I’m fairly certain financial institutions don’t use it because of that anti-laundring application.

They don’t usually want their transactions publicly known anyway.

And what happens when the audit doesn’t get written to, because there is a “delay” when the transaction happens? Or maybe it doesn’t happen at all.

In the NFT design, the transaction is it’s own audit entry. It’s federated because that’s how block chains work. No one can argue that the transaction didn’t happen, and everyone knows who it belongs to.

NFTs, as implemented on a block chain are a unique number. A URL to that transaction can be generated, but a URL itself does not establish anything.the NFT needs to be in your block chain wallet. “Not your keys, not your wallet, not your crypto” applies here as well.

Which is why the whole graphic -> nft thing didn’t make a lot of sense to me.

Great. You own the number assigned to a graphic. You own that graphic. You can still copy the pixels of that graphic too.

I might be incorrect, but databases can always be updated to affect existing data.

So then they aren’t even NFTs

Yes, plenty of ways, but none that didn’t have flaws. The idea behind it is that it leveraged a publicly viewable history.

Something like a Title Search for a home purchase would be done looking at the token’s history. It’s also not a database so there’s no way to edit it after the transaction has been performed.

In the instance of equities exchange it can also be used to prove who has and historically had ownership. In the care of, say, a broker, no one actually owns the stocks, the broker does and gives you an IOU for the stock. This means they can do whatever they want with the stock while it shouldn’t be touched since it’s yours.

I don’t know how Ticketmaster plays into this?

Worthless on their own, yes. It’s very valuable as a technology in terms of trackability and transparency, and establishing ownership.

Tied to a graphic? That’s just stupid and anyone who spent money on them deserved what they got.

Something that is fungible is not unique.

An NFT is essentially a number tied to another number in a block chain that establishes ownership.

It provides a history of who owns it to. It’s very useful when validating contracts and preventing fraud. Somehow it got turned into little graphics exchanged for money and I still don’t understand how that happened.

So, for instance, since the owners of the NFTs know that the wallet is compromised, the recipients of the NFTs after this point in the block chain are recipients of stolen goods. So anyone tracing the validity of an NFT knows that these are now all worthless.

How is this a rape joke?

Woah woah woah

You met someone?

That’s fucking impressive, I can’t even get to that step.

My 8 year old still plays coloring games with Elmo on his tablet. He ain’t got no time for girls per china.

Saddam’s Hiding place is definitely one of the GOAT memes. It’s from a news broadcast from Saddam Hussein was captured in like 2003, and they showed a very simple graphic with the red body clearly Saddam Hussein labeled as much.

So now he shows up in all sorts of unexpected places:

I develop with JS? All I can say is I need more brain damage to understand where is out

Furiousa is adorable

Open source software does not cause a loss of $ it causes everyone else gain.

Finally. CRISPR has been in development for so long I was worried we’d never see it save at least one life.

Yeah, something something right hand rule

I’m sure there are some - particularly around the Midwest there are a lot of giant truck enthusiast types - I have no idea why, other than it might say “I have a farm and big arms.”

So your looking at a $70k vehicle brand new. Personally if I was dropping $70k on a car it would be something far more fun to drive and cozier inside. And electric nowadays. And not Tesla.

But I guess you could still go based on brand - your Mercedes sedan is going to be way fancier than any Ford you can get.

But there are also the types who still think Jaguar is a luxurious brand. IDK.

Or maybe I’m just analyzing the premise of wealth being attractive too much. What I consider something to be valuable won’t be what they do.

I have to read the full text again, and IANAL, but the ruling was former presidents cannot be prosecuted for official acts particularly by their core constitutional powers. It did not rule on unofficial acts.

To me, that means every official act can be weighed against it being in his authority to actually do those things. If he doesn’t have that constitutional power, then he doesn’t get official act immunity.

What the judge did is power granted to the judicial branch by the constitution. That, again to me, says that there is an immunity clause.

But that all is based on the premise that law matters, and it doesn’t given that we’ve already abandoned due process.