The thing about the jpg ones is that the jpgs can’t be stored in the blockchain, so what is actually stored is a URL to some server (and that URL endpoint could be redirected elsewhere, the server could go offline, etc).
The other major use case I see touted is “own your game objects and bring your objects to different games” but 1) why would a company spend resources supporting an object they did not sell you and 2) could this not be handled more simply on e.g. Steam? (yes, locked into a service, but that’s just the way the industry is and I don’t see why it’s worth the time and effort for them to change that)
I do see how potentially a blockchain that stored actual data, e.g. some JSON, could be of more use. However, I struggle to find cases where just a regular database wouldn’t be more practical. I guess it would be limited to cases where auditability and visibility of changes are topmost concerns, and where it’s important that anyone can have a local backup copy at any time.
If you have some examples of where this technology could be one of the best solutions, I’d love to hear them. The blockchain does fascinate me but I feel like it’s often a solution in search of a problem rather than the other way around.
I have an example but it’s not necessarily the best and most practical solution, it’s just one very good solution to a problem that not everyone experiences, so it’s generally shot down as unnecessary.
In countries where buying a car or house involves an asynchronous exchange of money and keys or signing of documents, with all the trust issues involved, having an NFT represent ownership (which requires recognition and acceptance by the state) is a perfect use case, where you transfer ownership and receive payment in one atomic operation.
Smart contracts are the most obvious. There are a lot of applications. Like jungle said, it’s a good fit for ESCROW-type asset exchanges, but also for recurring transactions like royalty payments or dividends.
Your gaming asset example is also a valuable use. While industry inertia is indeed a relevant factor, consider: why would a company spend resources creating an object if it’s cheaper to support the framework for customers to supply their own? There’s a break-even point where it’s more profitable to outsource asset-creation and trim your staff. What’s better is the nerds who care about that sorta thing spend a lot on games.
And there are certainly others, cases where transparency is a topmost concern. Gaming seems like a fantastic proving ground for the technology: customers expect excellence, it’s a thriving and diverse market, but ultimately, a failure of the technology won’t have serious consequences in the grand scheme. If it proves secure in that arena, it might be a useful technology to incorporate into more serious applications.
Oh, fascinating! I wonder if it’s more concerns about the size of the blockchain itself then. I had assumed, clearly incorrectly, that it was a platform limitation itself. This makes the ways NFTs have been implemented even dumber. 🙃
It’s just impractical and expensive to store more than a Textstring in a Blockchain, because everytime the Blockchain is updated with new data, you have to send a copy to all the other databases that share this Blockchain. This will get very resource heavy I’d you get 100000 10MB files each day and must keep them in sync with 200 other databases, who also received a similar amount of data from different users.
The thing about the jpg ones is that the jpgs can’t be stored in the blockchain, so what is actually stored is a URL to some server (and that URL endpoint could be redirected elsewhere, the server could go offline, etc).
The other major use case I see touted is “own your game objects and bring your objects to different games” but 1) why would a company spend resources supporting an object they did not sell you and 2) could this not be handled more simply on e.g. Steam? (yes, locked into a service, but that’s just the way the industry is and I don’t see why it’s worth the time and effort for them to change that)
I do see how potentially a blockchain that stored actual data, e.g. some JSON, could be of more use. However, I struggle to find cases where just a regular database wouldn’t be more practical. I guess it would be limited to cases where auditability and visibility of changes are topmost concerns, and where it’s important that anyone can have a local backup copy at any time.
If you have some examples of where this technology could be one of the best solutions, I’d love to hear them. The blockchain does fascinate me but I feel like it’s often a solution in search of a problem rather than the other way around.
I have an example but it’s not necessarily the best and most practical solution, it’s just one very good solution to a problem that not everyone experiences, so it’s generally shot down as unnecessary.
In countries where buying a car or house involves an asynchronous exchange of money and keys or signing of documents, with all the trust issues involved, having an NFT represent ownership (which requires recognition and acceptance by the state) is a perfect use case, where you transfer ownership and receive payment in one atomic operation.
Smart contracts are the most obvious. There are a lot of applications. Like jungle said, it’s a good fit for ESCROW-type asset exchanges, but also for recurring transactions like royalty payments or dividends.
Your gaming asset example is also a valuable use. While industry inertia is indeed a relevant factor, consider: why would a company spend resources creating an object if it’s cheaper to support the framework for customers to supply their own? There’s a break-even point where it’s more profitable to outsource asset-creation and trim your staff. What’s better is the nerds who care about that sorta thing spend a lot on games.
And there are certainly others, cases where transparency is a topmost concern. Gaming seems like a fantastic proving ground for the technology: customers expect excellence, it’s a thriving and diverse market, but ultimately, a failure of the technology won’t have serious consequences in the grand scheme. If it proves secure in that arena, it might be a useful technology to incorporate into more serious applications.
Blockchains can absolutely store a jpeg. There’s no data size or format limit on an entry.
They chose not to store it.
Oh, fascinating! I wonder if it’s more concerns about the size of the blockchain itself then. I had assumed, clearly incorrectly, that it was a platform limitation itself. This makes the ways NFTs have been implemented even dumber. 🙃
It’s just impractical and expensive to store more than a Textstring in a Blockchain, because everytime the Blockchain is updated with new data, you have to send a copy to all the other databases that share this Blockchain. This will get very resource heavy I’d you get 100000 10MB files each day and must keep them in sync with 200 other databases, who also received a similar amount of data from different users.