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
I'm not a fan of the idea of having users sell their art for "credit" to be used on the store (I'd be much more open to actually paying an artist their worth in currency they can use for things like FOOD instead of some "discount" that would no doubt have some ridiculous restrictions) however if the Gallery and Art transactions are to be treated as a closed system, and the store credit isn't convertible, it wouldn't be required for a taxpayer to indicate this on their tax returns. This is in regards to the IRS here in the US, and is commonly applied to video game currency transactions.
If Daz opened up the ability for us to upload and sell our work, be it access, prints or otherwise for actual currency, be it direct or convertible (such as crypto, and having been agreed upon so that the seller knows it's their responsibility to file their taxes), I'd be more open to it than going the NFT route, which as others have noted can easily be abused.
It's refreshing that Daz is exploring these options, but I wish Daz would have been more open to input from us users before jumping the shark as they've already done.
That's really messed up. You want us to buy the assets, make the art, and then you get to sell said art for free? We would be paying you to work for you. Literally. Not a good look for Daz. Even worse than this NFT scandal.
I'm one of those old-timers who don't understand what's happening with digital trading so I have a simple question: how does this NFT thing affect me, as a mere hobbyist who never displays any of my "artwork"? I just make pictures for fun and, apart from a personal project where I'm recreating scenes from my own family life, I delete most of the stuff I create.
So, to be more precise, is this going to end up costing me when I want to buy store content to make my hobby pictures? Will I have to use tokens to buy from the store? Will the prices start to go up and down depending on the trading of these tokens? Or is it all limited to selling the completed images? I mean, even the promo pictures for store products might be considered completed artwork and any subsequent artwork created using that product might be considered derivative. Oh, so confusing and, to me at least, quite senseless: tulips indeed.
Depends on the tax law. German tax law does not make any difference if you receive something in physical goods or in cash. And yes, I do have to declare any income in foreign currency, even if that is not handed over in cash but by other means. Even if you would fly over to Germany to shake hands and give me a pat on my shoulder, I would have to declare this as "monetary benefit".
Everyone, I will be listing some exclusive NFT-backed nude renders of Troll Beast starting at $2500, which can be paid in US Dollar or Bitcoin.
I am also looking for an artist to help provide voicework for my sexy Troll Beast, and to help craft the soul of this magnificent digital icon.
Please DM if interested, and look forward to my hot renders, which will be found on DAZ's homepage next week.
Watch out, Shudu!
Once again, an NFT has no influence whatsoever on the data it is created on (and that data does not have to be artwork, it can be anything, a tweet, a piece of code, some random digital garbage). An NFT is an expensive unique link, nothing more, nothing less. If you buy that link it is yours. THAT LINK is yours, not the artwork or data it links to. Someone, anyone can create another unique link, another NFT to the same artwork and sell that one too. And another one. And another one. And...
If I had to say to you that I have a piece of NFT Harry Potter art that can be traced back to J.K Rowling, and the exact same piece of art that can be traced back to id3456234245 but no one knows who that is, which would be more valuable? They are exactly the same, with the only difference being that the majority of people will accept that one is the original and the other one isn't, and that gives it its value. It's a strange and foreign concept, but 23 years ago, when half life released as a digital download I hated the idea of buying a game without having a box and cd rom to accompany it. This also seems strange, but who knows how things will shape out in 23 years time.
- Bad for the environment
- They took our graphics cards!
Greed is bad in general, when it only extracts value and doesn't add value. It's a pyramid scheme that doesn't know it happened yet.
The core idea of NFT is interesting and cool, but as often the implementation is done by sockpuppets.
I am just guessing here, but I would say that the customer is returning a ticket. The value of the ticket is whatever the other person is willing to pay. The credit received would be less than that amount. So technically the customer is not being paid for a service.
Its probably all in the semantics.
Except you could actually play that game as much as you want. By the sound of it, with an NFT, you can only look at the piece of artwork that you bought a link for. You can't do anything with it, short of re-sell your link to said artwork.
This won't affect you in the least. It doesn't change anything. the Blockchain is simply a massive online register that can record transactions, that no one can alter. that's all it is. So if I sell something to you, using the blockchain, that record will be there forever. If that person sells the same item, that record will also be recorded. Now, a future owner can retrace all the sales to find the original owner. This technology opens up a whole range of applications. Imagine we had the list of every person that a valuable painting was sold to. You could verify that you are indeed the real owner of that painting.
Now, one of the applications that people have found is that they can release a piece of digital art and sell 100 copies of it. Just like a real painting, when that art is sold, the ownership passes to someone else. And in 20 years time, you will be able to trace the sales back to the original owner and verify that the art is in fact the real deal. For some reason, people have decided that they want to buy into this, and are spending a lot of money, hoping that these "digital tickets of ownership" will one day be worth something. From what I can gather, Daz is listing some of their own original art for sale. That's it. Nothing more, nothing less. If you don't want to buy, then you will not be affected.
yes, I agree 100%. I don't see the value in it, but still some people are paying upwards of 60 million dollars for that link. I don't know why.
Well, yes and no...once you consider the environmental impacts and potential compounded impacts to our plight of trying to buy hardware to make art. $3200 3090's anybody?
Not to mention that all this "can be traced back to the original artist" provenance is worth exactly poopie if the links are being sold for a piece of stolen artwork. It very well could effect all of us...way more than you think. I know my artwork has been stolen before and I gave up playing whack-a-mole trying to stop it. This makes it oh so much easier for thieving because it provides much more incentive through visibility.
Before NFT's even existed, thieves were using bots to scour Google images and automagically post them to print sellers like CafePress, etc. One would be taken down only for another to pop up. I had my entire Tumblr post history put up on some print site in China, including memes and reblogs of other people's artwork...and I was far from the only one. Now with NFT's...how long do you think it will take these thieves to make that bot automatically point to making an NFT instead of posting on a print site? Or both?
Thanks. So my concerns about DAZ store products being somehow linked to NFT are likewise unfounded?
Nothing about how the store functions has changed. The sum of the situation right now is that Daz and the Diigitals are selling their own unique artwork on a separate platform. They're promoting the artwork on the site. Users don't have to be involved at all, but it's contentious because Daz is encouraging artists to try the process they're using, which is expensive, risky, and wasteful.
The person who ended up paying USD 69M for the Beeble collection, Metakovan, is heavily involved in the crypto market and has a vested interest in the NFT market taking off. He thinks it will be worth a billion USD someday, or says he does. It wasn't just some dude who had a Beeble-shaped void in his life.
As for the tulip thing, it was bulbs, and not flowers that were being traded. Also, there was no scam and not that many bulbs were traded. The bidding was for the equivalent of forward contracts. Mostly things got under control before the craziest contracts settlement dates. When it was all over, the clergy made a bigger thing out of it than it was.
hey,
my renders are for rent. display them on your website for 67$ a month.
I'm totally shocked that DAZ would introduce something like this, whatever it is. I have absolutely no interest in Bitcoins etc. I skipped over many paragraphs of the intro. Then I saw reference to NFT. I heard about that on the news. We can buy "imaginary art?!" I already have a wildly vivid imagination, and it costs me nothing.
This NFT stuff has nothing to do with the DAZ3D company I've known for 20 years. I'll evade it like the plague.
Is Daz hard up for cash? I would be upset if that were true. I thought sales had gone up recently? But between this and the "can we sell prints of your stuff?" thing, I have to wonder.
Honestly, Daz might do better to just sell high-end assets: something with lots of bells and whistles but no blockchain (and of course a designer price tag). I don't think a lot of people would opt in to a $400 dollar dress, but you might sell some at $80 if it was really impressive and never went on sale. (I'm not suggesting you only sell high-end assets of course. I'm sure most of us can't afford that).
Or what about a contest where people could opt in to have their renders voted on? The winner gets a predetermined prize or amount of money and then Daz gets some rights to print it. That's probably less paperwork.
Why is this suddenly starting to feel like a new DRM or tracking system daz is trying to test out before they start using this system to sell thier content?
Much as I have little interest in NFT's it strikes me as somewhat hypercritical for people to complain about the environmentl imact of NFT's while spending endless hours using a computer for hobby/fun. I do renders myself, so I'm as guilty as anybody.
As opposed to what? Driving around in a car? Going shopping? Everything impacts the environment...the point is adding to it needlessly. Unless your idea of spending free time is standing in a corner doing nothing or gardening at a commune. I feel like the environment would much rather have me at home sitting on my ass in front a computer than driving around in my 10 mile-to-the-gallon Mustang that I only drive about 500 miles a year.
Blockchains are really bad at both of those tasks.
For DRM you would have to be always online and have your system connect to a master database to make sure your current copy of the blockchain is the real copy and not a fork you created by disconnecting from the main blockchain and signing a bunch of things that say that you own everything now. But if you are willing to trust a master database and be on the internet then it's far simpler to just have a couple bits to say that "you do / don't own this".
On tracking, the blockchain is public so all buyers/seller wallet id's (which are hard to tie to an actual person because they can be created freely) are stored in the public record. For tracking stuff more than that you would run in to the problem of blockchains not being good at storing a lot of data and being expensive at recording that data, which is why to list a single NFT on the market it costs ~$130, so spending enough to build a tracking profile of someone on the blockchain would send Bill Gates to the poorhouse.
In all fairness though, is the environmental impact nearly as bad as the 2.8 billion people with pvc plastic credit cards that need to be discarded every 4 years? yet, no one is angry at Daz for accepting credit card. Don't get me wrong, I hate the idea of mining and hate what it does to the price of hardware and the environment and I agree with what you are saying. They need to change it.
I honestly think that NFT are still new and exciting (to a very small group of people) and people are hoping to get in early and make some money, but soon everyone will jump in and the market will be flooded with thousands of images that don't really have any real value. WIth Daz getting involved, that will only quicken that saturation. I then think the market will right itself and people will want some form of value attached to the image before they invest. Long term, I don't think that this is going to affect artists that much. I'm happy to be challenged on this thinking though.
This actually sounds pretty cool to me!
It has been stated in here numerous times that each token has an individual ID number. Are you saying that you can't apply this system to your zipfiles? Kind of finding that hard to believe especiall with all the backtracking going on and snarky comments from some of the mods to derail this thread.
Likely we all spend a lot of time at the computer, but I think what the person you replied to meant is that some of these miners run banks of powerful graphics cards for months on end and STILL can get absolutely nothing in the way of bitcoin. They use more electricy in a month than you're bound to use in an entire year.
I agree, but arguably spending hours doing renders which never see the light of day is equally needless use of energy. So I think I would be wrong for me to criticise people using NFT's on environmental grounds. I don't have a car though, so I'm not polluting in that way
I agree a single individual using a computer is minimal , but how about all the people who play 'Fortnite' ( never tried it, just an example ) Is their collective impact minimal, or adding any useful value?