HeHasTheJazzHands
Well-Known Member
I was actually expecting Schecter or Ibanez to hop on the bandwagon first. Wouldn't be surprised if they do.
I don't want to live in this world [ESP NFT Content]
- Thread starter narad
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links like Ebay, Amazon, and others.
I was actually expecting Schecter or Ibanez to hop on the bandwagon first. Wouldn't be surprised if they do.
This site may earn a commission from merchant links like Ebay, Amazon, and others.
The Shecter NFT will be an abalone skull with gothic ornamentation, while the Ibanez NFT will be a black square.
Andromalia
Pardon my french
But, I like mushrooms.
narad
Progressive metal and politics
This was a total Gibson/Dean move. ESP USA has always been a bit sketch though -- just look at the etched guitars themselves, that's not a real ESP type of run to begin with.
Could have just left it there to be honest, ESP USA never needed to exist in the first place
Flappydoodle
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2018
- Messages
- 2,068
- Reaction score
- 2,177
Counterpoint: it's quite a clever idea. $100 is cheap, so ESP fanboys get something to own - a bit like how people pay real money for t-shirts, posters etc - to be walking advertisements for a brand. They can also make it a bit exclusive by limiting the numbers. Maybe someone will want it in the future and you can sell it on (but probably not for these IMO).
NFTs in principle do make a lot of sense, but the uses we are seeing right now are kinda silly, like this ESP NFT. The idea of people paying crazy money for art is also not new. So why not digital art? The real art world is full of fraud, fakes etc, which is impossible with an NFT. You also never have to doubt the owner of the NFT, because it only links to one single wallet.
Here's a good use case for the guitar world. Gibson, with every guitar, gives you an NFT certificate of authenticity for that guitar. So when you sell your guitar, you'd also transfer the NFT to the new owner. There can only ever be one owner of an NFT, and it can never be faked. So not having an NFT means maybe it's the guitar is a fake, so if there's decent adoption of this system, the NFT can add real value.
NFTs in principle do make a lot of sense, but the uses we are seeing right now are kinda silly, like this ESP NFT. The idea of people paying crazy money for art is also not new. So why not digital art? The real art world is full of fraud, fakes etc, which is impossible with an NFT. You also never have to doubt the owner of the NFT, because it only links to one single wallet.
Here's a good use case for the guitar world. Gibson, with every guitar, gives you an NFT certificate of authenticity for that guitar. So when you sell your guitar, you'd also transfer the NFT to the new owner. There can only ever be one owner of an NFT, and it can never be faked. So not having an NFT means maybe it's the guitar is a fake, so if there's decent adoption of this system, the NFT can add real value.
Dayn
Well-Known Member
That's how I'd expect NFTs to work. There are so many great ways to use blockchain technology. The real problem is that most NFTs aren't actually tied to anything and give you zero actual interest in anything at all. You often don't even own the image in any proper sense. As people have said, you're almost always paying for a receipt and obtain no property or rights of any kind.
It could be great, but it's just another tulip bubble.
beerandbeards
All things must pass
at least the Dutch made actual money off those tulips!
Flappydoodle
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2018
- Messages
- 2,068
- Reaction score
- 2,177
I've seen it already applied to things like watches where there are tons of forgeries. So you buy a Rolex and get an NFT of that exact watch which guarantees authenticity.
It would be awesome for guitars IMO - so you could have a wallet with your guitars, and when you buy a guitar on Reverb the dude would transfer for NFT to you. But right now I think it's just companies making a quick buck with a "me too" idea. Early stages yet and I have high hopes for the future.
ZeroS1gnol
Well-Known Member
NFT's are peak capitalism cancer if you ask me. Making money with something that barely has any worth, while having a massive energy footprint, to destroy the climate at it.
GunpointMetal
Well-Known Member
NFT as a COA makes sense. NFT as a singular product you pay money for still seems dumb. What do you do if someone screen grabs your NFT digital artwork? Do you sue them for theft? lol. Technically you still have your NFT, right? I mean we all know money isn't real, but....
LostTheTone
Elegant Djentleman
No, NFTs for (in effect) some random garbage is dreadful. And NFT for something that has some uniqueness and some inherent value is totally fine.
ZeroS1gnol
Well-Known Member
That sounds very ideological, too bad in practice it's mostly garbage and that will probably not change any time soon.
LostTheTone
Elegant Djentleman
Yup super ideological to say that using a thing for the stuff that the thing was designed for is reasonable.
And then you somehow also read an inherently neutral statement as support for the thing.
You fucking kidding me?
And which ideology do you think I am supporting exactly?
