I looked at was 0.15 (mystery blockchain valuation, hmmmm) on the DAZ site. That translated to about $276 and some odd cents USD (not a mystery as to why that valution is at all - that's a lot of money! LOL). So if I were to buy said NFT for $276 & some odd cents USD would that take the NFT and the associated art work off the market from other buyers? Yes, I know people can screen shot & such and skilled 3D artists can easiliy enough replicate these 3D DAZ 3D style scenes, this is a technical business question about NFTs. So, if that same art can be sold again associated with another NFT there is no way on earth that treats the customer fairly.
Thanks for that link. I wonder how airlines for example handle this, because if you give up your seat on an overbooked flight and they give you a $800 voucher I don't think they send you a 1099 at the end of the year and make you claim that as income.
If there isn't a way for the user to get something out of letting other people order prints of their art I don't think we would spend the web developers time because I suspect we wouldn't have many users opting in so they could just see a little ticker next to their images of how many people have ordered prints. Unless I'm wrong, and please let me know if I am.