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
The digital item itself is NEVER stored in the NFT blockchain. That would be too costly. A block in a blockchain has a given size. Once the block is "full", it is sent of for mining. With NFT's you can pack multiple transfers in one block, limiting mining cost a bit. If you pack in the asset itself, the transaction would span many blocks, making it horribly expensive to mine those.
I think if you don't open the newsletter (or open and don't download the remotely hosted product images) that it will show at the Daz end - I know I stopped getting emails to one account fro that reason. So yes, you can be somewhat selective and still probably get the message across.
I think from what I have read, Bitcoin is stored solely on the blockchain, but NFTs are split between servers, the record of the sale being stored on the blockchain and the asset (in this case the GIF or whatever) is stored on a separate server entirely, pointed to by the record of the sale. This means that NFTs are not as secure as Bitcoin in my opinion.
Loose the server where the GIF, PNG, JPEG are stored and the NFT is now worthless. Buyer beware!
You're talking about the digital equivalent of reselling your old paperbacks once you've read them. Authors and publishers don't make a dime off those transactions, and Daz wouldn't either, unless they got paid everytime the item changed hands. Now that's possible with NFTs, but also reduces the value of the item purchased. There's also the thing that people rarely buy items at full price, but rather discounted between 30 and 90 percent. How would the resale value be calculated? Who would pay 50% of the value of an item when it will eventually get discounted below that by Daz where it can be purchased without having to cover the gas. Any attempt at standardization would lead to a change in the promotions Daz offers, likely disadvantaging Daz customers ultimately reducing their revenue. We've been buying stuff for USD 2.99 all month. Who's gonna spend time trying to resell that stuff?
Daz could already accept returns for store credit if they wanted to, and even charge a restocking fee without involving the blockchain. Blockchain is a fab and shiny hammer and all, but not every problem is a nail.
Of course it is being driven by young people. Silicon Valley is full of young techno-libertarian prophets, destroying old sources of wealth and creating massive amounts of new wealth for themselves in a Schumpeterian hurricane.
Mark_e593e0a5 You are certainly right about the economics of immutable records! Ethereum technology does allow for storing any data or code you please, though. I haven't tried to store a GIF on the blockchain myself, so I'll have to take your word that it would be too expensive for images or short video clips. My point was more about possession: if you control the token but not the asset identified by the token, what do you really have? It all depends on the rights associated with the token; which if not clearly defined in a contract that will likely be respected and could be enforced if necessary, mean nothing.
The value of an immutable record of an identifier (which is what a hash is: an identfier, like a fingerprint) is to prove that the thing identified existed at the time the record was made. Proof of original creation can have actual value in an IP context, but rarely; and usually other records and witness testimony suffice to prove who created what and when if needed. Immutable records are great for financial and ownership ledgers; everybody understands that. The immutability of its ledger coupled with the transparency of its protocols is why Bitcoin has become so valuable -- it is perceived as more trustworthy than the Central Banks of the world. More Bitcoin cannot be created than the protocol allows, and banks are not needed to keep the records.
This is a bit off topic, but NFTs could have real value as transferable tokens redeemable by presentation to the issuer. Essentially we could each issue our own money, in the form of tokens to perform some service, e.g., mow the lawn, etc. The value of our tokens would depend on the demand for the services we offer, our reputations as trustworthy providers of those services, and the number of tokens we have issued. This would be a truly beneficial use of NFTs that would free a lot of people from debt slavery and allow all people to keep the fruit of their own labor. All the hullaboo about speculating in NFTs for digital art feels like noise to me, and a distraction from the true social benefit of blockchain ...as explained more fully in my book. If we are going to tokenize anything, we should tokenize and keep our promises. Better to just keep our promises without tokens...but memories and mores being what they are, we need records of those promises that can't be back-dated, hence, blockchain and tokens.
NFTs at DAZ will fade away, just as their foray into 3D-printable models did. They should stick to their knitting.
I have to admit that you are correct. Whenever we (i.e. me as a consultant in the company I work for) have a presentation of anything involving block chain, the young people ask "how can we do something good for the comunity with it". The older guys (yes, mainly white males, older women are more sensible with that stuff) ask "how can we make a profit with it".
I am more with the young ones. Yes, you CAN use blockchain for something useful. And it is no rocket science to implement a proof-of-stake blockchain. We use our blockchain (proof of stake) for only healthcare and pharma applications. It does make a difference if you can distinguish real medictation from some falsified pharma products. And the oldest person in the team that came up with that idea was 27.
In my opinion, NFT's are for either "adventurers", but more likely for older, greedy persons.
Sevrin I agree. Daz should stick to its knitting.
May I ask you as a person familliar with law (I am not): how do you enforce your rights? On an NFT? For tangible items, all the law systems in the world have some - more or less - efficient ways that the ownership of such an item can be ensured. That is even valid for intangible assets like IP, because there is an international agreeent an that (the international agreement of Paris from March 1883, IIRC). There is no international agreement that I am aware of regarding NFT's. So, do you really "own" such an NFT if there is no way to legally enforce youre ownership?
Thanks for sharing, JStryder!
It's great to see an IP lawyer's perspective on NFTs, blockchain, and the EULA of digital assets — especially those from DAZ.
As with EULA's, they have some, lets say, issues. EULAs are not necessarily binding. E.g. in some EU countries, the Daz EULA is void, as it violates country legislation. E.g. the Daz EULA is NIL in Germany. The issue here is: if one singe part of the EULA is void, it affects all the other parts (that would have been binding). as well.
Nevertheless, I do respect it, as I do repect all intellectual property and copyrights. In my opinion, something that is worth using is worth buying. I make my living as consultant in the "IT industry". I know from personal experience how much work it is to create someting useful on any given IT system. Nevertheless, it is NOT the Daz EULA binding me, it is my personal attitude and conviction. If Daz would have a representation within the EU, that would be different. But then, each and every promo since I joined would not be in accorance with EU law.
What's the issue with Daz's promos in Germany?
I am just generally mistrustful of solutions that boil down to, "If we can only accomplish total social upheaval and are totally correct about this technology encouraging the better angels of humanity's nature, the benefits will be incalculable!" In my experience it's a really hip way for people to justify total self-interest. Problems in the now are boring and hard and solving them is thankless. The world doesn't crown you King Genius for doing it--you get condescended to and told to shut up and even hurt. You may have to help people that don't like you and won't be grateful. When you bring up issues and offer solutions you have to fight to get anyone to take you seriously instead of being applauded and praised. You don't get to give the keynote speech and there's a good chance it hurts your livelihood instead of supercharging it.
But if you just believe in a technology so transcendent that it changes everything, you don't need to worry about the now. Shouldn't the priority be doing the thing that will solve hundreds of problems at once, and isn't it more ethically sound to push it forward as quickly as possible?
This is a very seductive mindset because it lets people envision themselves as powerful protagonist visionaries, solving the world's problems by (coincidentally) doing things they think are exciting and making a lot of money. It's a morally unimpeachable position, because when someone points out that they're not doing anything to help, this protagonist figure gets to say that they are in fact Superhelping™ by taking the long view and it's actually everyone else delaying progress by getting bogged down in the now.
It's a mindset that ruins businesses constantly in addition to scrambling social movements. My former boss was head of a mid-tier studio and he was so dead sure that we were going to build the metaverse that he tried to sunset the product that was keeping our lights on for basically no other reason than that he was bored of it and wanted to revolutionize our industry instead. This was an older guy with a decent career record who had held power at a company you've probably heard of and founded another one successfully. He was considered smart and given tons of leeway even as the projects got restructured and rescoped and everyone was panicking because only he knew what he wanted out of them, and he hadn't seen it yet. He oversaw the very first round of layoffs in over a decade of operations. If we hadn't been a subsidiary of a company that finally, eventually pulled the reins, he would have moonshot us straight into the ground. All because the core product needed some serious investment and problem solving, and it was much more in line with his personal narrative to start over Better and New.
He wasn't fired and he was allowed to stay on long enough to flounce away, still feeling like a misunderstood prophet. The core product is only now being treated as the breadwinner it is and developed accordingly, because it's all there is.
It would rule if someone with decision-making power read and thought about this.
Claims that would be fine in the US, but outright questionable in Germany (and the EU as a whole). E.g. If you promote something as "free" on the main promo page there must not be any strings attachted. So a later claim (i.e. if you click on the promo) like "Free with a purchase of..." is just not legal in the EU, while it is 100% fine elsewhere. In addition, all prices need to be 100% correct before put into the cart (including tax, if applicable, and including all discounts).If Daz would have an EU office, they would have to abide to EU law. As this is not the case, the non-US customer has to give more detail to the fine print. EU law is much more restrictive what is allowed for promotions and what is not.
Imagine if instead of working on NFTs, DAZ had put the effort into figuring out how to get to the point that you could use Iray out of the box to get the kind of results seen here (Blender Cycles using a DAZ figure): https://80.lv/articles/stunning-photoreal-renders-in-blender-by-blitter/
I'm sure this thread has easily overtaken the sale errors thread as the most active in the forum.
Why not? This is the biggest sale error of them all.
How is it not being driven by young people?
Ethereum, the cryptocurrency being used to pay for NFTs, was created by Vitalik Buterin is 27 — born in 1994... not exactly old.
And the recent NFT craze was sparked by two men in their 30's...
Vignesh Sundaresan "Metakovan" and Anand Venkateswaran) generated their wealth in the cryptocurrency space in Singapore through the crypto fund Metapurse, and made headlines for NFTs by purchasing the NFT for Beeple's Everydays: The First 5,000 Days (2021) for a whopping $69.3 million (with fees) or around 42,329.45 Ether at Christie's auction... making Beeple's work the third most valuable art ever auctioned by a living artist, after David Hockney and Jeff Koons.
Now, all these misguided people are being driven into this NFT craze, and it's more than a little terrifying to me... I guess I'm too old for all this too — none of it makes any sense... especially for Tafi, an avatar company, to be minting NFTs... and dragging DAZ into it by proxy.
Great! I love your products!
That post was in response to a comment I made, and I felt that the person behind it was expressing their own understanding of the subject in good faith and not speaking from Daz's official position. When your job is interacting with and creating content for customers, and you are essentially the front line in processing how they feel about the company, it's very difficult sometimes to want to give a human response while knowing your words will reflect on the company and possibly make things worse.
I didn't know at the time I posted that Daz would actually start selling NFTs or be this deep into it, and I don't want this person's thoughtful response, which I appreciated, to be interpreted as the company talking out of both sides of its mouth. There are very likely lots of internal conversations happening and employees who have varying opinions and just try to do the jobs they depend on to the best of their abilities.
I could probably think of a hundred other better things to put energy to good use on rather than this blockchain nonsense. Leave it to the human race to invent a way to throw energy into "nothing" to make money that doesn't exist that is backed by "nothing". Next thing you know, they'll be deliberately burning down forests to capture the smoke from it to make a new currency: smoCke
They can even have a reinvented Smokey the Bear picture with him saying something stupid like, "Burning will yield you 9 out of 10 smoCke per acre"!
Thanks, @plasma_ring for giving the actual context of that statement, although I suspect that hypocrisy has been downgraded to cognitive dissonance and then further demoted to misapprehension. Thanks, OP, for taking me back to Dr. Seuss (good times); he's been cancelled, by the way.
I got the same answer. I will therefore unsubscribe from the newsletter.
Of course, I'll have to wait for today's newsletter for the link to do so.
...that conjures up the corutroom scenes from the film My Cousing Vinny.
uh, did you say Enefty?
Yeah, NFT.
What is an Enefty?
...so in hypothetical sense, the EULA changes to extend the Daz' s right to use works posted in the gallery for promotional purposes to include associates like Tafi who then will be able to access those works for it's "promotional purposes" which for them, is creating NFTs. So a notice about a new EULA pops up when a community member tries to purchase something from the store or view his or her account and has to first agree to that new EULA before proceeding any further.
This is the sort of thing which is a concern for several of us here.
...yeah I remember that.
Kind of makes the all the details surrounding acquisition of the machine that goes *Ping!* sound totally reasonable and on the level..
...been doing that for years. Still have all the old Bitrock installers before the DIM was introduced as well as a backup of all my DIM .zip files