With the Diigitals stuff, at least Daz was building on a previous collaboration with a digital artist. I'm not seeing any Champion licenced stuff in the store. The overlap between Daz customers and people who spend on Champion stuff for the Gram can't be that big. Now if it had been a collaboration with Ensure or Depends, that would have been a different story.
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
Thanks for the tip; i did get 2 of those stupid nft newsletters it seems- found that out after I set up the filter
And I too had that f... urhm.. MUCH UNWELCOME stupid letter in my inbox today. Now I can't help but question wether to hold to my wait and see approach, or just be done with it. I Like 3d, I Like Daz (usually)... but this is looking more and more like something I want to stay the hell away from and yet I feel a lot like it's being forced onto me (the NFT pushing out Gallery and Forums on the upper navigation list, and now this email)
The only rational explanation for "The Second Coming"-style promotion by DAZ is, that TaFi has ordered them to do it.
If you browse through the auction site, you feel like you are browsing through kindergarten bulleting board. Who in their right mind would want to sell anything on a marketplace that has tens of farts for sale, or tokens for those farts...
It's spectacularly unclear. Wikipedia says Tafi was spun off from Daz3D. However, as I did some research, I found Daz, Tafi, and some defunct company called Morph3D all share the same CEO, James Thornton. So I guess there was some kind of restructuring.
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).
Isn't promoting the sale of NFTs actively contributing to the developments of NFTs?
It's spectacularly unclear. Wikipedia says Tafi was spun off from Daz3D. However, as I did some research, I found Daz, Tafi, and some defunct company called Morph3D all share the same CEO, James Thornton. So I guess there was some kind of restructuring.
My guess is that it was a branding move because they intended to expand into new channels. Daz3D does one specific kind of digital character customization, Tafi (the platform) does another, and they may have chosen Tafi as the parent company name for any number of reasons (it's snappier, they didn't want it to carry expectations based on the established Daz brand, they expected way more traction on the VRChat front, etc.). But I would be surprised if they were meaningfully different entities.
Edit to note that the official Daz twitter account refers to Tafi as their "sister company."
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?
It is still there it is int eh drop down when you hover over community.
It's just piling on now, but... Unsubscribed from the newsletter last night when I received the referenced email that only solicted NFTs and had nothing to do with DAZ software.
As I said days ago, this scheme isn't a method to market DAZ software to NFT creators, it isn't to educate artists to create NFTs... It's to market NFTs to DAZ's already existing customer base, us.
I just submitted a help ticket asking whether it is possible to unsubscribe just from NFT newsletters, and suggesting that it might be a good idea to differentiate newsletters so people can only subscribe to what they're interested in. I'm not expecting anything to come of it, but it's a marginally clearer signal than just filtering.
I'm hoping it's an April Fool's joke, and, if not, I'll be unsubscribing to all Daz3D emails and not buying anything again.
Don't punish PAs .. if you're going to protest with your wallet - just stop buying Daz Originals ..
I'm curious to know if they consulted with the PAs or at least warned them ahead of time. There are ways they could have handled this without playing games with people's livelihoods.
If they'd waited a few months to see if more eco-friendly alternatives showed up, or to make sure it wasn't a bubble, I think this would have been different. But nobody interested in NFTs is doing that because even if they sincerely hope this is sustainable, they all kind of instinctively get that the point is to be fast on the trigger. That's the whole weird identity and pride surrounding crypto and similar new tech--they want to be visionaries who were rewarded for seeing the future. When it doesn't pan out or they lose a lot, they have to stick with it or give up that pride and buoyant, optimistic, exciting community. Setbacks are growing pains, and the future just isn't here yet. Just one big break and we'll all be swimming in champagne.
I want to support the PAs, but I'm concerned by what Daz might think the future is and what their leadership's attitude might be toward emerging tech. Confession: I actually love the idea of virtual influencers, or at least digital identities. I want to make an avatar I can use to interact with other people online, where I can be a robot or an alien or have a TV for a head or whatever. But then I go and look that up and it's stuff like this. Just a thousand-yard stare into a perpetual future where the present is always disposable. Already fully buttoned up as a cutting-edge SEO-optimized marketing field, run by 50-year-old dudes who were born at the director level, all with a coat of Gen Z-friendly paint.
Coming back to this thread probably isn't productive for me, but I'm just sad. The people who use Daz are generally so down to earth and just doing what they love. I'm really tired of bracing for every company I depend on suddenly turning their customers into a springboard for the next hustle, and I've been having so much fun that I forgot to.
I'm hoping it's an April Fool's joke, and, if not, I'll be unsubscribing to all Daz3D emails and not buying anything again.
Don't punish PAs .. if you're going to protest with your wallet - just stop buying Daz Originals ..
I'm curious to know if they consulted with the PAs or at least warned them ahead of time. There are ways they could have handled this without playing games with people's livelihoods.
If they'd waited a few months to see if more eco-friendly alternatives showed up, or to make sure it wasn't a bubble, I think this would have been different. But nobody interested in NFTs is doing that because even if they sincerely hope this is sustainable, they all kind of instinctively get that the point is to be fast on the trigger. That's the whole weird identity and pride surrounding crypto and similar new tech--they want to be visionaries who were rewarded for seeing the future. When it doesn't pan out or they lose a lot, they have to stick with it or give up that pride and buoyant, optimistic, exciting community. Setbacks are growing pains, and the future just isn't here yet. Just one big break and we'll all be swimming in champagne.
I want to support the PAs, but I'm concerned by what Daz might think the future is and what their leadership's attitude might be toward emerging tech. Confession: I actually love the idea of virtual influencers, or at least digital identities. I want to make an avatar I can use to interact with other people online, where I can be a robot or an alien or have a TV for a head or whatever. But then I go and look that up and it's stuff like this. Just a thousand-yard stare into a perpetual future where the present is always disposable. Already fully buttoned up as a cutting-edge SEO-optimized marketing field, run by 50-year-old dudes who were born at the director level, all with a coat of Gen Z-friendly paint.
Coming back to this thread probably isn't productive for me, but I'm just sad. The people who use Daz are generally so down to earth and just doing what they love. I'm really tired of bracing for every company I depend on suddenly turning their customers into a springboard for the next hustle, and I've been having so much fun that I forgot to.
The PAs aren't powerless and can signal their lack of support for NFT monkey business. I keep pointing out this is the same misadventure as the DAZ Encrypted content where PA's took sides.
The PAs aren't powerless and can signal their lack of support for NFT monkey business. I keep pointing out this is the same misadventure as the DAZ Encrypted content where PA's took sides.
Sure, but I would like entities with life-changing power and money to proactively consider the impact of their choices so people don't have to do this constantly.
I'm hoping it's an April Fool's joke, and, if not, I'll be unsubscribing to all Daz3D emails and not buying anything again.
Don't punish PAs .. if you're going to protest with your wallet - just stop buying Daz Originals ..
I'm curious to know if they consulted with the PAs or at least warned them ahead of time. There are ways they could have handled this without playing games with people's livelihoods.
If they'd waited a few months to see if more eco-friendly alternatives showed up, or to make sure it wasn't a bubble, I think this would have been different. But nobody interested in NFTs is doing that because even if they sincerely hope this is sustainable, they all kind of instinctively get that the point is to be fast on the trigger. That's the whole weird identity and pride surrounding crypto and similar new tech--they want to be visionaries who were rewarded for seeing the future. When it doesn't pan out or they lose a lot, they have to stick with it or give up that pride and buoyant, optimistic, exciting community. Setbacks are growing pains, and the future just isn't here yet. Just one big break and we'll all be swimming in champagne.
I want to support the PAs, but I'm concerned by what Daz might think the future is and what their leadership's attitude might be toward emerging tech. Confession: I actually love the idea of virtual influencers, or at least digital identities. I want to make an avatar I can use to interact with other people online, where I can be a robot or an alien or have a TV for a head or whatever. But then I go and look that up and it's stuff like this. Just a thousand-yard stare into a perpetual future where the present is always disposable. Already fully buttoned up as a cutting-edge SEO-optimized marketing field, run by 50-year-old dudes who were born at the director level, all with a coat of Gen Z-friendly paint.
Coming back to this thread probably isn't productive for me, but I'm just sad. The people who use Daz are generally so down to earth and just doing what they love. I'm really tired of bracing for every company I depend on suddenly turning their customers into a springboard for the next hustle, and I've been having so much fun that I forgot to.
The PAs aren't powerless and can signal their lack of support for NFT monkey business. I keep pointing out this is the same misadventure as the DAZ Encrypted content where PA's took sides.
For PA's, Daz is providing a very convenient way to sell their art. But Daz is also relying on the PA's. Without PA's there is nothing to sell. Without customers, there is no way for a PA to get her/his stuff sold. If Daz is upsetting both parties, they are out of business in no time. I hope they do start listening. I have a couple of PA's that I absolutely do want to support.
It's just piling on now, but... Unsubscribed from the newsletter last night when I received the referenced email that only solicted NFTs and had nothing to do with DAZ software.
As I said days ago, this scheme isn't a method to market DAZ software to NFT creators, it isn't to educate artists to create NFTs... It's to market NFTs to DAZ's already existing customer base, us.
There's no reason they can't do all of those things at once, to varying extents. After all, if we make NFTs we'll have to do something with our crypto-currency, "encouraging" us to funnel it into the existing NFT market. Seems like the Diigitals is hyping up Daz3D on his Instagram, while Daz is trying to pitch NFTs to us directly. A multi-pronged approach.
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.
And that upload of the image would be subject to DMCA, unless the artist had given the purchaser the right to upload for viewing by others.
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)
Ditto. I looked all through my account and can't find a way to subscribe just to the newsletters that I want so no more newsletters for me. In fact, I can't find a way to subscribe to DAZ newsletters at all, so even if they stop spamming people with NFT drek, I can't re-subscribe in the future. Their FAQ tells how to unsubscribe to the newsletter, but not how to subscribe. I think that might need to be fixed, along with the fact that the Help area doesn't have a direct link back to DAZ.
I considered doing this on DeviantArt, but decided not to because even though it said "your image is big enough to print!", they really aren't. At least not to print to my standards. Not to mention making sure monitor to print color calibration would be a crapshoot and you could wind up with unhappy customers. I'd have the same fear about Daz doing it...especially given the gallery upload size limit
and the fact that you can only upload a .jpg. Who wants a print from a .jpg?
Yeah, this is a short-sighted bandwagon-jumping idea that will not end well, unless you luck out with a bored person with too much money and not enough wisdom to have it! All I know is the disappointment in not being able to buy/use the incredibly unique 3D models, yet instead only be allowed to pay well over $500 dollars for a bleedin' gif of the Covergirl, which is a pretty idiotic purchase as it can be easily duplicated, unless there's some hidden code in the gif itself!
EDIT: Just saw this crap in the storefront, they can't even make an Asian look like a REAL Asian...
Yeah, this is a short-sighted bandwagon-jumping idea that will not end well, unless you luck out with a bored person with too much money and not enough wisdom to have it! All I know is the disappointment in not being able to buy/use the incredibly unique 3D models, yet instead only be allowed to pay well over $500 dollars for a bleedin' gif of the Covergirl, which is a pretty idiotic purchase as it can be easily duplicated, unless there's some hidden code in the gif itself!
The GIF format specification is very old and therefore has quite some restrictions. It does not allow to embed any code to be executed while the GIF is displayed or an animation is run. While you can - theoretically - embed code in an image (steganography), you need the unchanged image to filter out that code again. And you would require some display engine, e.g. the layout enigne in your web browser, to execute that code.
I'm hoping it's an April Fool's joke, and, if not, I'll be unsubscribing to all Daz3D emails and not buying anything again.
Don't punish PAs .. if you're going to protest with your wallet - just stop buying Daz Originals ..
I want to support the PAs, but I'm concerned by what Daz might think the future is and what their leadership's attitude might be toward emerging tech. Confession: I actually love the idea of virtual influencers, or at least digital identities. I want to make an avatar I can use to interact with other people online, where I can be a robot or an alien or have a TV for a head or whatever. But then I go and look that up and it's stuff like this. Just a thousand-yard stare into a perpetual future where the present is always disposable. Already fully buttoned up as a cutting-edge SEO-optimized marketing field, run by 50-year-old dudes who were born at the director level, all with a coat of Gen Z-friendly paint.
The really scary thing about this is that it could/will end up being yet another system that sets up all but the 1% to fail. Those who already have the money and power and privelage will continue to run everything while everybody else is left in the dirt and holding the bag. The only difference is that, as you've said, they have a coat of friendly paint to hide behind.
I'm hoping it's an April Fool's joke, and, if not, I'll be unsubscribing to all Daz3D emails and not buying anything again.
Don't punish PAs .. if you're going to protest with your wallet - just stop buying Daz Originals ..
I want to support the PAs, but I'm concerned by what Daz might think the future is and what their leadership's attitude might be toward emerging tech. Confession: I actually love the idea of virtual influencers, or at least digital identities. I want to make an avatar I can use to interact with other people online, where I can be a robot or an alien or have a TV for a head or whatever. But then I go and look that up and it's stuff like this. Just a thousand-yard stare into a perpetual future where the present is always disposable. Already fully buttoned up as a cutting-edge SEO-optimized marketing field, run by 50-year-old dudes who were born at the director level, all with a coat of Gen Z-friendly paint.
The really scary thing about this is that it could/will end up being yet another system that sets up all but the 1% to fail. Those who already have the money and power and privelage will continue to run everything while everybody else is left in the dirt and holding the bag. The only difference is that, as you've said, they have a coat of friendly paint to hide behind.
Yeah. They talk a good game about it democratizing everything, but they mean "anyone could find a new emerging market and amass power and wealth."
I swear it's like I wished on the monkey's paw and get to have all the wild digital identity freedom I devoured stories about in the 00s, but in the most bland, success-hungry, sanitized way possible. I should upload some weird stuff to insta and make myself unmarketable.
It's spectacularly unclear. Wikipedia says Tafi was spun off from Daz3D. However, as I did some research, I found Daz, Tafi, and some defunct company called Morph3D all share the same CEO, James Thornton. So I guess there was some kind of restructuring.
Morph3D was spun off of Daz3D to provide Unity assets of Daz content. You could buy Genesis 3 (I think it was) figures and outfits fully rigged for Unity with morphs and such. Unfortunately for those of us that bought some, they no longer work.
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.
And that upload of the image would be subject to DMCA, unless the artist had given the purchaser the right to upload for viewing by others.
Doesn't seem to be a problem with NFT's, as there are several NFT's for Hermione Granger, at least one for Mona Lisa, and these were just some of which caught my eye when browsing through the auction site.
Somehow I started wondering if whoever made the desicion for DAZ to start promoting NFT's with such enthusiasm, really understood what the NFT's actually were,,,
Edit to note that the official Daz twitter account refers to Tafi as their "sister company."
That is the thing. Sister company means is not actually Daz as much as they share same ceo/directors. Lower scale but similar to Whatsapp, instagram, facebook...sharing data between them required change in their eula/privacy policies.
So last night they used a DAZ mail service and template but the promo has nothing to do with DAZ, it says Tafi all over the place and links go directly to OpenSea. I don't remember giving permission to share my email. And before Mr Snarky says that they didn't actually share the mail, i also don't remember subscribing to a Open to everyone Ad Network Proxy that has nothing to do with the 3D models sold at the site.
Think of it this way. My understanding is that the gallery allow daz to use the the images in site promos. Now think that Daz gets another sister company but this one is something you don't like or want your Art related to. After what they did last night with your mail, what is stopping them to use your Art on whatever they want that is not even related to the Daz3D?
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.
And that upload of the image would be subject to DMCA, unless the artist had given the purchaser the right to upload for viewing by others.
Doesn't seem to be a problem with NFT's, as there are several NFT's for Hermione Granger, at least one for Mona Lisa, and these were just some of which caught my eye when browsing through the auction site.
Somehow I started wondering if whoever made the desicion for DAZ to start promoting NFT's with such enthusiasm, really understood what the NFT's actually were,,,
A DMCA still has to be filed, by the rights owner or their agent. And the Mona Lisa itself is long out of copyright (if it was ever actually in), though specific photos may well be protected.
Comments
With the Diigitals stuff, at least Daz was building on a previous collaboration with a digital artist. I'm not seeing any Champion licenced stuff in the store. The overlap between Daz customers and people who spend on Champion stuff for the Gram can't be that big. Now if it had been a collaboration with Ensure or Depends, that would have been a different story.
Thanks for the tip; i did get 2 of those stupid nft newsletters it seems- found that out after I set up the filter
And I too had that f... urhm.. MUCH UNWELCOME stupid letter in my inbox today. Now I can't help but question wether to hold to my wait and see approach, or just be done with it. I Like 3d, I Like Daz (usually)... but this is looking more and more like something I want to stay the hell away from and yet I feel a lot like it's being forced onto me (the NFT pushing out Gallery and Forums on the upper navigation list, and now this email)
The only rational explanation for "The Second Coming"-style promotion by DAZ is, that TaFi has ordered them to do it.
If you browse through the auction site, you feel like you are browsing through kindergarten bulleting board. Who in their right mind would want to sell anything on a marketplace that has tens of farts for sale, or tokens for those farts...
Does TaFi own Daz?
That letter is hot garbage.
Perhaps Daz Incorporated should concentrate on it's core business and fix the numerous issues instead of wasting time and money on this rubbish !
Regards
Steve Schoon
Isn't promoting the sale of NFTs actively contributing to the developments of NFTs?
margrave said:
My guess is that it was a branding move because they intended to expand into new channels. Daz3D does one specific kind of digital character customization, Tafi (the platform) does another, and they may have chosen Tafi as the parent company name for any number of reasons (it's snappier, they didn't want it to carry expectations based on the established Daz brand, they expected way more traction on the VRChat front, etc.). But I would be surprised if they were meaningfully different entities.
Edit to note that the official Daz twitter account refers to Tafi as their "sister company."
It is still there it is int eh drop down when you hover over community.
I'm hoping it's an April Fool's joke, and, if not, I'll be unsubscribing to all Daz3D emails and not buying anything again.
Don't punish PAs .. if you're going to protest with your wallet - just stop buying Daz Originals ..
It's just piling on now, but... Unsubscribed from the newsletter last night when I received the referenced email that only solicted NFTs and had nothing to do with DAZ software.
As I said days ago, this scheme isn't a method to market DAZ software to NFT creators, it isn't to educate artists to create NFTs... It's to market NFTs to DAZ's already existing customer base, us.
I just submitted a help ticket asking whether it is possible to unsubscribe just from NFT newsletters, and suggesting that it might be a good idea to differentiate newsletters so people can only subscribe to what they're interested in. I'm not expecting anything to come of it, but it's a marginally clearer signal than just filtering.
I'm curious to know if they consulted with the PAs or at least warned them ahead of time. There are ways they could have handled this without playing games with people's livelihoods.
If they'd waited a few months to see if more eco-friendly alternatives showed up, or to make sure it wasn't a bubble, I think this would have been different. But nobody interested in NFTs is doing that because even if they sincerely hope this is sustainable, they all kind of instinctively get that the point is to be fast on the trigger. That's the whole weird identity and pride surrounding crypto and similar new tech--they want to be visionaries who were rewarded for seeing the future. When it doesn't pan out or they lose a lot, they have to stick with it or give up that pride and buoyant, optimistic, exciting community. Setbacks are growing pains, and the future just isn't here yet. Just one big break and we'll all be swimming in champagne.
I want to support the PAs, but I'm concerned by what Daz might think the future is and what their leadership's attitude might be toward emerging tech. Confession: I actually love the idea of virtual influencers, or at least digital identities. I want to make an avatar I can use to interact with other people online, where I can be a robot or an alien or have a TV for a head or whatever. But then I go and look that up and it's stuff like this. Just a thousand-yard stare into a perpetual future where the present is always disposable. Already fully buttoned up as a cutting-edge SEO-optimized marketing field, run by 50-year-old dudes who were born at the director level, all with a coat of Gen Z-friendly paint.
Coming back to this thread probably isn't productive for me, but I'm just sad. The people who use Daz are generally so down to earth and just doing what they love. I'm really tired of bracing for every company I depend on suddenly turning their customers into a springboard for the next hustle, and I've been having so much fun that I forgot to.
Sure, but I would like entities with life-changing power and money to proactively consider the impact of their choices so people don't have to do this constantly.
For PA's, Daz is providing a very convenient way to sell their art. But Daz is also relying on the PA's. Without PA's there is nothing to sell. Without customers, there is no way for a PA to get her/his stuff sold. If Daz is upsetting both parties, they are out of business in no time. I hope they do start listening. I have a couple of PA's that I absolutely do want to support.
There's no reason they can't do all of those things at once, to varying extents. After all, if we make NFTs we'll have to do something with our crypto-currency, "encouraging" us to funnel it into the existing NFT market. Seems like the Diigitals is hyping up Daz3D on his Instagram, while Daz is trying to pitch NFTs to us directly. A multi-pronged approach.
I really hope there are some big PAs against this garbage. :/
And that upload of the image would be subject to DMCA, unless the artist had given the purchaser the right to upload for viewing by others.
Ditto. I looked all through my account and can't find a way to subscribe just to the newsletters that I want so no more newsletters for me. In fact, I can't find a way to subscribe to DAZ newsletters at all, so even if they stop spamming people with NFT drek, I can't re-subscribe in the future. Their FAQ tells how to unsubscribe to the newsletter, but not how to subscribe. I think that might need to be fixed, along with the fact that the Help area doesn't have a direct link back to DAZ.
Yeah, this is a short-sighted bandwagon-jumping idea that will not end well, unless you luck out with a bored person with too much money and not enough wisdom to have it! All I know is the disappointment in not being able to buy/use the incredibly unique 3D models, yet instead only be allowed to pay well over $500 dollars for a bleedin' gif of the Covergirl, which is a pretty idiotic purchase as it can be easily duplicated, unless there's some hidden code in the gif itself!
EDIT: Just saw this crap in the storefront, they can't even make an Asian look like a REAL Asian...
The GIF format specification is very old and therefore has quite some restrictions. It does not allow to embed any code to be executed while the GIF is displayed or an animation is run. While you can - theoretically - embed code in an image (steganography), you need the unchanged image to filter out that code again. And you would require some display engine, e.g. the layout enigne in your web browser, to execute that code.
So, it is de facto a plain GIF, and nothing else.
The really scary thing about this is that it could/will end up being yet another system that sets up all but the 1% to fail. Those who already have the money and power and privelage will continue to run everything while everybody else is left in the dirt and holding the bag. The only difference is that, as you've said, they have a coat of friendly paint to hide behind.
Morph3D was spun off of Daz3D to provide Unity assets of Daz content. You could buy Genesis 3 (I think it was) figures and outfits fully rigged for Unity with morphs and such. Unfortunately for those of us that bought some, they no longer work.
Doesn't seem to be a problem with NFT's, as there are several NFT's for Hermione Granger, at least one for Mona Lisa, and these were just some of which caught my eye when browsing through the auction site.
Somehow I started wondering if whoever made the desicion for DAZ to start promoting NFT's with such enthusiasm, really understood what the NFT's actually were,,,
That is the thing. Sister company means is not actually Daz as much as they share same ceo/directors. Lower scale but similar to Whatsapp, instagram, facebook...sharing data between them required change in their eula/privacy policies.
So last night they used a DAZ mail service and template but the promo has nothing to do with DAZ, it says Tafi all over the place and links go directly to OpenSea. I don't remember giving permission to share my email. And before Mr Snarky says that they didn't actually share the mail, i also don't remember subscribing to a Open to everyone Ad Network Proxy that has nothing to do with the 3D models sold at the site.
Think of it this way. My understanding is that the gallery allow daz to use the the images in site promos. Now think that Daz gets another sister company but this one is something you don't like or want your Art related to. After what they did last night with your mail, what is stopping them to use your Art on whatever they want that is not even related to the Daz3D?
A DMCA still has to be filed, by the rights owner or their agent. And the Mona Lisa itself is long out of copyright (if it was ever actually in), though specific photos may well be protected.