NFT and the Future of Digital Content

tombraider4ever

SnowSultan said:
One thing we should keep in mind though is while there are art thieves out there, there's also brutal internet mob justice. I read something a while back where someone tried to sell a creative work that wasn't his (might have been a story, don't quite remember). Once word got out through Twitter that it was created by a different person and he was trying to profit from their work, he was doxxed, hounded, and even threatened until the sale was canceled and the original creator was recognized. Mob justice isn't the ideal way to solve problems, but it does work. I think if we recognize one of our fellow artists' works being sold as an NFT and post links to the original work in NFT and cryptoart-related forums, quite a few of those problems will solve themselves too. We can watch out for each other as vigilantly as they can try to steal our stuff

I'd still like to learn about what would be required on an artist's end to make their own art available as an NFT. There's too much Chicken Little panicking going on in discussions, and I'm more interested now in watching what some of the more talented artists decide to do in time. We also ought to stop worrying about silliness like DAZ selling our artwork on the dark web while we sleep or that there will be a limited number of copies of a PA's products from now on

 

I don't think threatened and hounding someone is right but revealing personal information like hers or his name? So very justified to me!  That would be hurtful? What about me who has to ruin every piece of artwork I make w a big fat watermark when I want SO BAD to show it with no mark for my followers and fellow TR fans to enjoy. So no violence of any kind but revealing their name; serves them right. I put my heart and soul in every artwork  I make and then some lowlife scum of the earth thief wants to make a quick buck or bitcoin or whatever and that is ok? They ruin my life and I feel sorry for them being exposed? That would be a hell no!  And for a thief that sees his theft exposed and deleting it? Are you really that naiv? I applogise as this sounds so rude, I mean that, but I just feel so strongly about this. 
 

 

Edit: the qoute thing got weird here but hopefully you can see where my reply begins.

Edited to fix quoting

xyer0

An entity that consistently borks metadata and has daily issues setting up links has now entered the business of selling products which consist entirely of metadata accessed via provided links? April Fools!

j cade

melissastjames said:

Torquinox said:

Here's a little more fuel for the fire: https://everestpipkin.medium.com/but-the-environmental-issues-with-cryptoart-1128ef72e6a3

It's a long article with a negative conclusion on the factors involved in blockchain as money and cryptoart. It's polemical and seems well-reasoned.

This part  right here - 

Cryptoart offers no intellectual property protection and there is no regulatory structure in place to keep copyrighted materials from being minted into and sold as NFTs, with or without the consent of the creator or copyright holder. Once an NFT is minted, there is no way to remove it from the blockchain or secondary market. 

Also this bit. that means if your art is stolen it can't be taken down as such - theoretically you could gain control of it, or the profits from it, but if you don't want to take part in the system... well tough luck

SnowSultan

tombraider4ever said:

I don't think threatened and hounding someone is right but revealing personal information like hers or his name? So very justified to me!  That would be hurtful? What about me who has to ruin every piece of artwork I make w a big fat watermark when I want SO BAD to show it with no mark for my followers and fellow TR fans to enjoy. So no violence of any kind but revealing their name; serves them right. I put my heart and soul in every artwork  I make and then some lowlife scum of the earth thief wants to make a quick buck or bitcoin or whatever and that is ok? They ruin my life and I feel sorry for them being exposed? That would be a hell no!  And for a thief that sees his theft exposed and deleting it? Are you really that naiv? I applogise as this sounds so rude, I mean that, but I just feel so strongly about this. 

 

Uh...that is the complete opposite of what I was saying. I don't feel sorry in the slightest for someone who steals and tries to sell others' art and was actually saying that internet mob justice *is* a potential solution to stopping that sort of piracy. If we understand each other correctly, we are in complete agreement.

Wonderland

margrave said:

melissastjames said:

Diigitals is the first big name to really pioneer the concept of digital models/supermodels...it's a new horizon, and likely will be an expanding horizon, and there is the potential for real women of color to be passed up or passed over in favor of a 3D model if that means a clothing designer could save money in doing so. It may not have happened this time with Shudu (even though she was mis-represented as being a real person for quite a while which must not have felt good at all for the people who saw her and looked up to her as a role model when they found out she wasn't real)...but there is the potential this whole concept of digital fashion models to be a good thing, or a very bad one. 

That's basically just the whole "robots are taking our jobs!" argument all over again, isn't it? The same one that's been raging for over a century now? 

Thats actually WHY I started doing sexier art (NOT porn though.) When I was a teenager and doing some modeling, there were sleazy photographers who said things like ‘just unbutton one more button sweetie” and more trying to coerce me to take my clothes off. I want to put those photographers out of business! I don’t do 3D porn, but I’m perfectly fine with people doing it, I think it can be psychologically damaging to real women and better left to CG models. 

Wonderland

Richard Haseltine said:

BlueFingers said:

I just dawned on me, I started with Daz Studio last December as it is a nice hobby not affected by COVID lockdowns etc., and I really really enjoy it.

But I really, genuinely, hate the idea that the money I spent will be invested in NFT development because of the enviromental costs.

Ugh, am I the only one with this dillema? I am having a hard time justifying it for myself, and since I am not too invested yet...

I don't think there's any suggestion that Daz is financing NFT development - indeed, I doubt they will keep offering NFTs unless they make a net contribution to income (and so fund DS and so on).

So can they put forums and the gallery back in the header of the website instead of NFTs?

Sera

Often, models get recruited at the age of 13. Their wages are then stolen from them because they have to pay thier employers for various fees. Not to mention all the rampant sexual assault and rape. I am not sure virtual models are such a bad thing. Thier creators are more likely to be adults who can stand up for themselves.

And yes, I'd much rather see people making digital porn than starring in it themselves. That would be far less likely to be traumatic.

Wonderland

Jason Galterio said:

Way back in the analog days, when I would submit manuscripts and such, you were highly recommended to trademark or somehow copyright your material. That way you would have proof that you own a dated copy of said document the predates anything a less than scrupulous agent or submission department might have.

If you were doing a lot of these, then it was cost prohibitive to register everything.

So a lo-tech solution was to make a copy of your document, either printing out an extra one, or photocopying the typed one. Then mailing it to yourself through USPS. When you received the sealed letter back, you left it sealed and put it aside. If you were really paranoid, you would address and stamp the letter on the "wrong side." This way all of the marks and addresses would go across the seal of the envelope.

The point of all of this...  Maybe someone could devise and invest in a "hi tech version of the lo tech solution." Maybe a server or something where users could upload their work files and/or finished images. Lock the files and have proof that the files existed in that location as of X date and have not been modified.

Social media basically does that. If you put a visible watermark on your art then post to Twitter, FB & Insta the same day, you are time stamping. Also if you have Photoshop you can add a copyright to the file under info. 

droidy001

I think the system is far more stupid than many of you are giving it credit for. As far as theft is concerned, as far as I'm aware (please correct me if I'm wrong) it's not about tagging something as original. If someone has a copy of your art legitimately they can put an nft on it. The nft only covers that one individual copy not the work of art. If that person then sells the nft the new owner can do nothing with it unless they have access to the physical media it is stored on, either a link or be in possession of the media. If the copy is then put on a server or emailed to the new owner then that copy is not the one they have an nft for. If a copy is sent to the new nft owner then that could be illegal if the seller of the legitimate copy does not have permission to distribute new copies. If the owner of the nft claims the work as their own then that is an entirely different situation and I'm guessing fraud. It all gets so confusing.

katfeete

droidy001 said:

I think the system is far more stupid than many of you are giving it credit for. As far as theft is concerned, as far as I'm aware (please correct me if I'm wrong) it's not about tagging something as original. If someone has a copy of your art legitimately they can put an nft on it. The nft only covers that one individual copy not the work of art. If that person then sells the nft the new owner can do nothing with it unless they have access to the physical media it is stored on, either a link or be in possession of the media.

It's honestly even stupider than that. An NFT is a token. It has nothing to do with the possession of the art itself. Wikipedia has one of the clearer explanations I've seen: 

An NFT is created by uploading a file, such as an artwork, to an NFT auction market, such as KnownOrigin, Rarible, or OpenSea. This creates a hash of the file recorded on the digital ledger as an NFT, which can be bought with cryptocurrency and resold. Very little data is stored directly inside an NFT. NFTs include links pointing to where the art and any details about it are stored, but the links can die.

(emphasis mine)

In other words, the only thing you are buying is the "hash" that was created when the file was uploaded. The article later compares it to buying autographed copies of a book or piece of art; IMO it's more like buying only the autograph. The work itself isn't in any practical fashion included. At best you're getting a URL pointing to the work, which can of course be moved, deleted, lost, etc. 

"Art theft" is used in this context simply in the sense that people who do not create the artwork are uploading images and creating these hashes from them, then selling the hashes. They haven't "stolen" anyone's work, or copyright, but they are making money off something they had no hand in creating, which many artists quite rightly object to.

It's very dumb, very fragile, and very, very wasteful. 

Wolfwood

I just got a new NFT promotion. Seems that DAZ do not learn.

This one is shadier than everything before because it actually tries to represent a physical object and the promo send you directly to OpenSea without explaining what NFTs are, much less what NFTs are not. So the distrated by a cool gif think they are actyally getting something exclusive when they at best this could be describe as bragging rights........ shared with 99 more people.

So sad anything related to DAZ is tied to NFTs; but if this is Tafi, leave it to tafi and don't mess with your digital models customers. Certainly don't send me email about it because i never subscribed to Tafi in the first place.

droidy001

katfeete said:

droidy001 said:

I think the system is far more stupid than many of you are giving it credit for. As far as theft is concerned, as far as I'm aware (please correct me if I'm wrong) it's not about tagging something as original. If someone has a copy of your art legitimately they can put an nft on it. The nft only covers that one individual copy not the work of art. If that person then sells the nft the new owner can do nothing with it unless they have access to the physical media it is stored on, either a link or be in possession of the media.

It's honestly even stupider than that. An NFT is a token. It has nothing to do with the possession of the art itself. Wikipedia has one of the clearer explanations I've seen: 

An NFT is created by uploading a file, such as an artwork, to an NFT auction market, such as KnownOrigin, Rarible, or OpenSea. This creates a hash of the file recorded on the digital ledger as an NFT, which can be bought with cryptocurrency and resold. Very little data is stored directly inside an NFT. NFTs include links pointing to where the art and any details about it are stored, but the links can die.

(emphasis mine)

In other words, the only thing you are buying is the "hash" that was created when the file was uploaded. The article later compares it to buying autographed copies of a book or piece of art; IMO it's more like buying only the autograph. The work itself isn't in any practical fashion included. At best you're getting a URL pointing to the work, which can of course be moved, deleted, lost, etc. 

"Art theft" is used in this context simply in the sense that people who do not create the artwork are uploading images and creating these hashes from them, then selling the hashes. They haven't "stolen" anyone's work, or copyright, but they are making money off something they had no hand in creating, which many artists quite rightly object to.

It's very dumb, very fragile, and very, very wasteful. 

It just gets drafter the more I learn. Taking a copy of a work you have no rights to is the theft. The nft is a way of monetising that theft. So when it comes down to it (in a weird sort of way) then nft is just another crypto currency except each one has a different value, but still not backed by anything.

Ippotamus

Wolfwood said:

I just got a new NFT promotion. Seems that DAZ do not learn.

This one is shadier than everything before because it actually tries to represent a physical object and the promo send you directly to OpenSea without explaining what NFTs are, much less what NFTs are not. So the distrated by a cool gif think they are actyally getting something exclusive when they at best this could be describe as bragging rights........ shared with 99 more people.

So sad anything related to DAZ is tied to NFTs; but if this is Tafi, leave it to tafi and don't mess with your digital models customers. Certainly don't send me email about it because i never subscribed to Tafi in the first place.

 Wait, DAZ sent you a NFT promotion/NFT ad?
Wow, that's horrible.

Matt_Castle

Richard Haseltine said:

From all I've seen and read there is a general shortage of many electorinic components. Miners may be an additional factor in GPUs, but there is more than enough underlying demand to soak up the supply anyway.

That assumes that the situation remains fair in the case of a shortage, which is entirely untrue.

Once supply starts getting tight, the scalpers and miners break out the bots, and then people play that game and push up the prices on eBay, so more scalpers break out more bots... ultimately, the shortage falls entirely on the people who can't or won't play by the scalpers' rules; If you don't have the time to watch every possible stock alert Youtube video or Twitter account, and the speed to beat the bots and other desperate buyers, you lose.

I got my RTX 3060 by going absolutely all in on launch day, carefully synchronising my clocks to know exactly when the launch was, pre-picking a specific model from a specific site (no prices yet shown), getting lucky enough to discover about 40 seconds early that the site had signed everyone out and was putting them through anti-bot captchas (giving me an extra moment to sign back in) and then refreshing and clicking "Add to cart", "Checkout" and "Pay" as fast as physically possible - with no time to compare sites, prices on different models, etc.

Frankly, I behaved like a complete jerk; I was one of the people who made the situation less fair. But it was the only strategy I had for even a slim chance at being able to get one at retail, and had I not got it then, I'm pretty sure I still wouldn't have one now, over a month later. (And even if I did, I probably would have had very little choice about which model).  I know there are people on the Daz Slackers Discord who have been looking since launch and have still come up short - to the point I actually genuinely feel quite guilty about the whole thing, because I'm not actually any more worthy of having that card than they are.

The situation right now is so bad that I recently sold a used 750 Ti - a card that was respectable but very distinctly entry level even when it was new - for a third more than I paid for it from the store nearly six years ago.

While a large part of this is down to the pandemic meaning that many workers need to, and many gamers want to, upgrade their systems, the miners are still exacerbating it. Anything that takes the pressure off will make that situation less unfair, by encouraging fewer scalpers. A mining crash would arguably be the best case scenario, because not only does that reduce demand, it *massively* increases supply - previous mining crashes have seen a flood of ex-mining GPUs washing onto the second hand market.

BlueFingers said:

Ugh, am I the only one with this dillema? I am having a hard time justifying it for myself, and since I am not too invested yet...

Not in the slightest. I'm in pretty deep here, and even I'm seriously wondering what my relationship with Daz is going to be like going forward. I've been working on things with the intention that they'd be saleable assets (and I already know there's the interest out there for them; I've had people DMing me on Discord asking if I'm selling them yet), but I honestly don't know if I'm willing to approach Daz about that at the moment.

 

zombietaggerung

Ippotamus said:

Wolfwood said:

I just got a new NFT promotion. Seems that DAZ do not learn.

This one is shadier than everything before because it actually tries to represent a physical object and the promo send you directly to OpenSea without explaining what NFTs are, much less what NFTs are not. So the distrated by a cool gif think they are actyally getting something exclusive when they at best this could be describe as bragging rights........ shared with 99 more people.

So sad anything related to DAZ is tied to NFTs; but if this is Tafi, leave it to tafi and don't mess with your digital models customers. Certainly don't send me email about it because i never subscribed to Tafi in the first place.

 Wait, DAZ sent you a NFT promotion/NFT ad?
Wow, that's horrible.

I got an email too, yesterday. i just deleted it.

Ippotamus

Makes sense, I used AdBlocker/Block Element on all the NFT movies and ads on the website.

brimstoneomega

Sevrin said:

Daz_Jessica said:

Daz was founded on the concept of empowering artists and giving them an avenue to monetize from their talent and hard work. We are exploring NFTs (among other avenues) as an extension of that vision. We hope that in the future we can provide more avenues for artists to create and sell their works, if they so choose. 

 

Sure wish you would have focused on providing assets that aren't broken in the store and documenting Daz Studio.   That would go a long way toward helping artists create their works.

Absolute savagery. I like you. 

Sorry, I know that post was a thousand pages ago, but I just started reading this thread. Got about nine hundred and eighty-three pages left till I'm all caught up. 

And to all those wondering about multiple coipes of NFTs, yes, you can make multiples, linked to the same work, but the NFT is unique. It's not the actual piece of art that's being sold, it's the number associated with it. Unless you're talking about socks. Those are real. Yes, I said socks, real life socks with NFTs.

rek

DAZ sent me a Tafi (who/what is that?) Champions (?) NFT promotion o_O.

I have zero interest in that and don't see how it relates to 3D assets in any way. So I've hit the unsubscribe button with a *sigh*. (I actually liked getting the newsletter, but I don't want anything to do with NFTs)

brimstoneomega

SnowSultan said:

DAZ_Jessica said that another article/blog was coming that would explain how to create and sell our own NFTs though. I'm a little curious to see what that entails - I still don't think this is something DAZ should be getting involved in, but I'm open to seeing what's coming next.

First, you need a crypto wallet, then you need to buy ethereum, then take any image and mint it, pay a "gas" fee that is getting quite high, and will probably continue to rise. Then you decide how many of the things you want to make and then if you want to collect royalties on the further sales of the NFT (or something along those lines). Then you sell it or auction it or whatever. If Daz is going to start facilitating all that.... I don't even know what to say. It's probably going to be just some info on how to do all that and where to go to do the aforementioned "all that". 

Sevrin

rek said:

DAZ sent me a Tafi (who/what is that?) Champions (?) NFT promotion o_O.

I have zero interest in that and don't see how it relates to 3D assets in any way. So I've hit the unsubscribe button with a *sigh*. (I actually liked getting the newsletter, but I don't want anything to do with NFTs)

I got that too.  Maybe the "Join the Community" pop-up was an effort to help push their NFT advertisements. 

jerham

rek said:

DAZ sent me a Tafi (who/what is that?) Champions (?) NFT promotion o_O.

I have zero interest in that and don't see how it relates to 3D assets in any way. So I've hit the unsubscribe button with a *sigh*. (I actually liked getting the newsletter, but I don't want anything to do with NFTs)

Same here and also immedtiatly ubsubscribed. To say it nicely i'm very very dissapointed with DAZ and there decision to jump on the NFT hype this way.

And the promoted "art" in the email you can bid on ..i find it a complete joke and Daz unworthy to attach themself to this. Very fitting to receive this on the first of april but i fear this isn't a april fools day joke 

Mark_e593e0a5

rek said:

DAZ sent me a Tafi (who/what is that?) Champions (?) NFT promotion o_O.

I have zero interest in that and don't see how it relates to 3D assets in any way. So I've hit the unsubscribe button with a *sigh*. (I actually liked getting the newsletter, but I don't want anything to do with NFTs)

I received the same mail and also unsubscribed immediately. Given that this email has only Tafi content (even if it sent from a Daz account), I consider that an unsolicited email. Please turn back Daz, you are on the wrong track.

Sevrin

If you want to continue to receive the newsletter, you can create an email filter that deletes emails from Daz containing the string "NFT".  Any modern email client should be able to do this.

In Gmail

Then

tsarist

Wonderland said:

Thats actually WHY I started doing sexier art (NOT porn though.) When I was a teenager and doing some modeling, there were sleazy photographers who said things like ‘just unbutton one more button sweetie” and more trying to coerce me to take my clothes off. I want to put those photographers out of business! I don’t do 3D porn, but I’m perfectly fine with people doing it, I think it can be psychologically damaging to real women and better left to CG models. 

Well, I don't know if you had much to do with it, but most of those sleazy photographers are out of business now. lol.

The collapse of print magazines really hurt them.

I was a photographer at one point and did racy, sometimes nude (Playboy type stuff, softcore). way back in the day. I never got into the "one more button" nonsense because it's just plain unprofessional. Before a model steps onto set, she needs to know exactly what the shoot entails. It makes for a better experience. You get better pictures & avoid getting a bad reputation. Models talk.

I never even considered porn because it's not something that would take my career where I wanted to go.

WendyLuvsCatz

newsletter public net version 

I have no words

Slartibartfast

I am extremely disappointed to see Daz using their established communication with customers to promote this bullshit. Don't they realize how much respect they're losing with this nonsense?

plasma_ring

WendyLuvsCatz said:

newsletter public net version 

I have no words

The person who bought the one (1) Studio render so far also bought the Champion scrolling hoodie one. Their profile is the Real Crypto Experience. 

SnowSultan

First, you need a crypto wallet, then you need to buy ethereum, then take any image and mint it, pay a "gas" fee that is getting quite high, and will probably continue to rise. Then you decide how many of the things you want to make and then if you want to collect royalties on the further sales of the NFT (or something along those lines). Then you sell it or auction it or whatever. If Daz is going to start facilitating all that.... I don't even know what to say. It's probably going to be just some info on how to do all that and where to go to do the aforementioned "all that". 

Thank you, sounds like far more trouble than it's worth. I think we should just all start Patreon pages and support each other. I gave a little to HDRI Haven every month for a year and a little bit to a disabled manga artist for a few more.

I'm still shopping here though - NFTs will exist whether or not DAZ is involved. I'm not going to limit my own artistic resources and punish PAs who had nothing to do with this because the parent company is doing something we don't like.  

kyoto kid

...@Sevrin, Thank you for the memory jog,  just set up a filter for my inbox.

JB007

Yeah, another one here now unsubscribed from the Daz newsletter after recieving unsolicited NFT crap .. it would almost be tolerable if it was Daz related but it's spamming some emoji rubbish from Tafi and Champion .. whoever the hell the latter is .. 

Daz .. seriously .. stop this rubbish now .. nobody is interested and you're creating a lot of ill will ..