Including that, it's a scam. You can't sell an original where none exists. It's like selling something imaginary, like an idea. I guess if it includes publishing rights to the piece, that's something.
that's just the current, limited application of nfts. there are others...but these types of use cases would be waaaaay down the road, assuming it even becomes a legitimate thing beyond scammy shit art right now.
yeah, i'm not sure why norton suggested this. it makes no sense. the only real sensible way games can use NFTs and blockchain, at the moment, is for creating of in-game items (as an NFT) tied to a blockchain and utilizing a provably random/fair mechanism for random generation of those items.
But in the case of digital art, there's really no original. What are you going to do, give them the computer or tablet you created the piece on? Decapitate yourself and give them the brain you conceived the piece with? The idea is completely nonsensical.
you'd have to be bought into the the idea that everything would be digital. the easiest example i can come up with would be the title to your home. anything that needs a unique digital representation that can not be forged or manipulated. but, like i said, this requires many things to happen before this becomes a reality. you'd also have to have multiple organizations recognize that NFT as being official so you can use it the way you might use a title to obtain a loan or sell.
From what I’ve seen, it does not. Just that your “original” (copy) is unique to you.
of course it's possible, but it requires you to be online, hence lagduf's example of why it didn't work before. if people have changed their mentality now, then yeah, it would work if the companies are willing to do it.
