I think NFT's had some promise for stuff you actually have to own (not some ape pictures). Like a digital version for maybe an invitation or tickets or if done properly (by your countries government for example) maybe even for stuff like licenses (i.e. driving license, welding license etc.) Or identification (passport, id, etc.)

[–] rbn@feddit.ch 17 points 2 years ago (1 children)

For government documents you need nothing but a plain old certificate to create a digital signature. If there is a single instance of trust (such as a government) there absolutely no point in using a blockchain.

Decentral NFTs for concert tickets would only make sense if you were looking for a solution to liberate the second market, i.e. people selling tickets to other people without involvement of the host of the concert. Such a model is neither beneficial for the hosts (as they wouldn't benefit from the second market sales) nor the visitors (as the second market typically leads to even higher prices). If you meant a way to return/trade tickets on a platform controlled by the host / the original issuer of the tickets, then there's again no need at all for crypto aside plain old, stupid certificates.

[+] makeasnek@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

[deleted]

[–] ElectricCattleman@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

There are some fringe benefits for blockchain but massive issues with normal human issues like:

Scams/theft: person has the wallet lost through scam or left, how do you invalidate the lost credentials or tickets.
Wallet loss: loss through any number of means: fire, incompetence, computer being destroyed, loss of account to cloud backup etc
Issuer need to invalidate: if tickets/credentials were purchased by fraud or an issue occurs where they need to invalidate

How does blockchain handle these common situations?

[–] conorab@lemmy.conorab.com 1 points 2 years ago

The downtime issue for identities is already solved with a government certificate and distributed certificate revocation list. As long as multiple independent parties are mirroring the government’s list, taking down the government servers would not affect identity verification. Certificate Transparency solves the CA compromise problem since you have a log of all issued certs.

[–] Hildegarde@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Every single one of the examples you gave relies on some single centralized authority to give it value. Passports and licences are meaningless without a government. Tickets rely on the venue.

I have not heard anyone mention any application for NFTs that would work better than a database run by the agency that is required to give the document value.

Blockchain is a solution in search of a problem.

[–] UPGRAYEDD@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

The problem IS the centralized authority. Can you forever trust a government to not artificially inflate or deflate the value of a currency? The whole point was to have a system with no single authority. No single point of failure.

It is, however, not perfect. The volatility, limited number of transacrions per second , and reliance on an incredible amount of energy expense were the largest of these when the original bitcoin concept was created. Some of these issues have solutions, but its still an evolving technology.