As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

Penny Arcade - Comic - New-Fangled

DogDog Registered User, Administrator, Vanilla Staff admin
edited March 15 in The Penny Arcade Hub
imagePenny Arcade - Comic - New-Fangled

Videogaming-related online strip by Mike Krahulik and Jerry Holkins. Includes news and commentary.

Read the full story here

Unknown User on
QuidTofystedethzepherincB557MichaelLCMonkey Ball WarriorNightslyrRhesus PositiveAndy JoeZilla360Peter EbelKoopahTroopahH3KnucklesJusticeforPlutoSorce

Posts

  • Anon von ZilchAnon von Zilch Registered User regular
    On the one hand I'm all for artists getting paid for making the jpeg. But on the other hand I can't really get in the headspace of an art collector enough to understand why someone would buy the jpeg.

  • Monkey Ball WarriorMonkey Ball Warrior A collection of mediocre hats Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited March 15
    Those Pacman cowboy boots. And the buckle.

    That entire outfit

    Monkey Ball Warrior on
    "I resent the entire notion of a body as an ante and then raise you a generalized dissatisfaction with physicality itself" -- Tycho
    RingoAndy JoeQuidV1mmRahmaniZilla360Man in the MistsAldoKoopahTroopahH3Knucklesdoompooky
  • ironzergironzerg Registered User regular
    It's being bought by the same people who are investing in cryptocurrency. And it's not surprising that you're seeing most of these high-dollar transactions being paid for in cryptocurrency. There's also a pattern where the art asset immediately being flipped.

    It's the same mindset. The technology is moving so fast, people are trying to move fast with it in the hopes of being able to buy low and cash out before it all collapse. Or at least hedge their bets by investing in the digital, then transferring some of that wealth back into stable financial instruments, so that they win either way.



    Phoenix-DZilla360cB557Man in the MistsH3Knuckles
  • RatherDashing89RatherDashing89 Registered User regular
    So now we're at the point where we're not even hiding the fact that fine art purchases are just money laundering /wealth transfer/ money shenanigans.

    RingoPhoenix-DshoeboxjeddycB557AldoH3KnucklesdoompookySorceT-boltBillieVee
  • BropocalypseBropocalypse Registered User regular
    edited March 15
    It's a speculative market, one hundred percent. There's no sensible economic output for digital art beyond its value as entertainment. Hell, digital art isn't even consumed! It can be replicated indefinitely! Even if a copy of it exists in this weird nebulous NFT context that allegedly guarantees that only one copy of it exists... but that guarantee also only exists within the NFT context.

    There's also the ethical problem where allegedly a single cryptoart trade outputs 100 kg of carbon dioxide from the sheer amount of computing power required? Sheesh.

    Bropocalypse on
    H3Knuckles
  • Monkey Ball WarriorMonkey Ball Warrior A collection of mediocre hats Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited March 15
    It's a speculative market, one hundred percent. There's no sensible economic output for digital art beyond its value as entertainment. Hell, digital art isn't even consumed! It can be replicated indefinitely! Even if a copy of it exists in this weird nebulous NFT context that allegedly guarantees that only one copy of it exists... but that guarantee also only exists within the NFT context.

    There's also the ethical problem where allegedly a single cryptoart trade outputs 100 kg of carbon dioxide from the sheer amount of computing power required? Sheesh.

    That's going to depend on which chain is backing it, but given right now it's either bitcoin or ether, yes. You don't want to know how much energy it costs.

    edit: Example: A single transaction on ether, the chain that is almost certainly backing all this at the moment, consumes 744kWh, almost an entire months worth of a household. I could charge my car completely empty-to-full 12 times.

    Monkey Ball Warrior on
    "I resent the entire notion of a body as an ante and then raise you a generalized dissatisfaction with physicality itself" -- Tycho
    H3Knuckles
  • Andy JoeAndy Joe The AdirondacksRegistered User regular
    Looks like Noah'll be able to buy all the Super Chats he wants now.

    XBL: Stealth Crane PSN: ajpet12 3DS: 1160-9999-5810 NNID: StealthCrane
    Pokemon Sword Name: Claíomh
    V1mMonkey Ball WarriorKoopahTroopah
  • MaryAmeliaMaryAmelia Registered User regular
    The more I learn about cryptocurrency, the less I know...

  • islingtonislington Registered User regular
    I really hope they recorded a podcast for this one. i want to hear this writing session!

  • ironzergironzerg Registered User regular
    edit: Example: A single transaction on ether, the chain that is almost certainly backing all this at the moment, consumes 744kWh, almost an entire months worth of a household. I could charge my car completely empty-to-full 12 times.

    That's super interesting, and something I never knew about or even consider when it comes to cryptocurrency.

    I'd also add that you can fake a digital image if a high-resolution copy exists somewhere. Sure, you can say that you have the original file, but is that really meaningful?

    I mean, you can make a forgery or copy of a masterwork piece of art, but it's still the copy. There's something to be said about physically interacting with a piece that a genius human being touched and created. There's a physical connection that, in my mind, is more powerful that saying that the digital artist created it on a computer, then clicked "save as" and emailed you an encrypted file.



  • RatherDashing89RatherDashing89 Registered User regular
    edited March 15
    I only just learned about NFTs today, but my initial (and very unprofessional) impression is that the actual object (jpeg, tweet, or...moments in basketball games, apparently?) is completely immaterial. The prices these nonsense transactions are going for shows that it's not weird fans with money to burn buying this stuff. It seems to just be another way for millionaires to shuffle wealth around and otherwise get up to mischief. I can only imagine the accountants salivating at the notion of being able to convert wealth into a "commodity" that is literally just a concept and can be traded around at whatever value they determine.

    Adam Ruins Everything explained how it works with paintings very well: this looks like the exact same thing to me.

    RatherDashing89 on
    ironzergAldoRingoH3KnucklesZilla360
  • dejavu,againdejavu,again Registered User regular
    See what you guys are missing about all this, is that *I'm* the super special genius that's going to get rich, not one of the 99% of other plebs that will be left holding the bag when the overflowing bubble bath gets drained. /s

    (I do think that's the mindset of the non-millionaires involved - the millionaires, as always, have access to a bunch of tricks no one else does)

    RingoDelzhandMoridin889
  • HevachHevach Registered User regular
    edited March 16
    ironzerg wrote: »
    I'd also add that you can fake a digital image if a high-resolution copy exists somewhere. Sure, you can say that you have the original file, but is that really meaningful?

    At a certain level, even having the original file isn't meaningful, just due to the way that digital file storage works in modern operating systems. When you "move" a file within a single drive, you're just moving its pointer and leaving the file where it is, but the operating system will move files physical location on the drive as a normal function of space management, which physically involves making a brand new copy and aiming the pointer to that instead of the original.

    But if you move a file to a new drive or transmit it on the internet, you're also just making a brand new copy. Your computer doesn't even delete the original, it just forgets where it is. It's the Ship of Theseus except the original timbers didn't rot, you just threw away the key to the museum door after meticulously building an absolutely identical museum and ship next door.

    Hevach on
    H3Knuckles
  • V1mV1m Registered User regular
    Hevach wrote: »
    ironzerg wrote: »
    I'd also add that you can fake a digital image if a high-resolution copy exists somewhere. Sure, you can say that you have the original file, but is that really meaningful?

    At a certain level, even having the original file isn't meaningful, just due to the way that digital file storage works in modern operating systems. When you "move" a file within a single drive, you're just moving its pointer and leaving the file where it is, but the operating system will move files physical location on the drive as a normal function of space management, which physically involves making a brand new copy and aiming the pointer to that instead of the original.

    But if you move a file to a new drive or transmit it on the internet, you're also just making a brand new copy. Your computer doesn't even delete the original, it just forgets where it is. It's the Ship of Theseus except the original timbers didn't rot, you just threw away the key to the museum door after meticulously building an absolutely identical museum and ship next door.

    A very nice description of how much work it is to commodify something that's virtually infinitely reproducible.

  • DelzhandDelzhand Hard to miss. Registered User regular
    ironzerg wrote: »
    edit: Example: A single transaction on ether, the chain that is almost certainly backing all this at the moment, consumes 744kWh, almost an entire months worth of a household. I could charge my car completely empty-to-full 12 times.

    That's super interesting, and something I never knew about or even consider when it comes to cryptocurrency.

    I'd also add that you can fake a digital image if a high-resolution copy exists somewhere. Sure, you can say that you have the original file, but is that really meaningful?

    I mean, you can make a forgery or copy of a masterwork piece of art, but it's still the copy. There's something to be said about physically interacting with a piece that a genius human being touched and created. There's a physical connection that, in my mind, is more powerful that saying that the digital artist created it on a computer, then clicked "save as" and emailed you an encrypted file.

    Also we're probably only a year or two out from AI upscaling being able to produce a better version of your JPG on demand at the consumer level.

    Steam|FFXIV|Switch SW-3472-4893-0802
  • T-DangerT-Danger Registered User regular

    edit: Example: A single transaction on ether, the chain that is almost certainly backing all this at the moment, consumes 744kWh, almost an entire months worth of a household. I could charge my car completely empty-to-full 12 times.

    This aspect confuses me somewhat. How exactly does sending a transaction through bitcoin use more energy than say, sending someone money through something like Paypal? Aren't they essentially doing the same thing, sending data from one account to another to tell it how much money to add/subtract?

  • dennisdennis Executive Peasant Registered User regular
    T-Danger wrote: »

    edit: Example: A single transaction on ether, the chain that is almost certainly backing all this at the moment, consumes 744kWh, almost an entire months worth of a household. I could charge my car completely empty-to-full 12 times.

    This aspect confuses me somewhat. How exactly does sending a transaction through bitcoin use more energy than say, sending someone money through something like Paypal? Aren't they essentially doing the same thing, sending data from one account to another to tell it how much money to add/subtract?

    No, they have to do a bunch of extra cryptographic stuff. It's what makes blockchain what it is.

    H3KnucklesMoridin889TofystedethYoungFrey
  • Moridin889Moridin889 Registered User regular
    T-Danger wrote: »

    edit: Example: A single transaction on ether, the chain that is almost certainly backing all this at the moment, consumes 744kWh, almost an entire months worth of a household. I could charge my car completely empty-to-full 12 times.

    This aspect confuses me somewhat. How exactly does sending a transaction through bitcoin use more energy than say, sending someone money through something like Paypal? Aren't they essentially doing the same thing, sending data from one account to another to tell it how much money to add/subtract?

    The currency isn't backed by anything. If I give you a twenty dollar bill, there's something behind it and verifying it's a 20 dollar bill. When I give you a cryptocurrency you have to verify it's real, which takes a bunch of computer stuff, which eats electricity

    RingoH3Knuckles
Sign In or Register to comment.