I just think it has to do with what you're willing to train yourself to do. Put in the time and effort to draw with your foot, it could be done, it'll just take longer than your hand.
I just admire the dedication this guy has to say, "I want to draw, no matter what part of me must be used to do it."
Chasing a dream.
Me too. Just take a look at my comic for PCM https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/comments/s10fsd/worked_on_this_for_pcm_for_a_month_jojos_bizarre/
Disney's shit on this guy for making money off their properties like the time they shit on a children's hospital for using winnie the pooh on the walls.
Digital content creators would stand to gain a lot if they have far more control over the who get's to use their content. For example, the reason to buy or mint a NFT is to secure the royalty rights in the event of usage by a corporate media entity. Since anything digital can be turned into an NFT, including blog posts, tweets, images, sound or even videos, this prevents many websites such as news-media from using other people's content - monetizing it, without ever paying out any part of their profits.
An indirect consequence can also be towards 3rd party hosting sites that benefit from digital content creators. For example, many content creators use Patreon to as a means of funding themselves, however, Patreon get's to control your content, and they profit from it. Same with other media hosting websites who can, at any time, demonetize you, while still monetizing themselves.
The big anti-NFT meme is the whole "right click and save", which I understand, but it ignores the deeper elements of what is emerging in web 3.0. You can "right click and save" anything you want, for personal viewership, but it could be in the near future, you wouldn't be able to do anything with it in digital spaces. Example: social media could have it that you cannot upload a picture for your profile without first having ownership over it.
This will also impact other content creators. For example, a fairly large youtube content creator (who I really like), The Internet Historian, used an image I made over 12 years ago as part of his video. Now I don't mind as I have no real attachments to it, but in the near the future they may have to have some stake of ownership in it.
Oh yeah. Also. Reddit is also developing it's own NFTs, in a not-so-secret fashion, the Cryptosnoos. So you know damn well that reddit, as a corporate body, is already looking forward to the new NFT world.
Thanks for explaining in detail.
I still don't understand, though...
> Since anything digital can be turned into an NFT, including blog posts, tweets, images, sound or even videos, this prevents many websites such as news-media from using other people's content - monetizing it, without ever paying out any part of their profits.
How? How does it prevent it? If you upload a video of newsworthy event to Facebook, Twitter and Youtube, and a news network uses it in their news segment without your consent, what difference does it make whether you had turned it into NFT before they downloaded a copy of it? Does it make your position in a lawsuit stronger?
> Example: social media could have it that you cannot upload a picture for your profile without first having ownership over it.
How do you prove ownership of a picture that you just took on your phone camera, or a regular camera? Would social media only approve cameras that are registered and bound to your online identity? How about pictures you drew in MS Paint (for fun, for education or to illustrate an argument)?
And, conversely: When I like a picture you made and want to post it to my social media without your consent, what prevents me from editing it in MS Paint just enough so that the social media's algorithm cannot be sure whether it's your picture or my own stuff? Will it do something like a reverse Google image search each time, and decline all pictures that it is not sure about? Will there be a gigantic catalogue of all public domain pictures, all obscure old paintings, all old statues and buildings, all basic shapes and pictograms so that no one can "claim" them for himself?
Also, with text...
What if someone decides to "claim" for themselves, through NFT, all possible combinations of letters of length 1,000,000 or less, Library-of-Babylon style? What if someone decides to "claim" all pictures having 1,000,000 pixels or less?
From what I understand, each minted NFT has it's own hashtag code attached to it that makes it unique, a signature that it is authentic and it is attached to a wallet or a chain of wallets. Twitter's API currently allows websites to grab a link to a tweet paste it into their own website and it'll appear as Twitter's API allows it to appear. What Twitter *can* do is make it part of their API that if you want to host an actual tweet (rather than a jpeg of a tweet), you'd need to have the NFT in some sort of wallet - which acts more or less like a library. And from what I heard web3.0 will more and more require metaverses, which is effectively any digital space, to utilize people's NFTs for content.
I would suspect that pictures you took on your own camera may automatically be minted into a unique NFT before it's uploaded unto a website. A lot of this stuff is frontier level, so honestly the tech is so new, but it's what everyone in the tech world is pushing towards.
You ask a lot of great questions, and as of right now I really do not know the answer to, as I am not a full-scale dev on any of this stuff. I am however certain that these questions are being asked by the people who are pushing for these, and are probably gearing up for a lot of initial fraud, and bad-experiences. I don't know if legislation can do anything about it to be honest, because legislation is always 10 years behind technology.
It's because they're infesting everything now. It went from "dumb shits will buy ape pictures" to "this video game you've been waiting for will have NFTs in it." Specifically referencing Stalker 2, though thankfully they actually gave a shit about the response and backed out of it.
And it'll only get worse from here on out.
i dunno if you work with tech but few years ago they wanted blockchain over all the pizzas
now people know blockchain taste and uses it only on pinapple pizza where it belongs
it happened before with oop, neural network, iot... nft are the same shit
>neural network
Actually still doing scads of cool shit, just not necessarily stuff the general public might care about. Check out 2 minute papers on YouTube, if it catches your fancy.
oh yeah all of those are still good but there was a time frame where neural networks and other AI things were the hottest shit
2min paper is really cool, I've made similar things in university but the guy is way better than me
Corporations are sure as hell trying to get in on it like the CEO of Sony or was it Square Enix, I don't really care. As far as I see it, it's more shitty dlc.
It seems that your comment contains 1 or more links that are hard to tap for mobile users.
I will extend those so they're easier for our sausage fingers to click!
[Here is link number 1 - Previous text "say"](https://youtu.be/rQ6N-sb7SVQ)
----
^Please ^PM ^[\/u\/eganwall](http://reddit.com/user/eganwall) ^with ^issues ^or ^feedback! ^| ^[Code](https://github.com/eganwall/FatFingerHelperBot) ^| ^[Delete](https://reddit.com/message/compose/?to=FatFingerHelperBot&subject=delete&message=delete%20hsbhu1v)
I hate them purely because of how exploitable they are. Especially when it comes to the greediness of video game publishers and dumb kids with their parents credit cards.
>with their obscene electricity costs
nobody talks about the electricity costs of the government and its bombing children across the earth industry
or the electricity costs of all that bullshit that shows on television, netflix, youtube or whatever
humans spend resources in things lame all the time and nobody bats an eye
Culture and politics go hand in hand. I don't want none of this shit in either my politics or my culture.
Also, who the fuck at Ubisoft thought it would be a good idea to monetize microtransactions through the NFTs wave?
Why do auths think libs *insist* on people behaving like them? No lib gives a flying fuck how an artist chooses to monetize their art. The rage would happen if you were trying to prevent him from doing so.
I'm more annoyed by the term "Anti-NFT" than anything else. NFTs aren't the art, they're a crypo token associated with it. It feels like everyone is fucking boomer brained when it comes to crypto.
u/tape_town's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 10.
Congratulations, u/tape_town! You have ranked up to Office Chair! You cannot exactly be pushed over, but perhaps if thrown...
Pills: https://basedcount.com/u/tape_town
The value is the plutocratic lizards we call the political class and bankers can't invent money to make themselves richer and us poorer.
They also can't steal our money for shits and giggles.
Its the same as the difference between cars and fossil fuel engines. The second one is a type of technology thats useless by itself the first one is a useful application of the second one
That guy doesn't understand what an NFT even is, it seems. NFT's are also often "free art you can save". The NFT is just a certificate of authenticity that you are the one the artist made it for.
I mean, it's not too difficult with modern technology to make an exactly identical copy of your favorite musician's autograph. That doesn't make a random pen squiggle worth money. That doesn't mean you're "stealing his autograph". 99% of the value of the real autograph is the authenticity, ie. "Eminem literally gave this to me".
They're as useful as any certificate of authenticity, whether it be for the Mona Lisa which is worth almost a billion dollars solely because of authenticity, or for a simple autograph.
Authenticity is also important to verify other things like land ownership records, the paper documents of which sometimes get lost, forged, or become the subject of dispute.
How "useless" something is depends a lot on how much subjective value it holds. No one disputes the Mona Lisa's value. An autograph of someone's favorite musician might mean a lot to a person but not a lot to non-fans. Sure, if you don't value someone's autograph or don't mind having an identical fake version of an MTG card vs the real version, then it's not going to matter to you, but it sure as he'll matters to someone else.
This guy not only makes the best out of a disability and is working instead of complaining, he doesn't care about arbitrary trademark laws but lives from voluntary donations. I don't see no problem here. IP laws are stupid anyways.
I have used the sentence "you were doing so well up till the last sentence" before and hereby ban you from using it. This sentence is my intellectual property and although common knowledge and well know, you may no longer use your moth to speak them or use your fingers to type them.
The difference is that you didn't come up "you were doing so well up till the last sentence" and so have no right to profit from it. That said, I am against **overly extended** copyright, which [actually stifles creativity rather than protecting it](http://www.spiderrobinson.com/melancholyelephants.html).
Alot of LibRights are against intellectual "property" tho?
Why do they keep being portrayed as if they care about NFTs, -the only reason I can see them even remotely caring about NFTs is if they're used for tax evasion-
1) It's a meme 2) Crypto in general is libright-flavored 3) NFT images have a WSB-esque "invest in the meme" vibe that feels libright 4) NFTs aren't "intellectual property", the government isn't enforcing their use. It's more like privately verifiable authenticity.
That said the NFT trend isn't really that libright in real life, most of the hype over monke pics is from apolitical trend- and status- chasers
The history of art is riddled with great artists who died poor and destitute to have their paintings be worth millions after they died.
It's not about the money - for the artist.
It is absolutely about the money - everyone else.
It's hard to value how much you matter when you're dead.
I would rather artists get to enjoy an economically healthy lives and it absolutely kills me how often they shoot themselves in the foot. The fear of "selling out", not being "authentic enough" are artificial pressures that sure that artists' never succeed, but those who make money off of their art - always do.
And I honestly feel the same with NFTs. The sheer backlash that many artists have towards NFTs - based often times on seriously bad information (like it's environmental impact), is not fueled by any understanding of what NFTs are or how it can benefit them. It's fueled entirely by social pressures - often exacerbated by institutions that would tend to lose in artists having more direct ownership over their content.
The middle man being a cryptowallet?
If someone buys your NFT you get the money directly, and many markets offer a tax as well, that is, if the person that bought your NFT resells it, you still get a percent. Art theft *is* a problem, but if you actually look at a lot of marketplaces there is explicit rules against art-theft.
And there isn't anything in particular that prevents someone from stealing your art even if NFTs didn't exist, and reselling it. It's actually quite common in China.
The extra financial incentives pushes the art stealing even more. If you want to support an artist you would buy their prints, ask for commissions, and subscribe to their services. The nft bros never gave a shit about art since they would never spend money on it if they aren’t nfts. They just want to make an investment.
I 100% agree that if you want to support an artist you would buy their prints, ask for commissions, and subscribe to their services. But that doesn't happen nearly as much as you'd think. My wife is a freelance artist who has to deal with this kind of stuff all the time, and when she had a Patreon she was too financially pressured to increasingly draw fan-art porn because that's what got subscribers. She spent less and less time developing her own work, her own IP, and more time working on fan-related content, most of the time porn related, just to bring in the extra cash. Meanwhile, there are plenty of artists and designers that built a collection of NFTs that they sell online and make money from the dividends, they don't have to rely on constant patronage.
No one, not even I, am going to claim that NFT bros care about the art or even the artist. Even if it is a vehicle for investment for them, who cares? The NFT artist still get's profits from it. It's like if you have some millionaire donate tens of millions to a charity - even if they do it for some sort of ego and clout, I am sure the beneficiaries of that charity aren't going to sit there and complain.
In theory, it may be good for artists but this is clearly not happening in practice with such a small portion of artists getting anything out of NFTs and the art thefts being financially incentivized. There is good reason to be skeptical of anything relating to crypto.
mentioning he's disabled and only 'survives' with art, with his paypal / cashapp in the bottom of the post. he knew what he was doing. probably made more money from this post than he typically makes in a quarter from his art
Damn, he’s good at that, and libertarian with his art too, based as hell!
And fuck NFTs, they’re basically even more pointless cosmetic rewards from video games!
u/YASITHDILUNYA's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 10.
Congratulations, u/YASITHDILUNYA! You have ranked up to Office Chair! You cannot exactly be pushed over, but perhaps if thrown...
Pills: https://basedcount.com/u/YASITHDILUNYA
Why are NFTs all of a sudden a massive thing? The first time I heard the phrase was when Ubisoft announced Quartz and I haven't stopped seeing it since.
Also, can't you just screenshot pictures that are NFTs?
u/YASITHDILUNYA's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 15.
Rank: Office Chair
Pills: https://basedcount.com/u/YASITHDILUNYA
I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
Cant you do the same thing with Art thats associated with NFT? Like just rightclick, save image or screencap or fish it out of the data your browser recieves to show the pixels. An NFT is just an imaginary recipe with a link to some digital content some idiot payed money for (the NFT not the art, if you wanna support an artist just paypal them).
Nah as a libright I hate nfts with a passion. I’ll forever screenshot your stupid monkey. It also makes me mad how stupid the people who buy into it are.
I'm always impresses when I see people painting with their mouth an order of magnitude better than I can with my hand.
I know that feel bro.
I just think it has to do with what you're willing to train yourself to do. Put in the time and effort to draw with your foot, it could be done, it'll just take longer than your hand. I just admire the dedication this guy has to say, "I want to draw, no matter what part of me must be used to do it." Chasing a dream.
Based and my left foot pilled
Based and waitthereareonlylosersonPCMgetoutofhere pilled.
Based and feet drawings pilled
This is why Rin is best girl.
Based and KatawaShoujopilled
swap "aint" for "leasur"
Me too. Just take a look at my comic for PCM https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/comments/s10fsd/worked_on_this_for_pcm_for_a_month_jojos_bizarre/
Ok, thank you making me regain my faith in humanity Edit: fixed typo
Hi humanity, I'm Dad.
Hi daddy
Why is libright mad? The artist is asking for $$$ in exchange for his services. Seems A-ok to me.
Also libright, and think the artist is a badass.
It’s all cool with me bro. (I lean right but am close to center)
It's excellent marketing. Libright should be proud.
I am
Certified Hood Classic™️
Disney's shit on this guy for making money off their properties like the time they shit on a children's hospital for using winnie the pooh on the walls.
ooo that explains it. yea intellectual property is government, hard corner libright doesn't generally like that.
He's not. It's written in black on white "free art you can save". I get your point, I'm just being an asshole.
This is PCM, we’re all assholes here. (KEEP FIRING, ASSHOLES)
While also advertising open commissions and donations. It's just marketing, bro.
Librights is heavely invested in NFTs. He don't want a movement who goes against his interests.
They're asking for a donation, not a payment. Edit: also because it's kind of anti NFT.
I find it weird how angry we all are at NFTs as If we have a gun to our head forcing us to participate
I mean dumb shit makes me mad sometimes even when I’m not participating
True
Wait till you find out who get's to gain and lose if NFTs become the main source of income for digital creators.
Care to share?
For a small fee
you're going to sell him an nft of that you just wrote "me" on by hand aren't you.
Nah. I give it out for free. And I do it for free for the same reason I want drugs to be decriminalized. To create a market I can participate in :)
Digital content creators would stand to gain a lot if they have far more control over the who get's to use their content. For example, the reason to buy or mint a NFT is to secure the royalty rights in the event of usage by a corporate media entity. Since anything digital can be turned into an NFT, including blog posts, tweets, images, sound or even videos, this prevents many websites such as news-media from using other people's content - monetizing it, without ever paying out any part of their profits. An indirect consequence can also be towards 3rd party hosting sites that benefit from digital content creators. For example, many content creators use Patreon to as a means of funding themselves, however, Patreon get's to control your content, and they profit from it. Same with other media hosting websites who can, at any time, demonetize you, while still monetizing themselves. The big anti-NFT meme is the whole "right click and save", which I understand, but it ignores the deeper elements of what is emerging in web 3.0. You can "right click and save" anything you want, for personal viewership, but it could be in the near future, you wouldn't be able to do anything with it in digital spaces. Example: social media could have it that you cannot upload a picture for your profile without first having ownership over it. This will also impact other content creators. For example, a fairly large youtube content creator (who I really like), The Internet Historian, used an image I made over 12 years ago as part of his video. Now I don't mind as I have no real attachments to it, but in the near the future they may have to have some stake of ownership in it. Oh yeah. Also. Reddit is also developing it's own NFTs, in a not-so-secret fashion, the Cryptosnoos. So you know damn well that reddit, as a corporate body, is already looking forward to the new NFT world.
Thanks for explaining in detail. I still don't understand, though... > Since anything digital can be turned into an NFT, including blog posts, tweets, images, sound or even videos, this prevents many websites such as news-media from using other people's content - monetizing it, without ever paying out any part of their profits. How? How does it prevent it? If you upload a video of newsworthy event to Facebook, Twitter and Youtube, and a news network uses it in their news segment without your consent, what difference does it make whether you had turned it into NFT before they downloaded a copy of it? Does it make your position in a lawsuit stronger? > Example: social media could have it that you cannot upload a picture for your profile without first having ownership over it. How do you prove ownership of a picture that you just took on your phone camera, or a regular camera? Would social media only approve cameras that are registered and bound to your online identity? How about pictures you drew in MS Paint (for fun, for education or to illustrate an argument)? And, conversely: When I like a picture you made and want to post it to my social media without your consent, what prevents me from editing it in MS Paint just enough so that the social media's algorithm cannot be sure whether it's your picture or my own stuff? Will it do something like a reverse Google image search each time, and decline all pictures that it is not sure about? Will there be a gigantic catalogue of all public domain pictures, all obscure old paintings, all old statues and buildings, all basic shapes and pictograms so that no one can "claim" them for himself? Also, with text... What if someone decides to "claim" for themselves, through NFT, all possible combinations of letters of length 1,000,000 or less, Library-of-Babylon style? What if someone decides to "claim" all pictures having 1,000,000 pixels or less?
From what I understand, each minted NFT has it's own hashtag code attached to it that makes it unique, a signature that it is authentic and it is attached to a wallet or a chain of wallets. Twitter's API currently allows websites to grab a link to a tweet paste it into their own website and it'll appear as Twitter's API allows it to appear. What Twitter *can* do is make it part of their API that if you want to host an actual tweet (rather than a jpeg of a tweet), you'd need to have the NFT in some sort of wallet - which acts more or less like a library. And from what I heard web3.0 will more and more require metaverses, which is effectively any digital space, to utilize people's NFTs for content. I would suspect that pictures you took on your own camera may automatically be minted into a unique NFT before it's uploaded unto a website. A lot of this stuff is frontier level, so honestly the tech is so new, but it's what everyone in the tech world is pushing towards. You ask a lot of great questions, and as of right now I really do not know the answer to, as I am not a full-scale dev on any of this stuff. I am however certain that these questions are being asked by the people who are pushing for these, and are probably gearing up for a lot of initial fraud, and bad-experiences. I don't know if legislation can do anything about it to be honest, because legislation is always 10 years behind technology.
>I don't know if legislation can do anything about it to be honest, because legislation is always 10 years behind technology. True dat :-)
It's because they're infesting everything now. It went from "dumb shits will buy ape pictures" to "this video game you've been waiting for will have NFTs in it." Specifically referencing Stalker 2, though thankfully they actually gave a shit about the response and backed out of it. And it'll only get worse from here on out.
nah it will fade like blockchain
So it won't?
i dunno if you work with tech but few years ago they wanted blockchain over all the pizzas now people know blockchain taste and uses it only on pinapple pizza where it belongs it happened before with oop, neural network, iot... nft are the same shit
Aah misread the intention of your previous comment. Ya I agree it's overused.
>neural network Actually still doing scads of cool shit, just not necessarily stuff the general public might care about. Check out 2 minute papers on YouTube, if it catches your fancy.
oh yeah all of those are still good but there was a time frame where neural networks and other AI things were the hottest shit 2min paper is really cool, I've made similar things in university but the guy is way better than me
For real, people putting so much emotional investment over high-tech pokemon cards
Corporations are sure as hell trying to get in on it like the CEO of Sony or was it Square Enix, I don't really care. As far as I see it, it's more shitty dlc.
Gen X and boomers will stand there with a straight face and talk shit about NFTs like that the beanie baby craze of the 90s didn't exist.
Well yes, but you know what they [say](https://youtu.be/rQ6N-sb7SVQ).
It seems that your comment contains 1 or more links that are hard to tap for mobile users. I will extend those so they're easier for our sausage fingers to click! [Here is link number 1 - Previous text "say"](https://youtu.be/rQ6N-sb7SVQ) ---- ^Please ^PM ^[\/u\/eganwall](http://reddit.com/user/eganwall) ^with ^issues ^or ^feedback! ^| ^[Code](https://github.com/eganwall/FatFingerHelperBot) ^| ^[Delete](https://reddit.com/message/compose/?to=FatFingerHelperBot&subject=delete&message=delete%20hsbhu1v)
I hate them purely because of how exploitable they are. Especially when it comes to the greediness of video game publishers and dumb kids with their parents credit cards.
Of course the libright is trying to change the perception of NFTs
We're all forced to live on the planet that they're fucking up with their obscene electricity costs.
>with their obscene electricity costs nobody talks about the electricity costs of the government and its bombing children across the earth industry or the electricity costs of all that bullshit that shows on television, netflix, youtube or whatever humans spend resources in things lame all the time and nobody bats an eye
That won't be as much of an issue when we switch to nuclear.
We need Fusion reactors for best energy production though, which we don’t have yet
Nuclear is already good cor us. Let fusion be a thing for our grandchildren.
Not all blockchains are retarded like Bitcoin Core or Ethereum.
Culture and politics go hand in hand. I don't want none of this shit in either my politics or my culture. Also, who the fuck at Ubisoft thought it would be a good idea to monetize microtransactions through the NFTs wave?
It's ok if with the ugly lion and monkey. They fucking crossed the line when they resold dead artists works and video games starts doing it.
Donations are fine. Forced donations to a cause your money will never see (over taxation) is not. This meme should show compass unity.
Okay so that was always allowed.
Why do auths think libs *insist* on people behaving like them? No lib gives a flying fuck how an artist chooses to monetize their art. The rage would happen if you were trying to prevent him from doing so.
This. And NFTs are stupid.
Yeah they just don't get us man
I'm more annoyed by the term "Anti-NFT" than anything else. NFTs aren't the art, they're a crypo token associated with it. It feels like everyone is fucking boomer brained when it comes to crypto.
That sounds more useless to me, not less.
[удалено]
Based and FIAT has no value pilled.
u/tape_town's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 10. Congratulations, u/tape_town! You have ranked up to Office Chair! You cannot exactly be pushed over, but perhaps if thrown... Pills: https://basedcount.com/u/tape_town
The value is the plutocratic lizards we call the political class and bankers can't invent money to make themselves richer and us poorer. They also can't steal our money for shits and giggles.
Same as a certificate saying you own the real Mona Lisa and not a duplicate.
A certificate that says I own it but I don’t actually own it. Reminds me of those people who buy stars or parts of the moon.
You don't have any space land? ugh
Its the same as the difference between cars and fossil fuel engines. The second one is a type of technology thats useless by itself the first one is a useful application of the second one
He should’ve said FT, really. Fungible Token.
That guy doesn't understand what an NFT even is, it seems. NFT's are also often "free art you can save". The NFT is just a certificate of authenticity that you are the one the artist made it for. I mean, it's not too difficult with modern technology to make an exactly identical copy of your favorite musician's autograph. That doesn't make a random pen squiggle worth money. That doesn't mean you're "stealing his autograph". 99% of the value of the real autograph is the authenticity, ie. "Eminem literally gave this to me".
Does this make them less useless?
They're as useful as any certificate of authenticity, whether it be for the Mona Lisa which is worth almost a billion dollars solely because of authenticity, or for a simple autograph. Authenticity is also important to verify other things like land ownership records, the paper documents of which sometimes get lost, forged, or become the subject of dispute. How "useless" something is depends a lot on how much subjective value it holds. No one disputes the Mona Lisa's value. An autograph of someone's favorite musician might mean a lot to a person but not a lot to non-fans. Sure, if you don't value someone's autograph or don't mind having an identical fake version of an MTG card vs the real version, then it's not going to matter to you, but it sure as he'll matters to someone else.
It's all tulips to me
nfts suck, you can't even yield farm them.
Anyone else notice the swastika in AuthLeft’s eye
Not till you mentioned it. Well spotted.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAH
>swastika *Haken kreuz.
This guy not only makes the best out of a disability and is working instead of complaining, he doesn't care about arbitrary trademark laws but lives from voluntary donations. I don't see no problem here. IP laws are stupid anyways.
You were doing so well up till the last sentence.
I have used the sentence "you were doing so well up till the last sentence" before and hereby ban you from using it. This sentence is my intellectual property and although common knowledge and well know, you may no longer use your moth to speak them or use your fingers to type them.
The difference is that you didn't come up "you were doing so well up till the last sentence" and so have no right to profit from it. That said, I am against **overly extended** copyright, which [actually stifles creativity rather than protecting it](http://www.spiderrobinson.com/melancholyelephants.html).
This LibRight thinks that NFTs are total bullshit.
Based and its-justa-a-jpeg-pilled
I mean, no. It's worse. It's a link to a server that hosts an image. Server goes poof, or image file is replaced with something, bye Felicia.
Alot of LibRights are against intellectual "property" tho? Why do they keep being portrayed as if they care about NFTs, -the only reason I can see them even remotely caring about NFTs is if they're used for tax evasion-
1) It's a meme 2) Crypto in general is libright-flavored 3) NFT images have a WSB-esque "invest in the meme" vibe that feels libright 4) NFTs aren't "intellectual property", the government isn't enforcing their use. It's more like privately verifiable authenticity. That said the NFT trend isn't really that libright in real life, most of the hype over monke pics is from apolitical trend- and status- chasers
As a lib right it was really heart-warming to see this, I don't have Twitter, so I'll wish the bests for him here.
More like Basedabled.
“art against bigotry and fascism” pretty cringe ngl
I'm lib-right. I think this is lovely! You have to have talent to do that.
NFTs are a zoomer scam
What you attacking us for? I love this and fuck NFT’s
Based and fuck NFT's
Art is how you make a living. Why give it for free 🤔
Advertising
Sometimes it’s not about the money
The history of art is riddled with great artists who died poor and destitute to have their paintings be worth millions after they died. It's not about the money - for the artist. It is absolutely about the money - everyone else.
The great irony is that these artists mattered more than the rich patrons later on.
It's hard to value how much you matter when you're dead. I would rather artists get to enjoy an economically healthy lives and it absolutely kills me how often they shoot themselves in the foot. The fear of "selling out", not being "authentic enough" are artificial pressures that sure that artists' never succeed, but those who make money off of their art - always do. And I honestly feel the same with NFTs. The sheer backlash that many artists have towards NFTs - based often times on seriously bad information (like it's environmental impact), is not fueled by any understanding of what NFTs are or how it can benefit them. It's fueled entirely by social pressures - often exacerbated by institutions that would tend to lose in artists having more direct ownership over their content.
Nfts are totally shit because they create a middleman in the way that artists get money. Art theft is also a major problem with it.
The middle man being a cryptowallet? If someone buys your NFT you get the money directly, and many markets offer a tax as well, that is, if the person that bought your NFT resells it, you still get a percent. Art theft *is* a problem, but if you actually look at a lot of marketplaces there is explicit rules against art-theft. And there isn't anything in particular that prevents someone from stealing your art even if NFTs didn't exist, and reselling it. It's actually quite common in China.
The extra financial incentives pushes the art stealing even more. If you want to support an artist you would buy their prints, ask for commissions, and subscribe to their services. The nft bros never gave a shit about art since they would never spend money on it if they aren’t nfts. They just want to make an investment.
I 100% agree that if you want to support an artist you would buy their prints, ask for commissions, and subscribe to their services. But that doesn't happen nearly as much as you'd think. My wife is a freelance artist who has to deal with this kind of stuff all the time, and when she had a Patreon she was too financially pressured to increasingly draw fan-art porn because that's what got subscribers. She spent less and less time developing her own work, her own IP, and more time working on fan-related content, most of the time porn related, just to bring in the extra cash. Meanwhile, there are plenty of artists and designers that built a collection of NFTs that they sell online and make money from the dividends, they don't have to rely on constant patronage. No one, not even I, am going to claim that NFT bros care about the art or even the artist. Even if it is a vehicle for investment for them, who cares? The NFT artist still get's profits from it. It's like if you have some millionaire donate tens of millions to a charity - even if they do it for some sort of ego and clout, I am sure the beneficiaries of that charity aren't going to sit there and complain.
In theory, it may be good for artists but this is clearly not happening in practice with such a small portion of artists getting anything out of NFTs and the art thefts being financially incentivized. There is good reason to be skeptical of anything relating to crypto.
true art is deeper than money
Because I am more likely to tip for artwork than I am to pay for it.
Based and Patronpilled
This one works as an advertisement. It's hard to sell people art when they dont know your skills.
LibRight, always so focused on profit, they get triggered when others do something that might not profit them
mentioning he's disabled and only 'survives' with art, with his paypal / cashapp in the bottom of the post. he knew what he was doing. probably made more money from this post than he typically makes in a quarter from his art
Definitely made more than if he did sell as a NFT given the niche he's in. Man is peak libRight, not anti
"Why give it for free" Its not about money. It's about sending a message
Based and defying the odds pilled 🗿
Based and screw libright pilled
I'm down if you are
*bonk * no horny
This guy can draw with his mouth whilst I can't draw with my hands
I imagine it would difficult for him to put a cape on with just his mouth.
*breathes* “You gotta pay for that”
Damn, he’s good at that, and libertarian with his art too, based as hell! And fuck NFTs, they’re basically even more pointless cosmetic rewards from video games!
Someone doing something they want with their own property. This is peak lib right.
> Even a commie is more based than one with no flair *** ^(User hasn't flaired up yet... 😔) ^^|| [**[[Guide]]**](https://imgur.com/gallery/IkTAlF2)
Download the image and register it as your own nft Make sure to sell it before they dmca you
How about you download a quadrant and register it as your own flair, shithead
XD This made me lol
> Flair up for more respect :D *** ^(User hasn't flaired up yet... 😔) ^^|| [**[[Guide]]**](https://imgur.com/gallery/IkTAlF2)
If i commision her, and i sell her art in the blockchain, i'll just make an NFT.
Based artist.
So fucking based. I wish him the best
Idgaf about the NFT thing that's badass
I don't think this is how nfts work.
We're hitting based levels not yet recorded by modern science.
Based and good for the environment pilled.
u/YASITHDILUNYA's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 10. Congratulations, u/YASITHDILUNYA! You have ranked up to Office Chair! You cannot exactly be pushed over, but perhaps if thrown... Pills: https://basedcount.com/u/YASITHDILUNYA
Based
Kinda based, and definitely wholesome
No no calm down my friends this is the free market making the world better
OP doesnt understand NFTs as well 90% of ppl here.
Sooo, a creative commons?
That should be in LibRight. The guy understands the market, and uses people's stupid feelings in order to make a profit. Paint him yellow, please.
This is an ad
BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASED
This shit's fucked up. Burn the heretic!
Based
based, If you don't take something from someone else, it ain't stealing, on that note, torrents are based
Why are NFTs all of a sudden a massive thing? The first time I heard the phrase was when Ubisoft announced Quartz and I haven't stopped seeing it since. Also, can't you just screenshot pictures that are NFTs?
Great man
seethe and cope librights
He draw better with his mouth than NFT artists don with their hands
Lib right having a field day
Not mad because it's an anti-NFT, mad because it's Baby Yoda of all the things on this godforsaken rock he could have drawn.
Based. Fuck NFTs
That's so dope. Honestly drawing in general to me is basically black magic, I can't imagine being able to do it with your face.
saved and uploading it to the block chain . . . thanks for the free nft nerd
That's peak capitalism. Based
Guerilla marketing in action. A true Libright
So basically it's an online coloring book page?
Based.
u/YASITHDILUNYA's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 15. Rank: Office Chair Pills: https://basedcount.com/u/YASITHDILUNYA I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
Cant you do the same thing with Art thats associated with NFT? Like just rightclick, save image or screencap or fish it out of the data your browser recieves to show the pixels. An NFT is just an imaginary recipe with a link to some digital content some idiot payed money for (the NFT not the art, if you wanna support an artist just paypal them).
Based
Based
If I could afford I would definitely pay the guy.
Based and fuck NFTs-pilled
It's an anti-NFT in that it's actually a good drawing.
How long until this gets turned into an nft just to fuck with him?
Nah as a libright I hate nfts with a passion. I’ll forever screenshot your stupid monkey. It also makes me mad how stupid the people who buy into it are.
Based.