NFTs are gambling. Pure and simple. If you think gambling is wrong then I get that but the constant need to moralize that somehow people buying and selling them are scammers or unethical is very weird to me.
1 Like
I havenāt editted any posts? I think my post still says the discord made a lot of money off of NotARug. It was a meme NFT that literally told you it was a rug in every tweet, discord post and other communication.
If we think having dumbasses handing over their money to us is bad then I guess thatās a personal opinion I can respect. But lets not pretend like it wouldnāt happen if none of us here were engaged in it. It would just be someone else. There is always someone else lined up to pick up the edges and itās ac competition for all of them. Also I donāt see how you can play poker and have opinions like that(i understand not everyone here plays poker anymore).
Also, for anybody worrying about click a mouse lose your house, it is actually quite difficult to buy pure shitcoins like MonkeyPoxInu. You need to know a lot to do it and there will be lots of very explicit warnings along the way telling you not to.
what does poker and gambling have to do with buying and selling something that is a scam?
not all things in poker are āmOrALā and not all things in nft are āmOrALā and not all things in gamblings are āmOrALā and some similarities between those things arenāt a cover all for any crticism.
If I bought an NFT and sold it for a profit and it was later discovered to be a scam that lost 100% of its value iād feel shitty. You later explained that this was somehow conveyed to buyers. Seems a bit shady to me as well but i will spare myself terrible poker analogies that surely will come.
I mean tubcats and Topshot are either there are headed there. The Topshot stuff I own is down a huge amount of money from when I bought it. You sold tubcats to people for thousands of dollars that are now worth $200. Does that make you bad? In my opinion no. But it seems like you are saying it does?
I think you are misunderstanding my point here. I agree that NFTs and crypto have problematic elements. I agree that they draw in low info people who mostly lose money. I disagree that my participation in it (or yours) has any material impact on it. I agree it isnāt a perfect analogy to poker but it is similar and I am not sure that is deniable. Both ecosystems rely on fish to feed the people who actually make money from it. Both ecosystems have a house that takes the biggest cut in many cases. Both ecosystems are full of scams and pitfalls. I mean the reason it is being brought up is it is odd to see actual poker players moralizing nfts and crypto. No they arenāt the same but similar arguments can be made about why both are bad (or why both are ok).
well i still own tubcats and topshots and i feel shitty. but none of them are scams. you can say they are bubbles and you can say dapper people are incompetent but they were never a scam. why do you keep mentioning these two? how are they the same thing is a scam?
your post is completely nonsensical to me. some aspects of poker suck, some aspects of nfts suck. I am pointing to a specific aspect of NFTs that suck and participating voluntarily in it is immoral to me.
If you think that participating in NFTs is immoral you shouldnāt do it then? Pretty much none of the NFTs I own started out as scams either fwiw. Even the NotARug thing was a joke. It wasnāt a pure scame. It was a literal NFT meme.
It wouldnāt make a difference going forward. The Seargean General could put a label on the coins stating that they cause harm to your bank account and it wouldnāt stop folks - theyāve just found something to spark their dopamine.
Which is why nobody mentions buying monkeypox or or any other shit that had crashed, because they already knew.
but i never said participating in nfts is immoral. i might think that i might not my own participation in it has nothing to do with the arguments i made. You keep searching for hypocrisy because you are unwilling or unable to answer what iām actually arguing. Maybe it because your lack of ability maybe itās my inability to explain myself, but either way screaming HYPOCRICY will not help your argument.
If you knew a certain NFT would end up to be a scam and sold it for a profit, that would be immoral?
Iāve never done this and wouldnāt purposefully do it. Like I said even the NotARug thing was a joke with lots of cryptic elements. I donāt think you understand what I am explaining about that. Literally no one buying into that didnāt know what they were buying it was right in the title and all the marketing. I didnāt make much on that NFT and the people who bought mine made way more. So this idea that I was just fleecing idiots there isnāt a take that is tethered to reality real well.
Also Iām not sure how somehow buying/selling a jpeg of a tubcat somehow even differs from that behavior? It isnāt like tubcats have any utility either?
Iām not screaming hypocrisy here either fwiw. I just literally donāt understand how you are differentiating what is ok behavior (buying and selling tubcats) and what is not ok behavior (buying and selling a pure meme nft). Neither one has any actual real world value and they are both scams from the perspective of NFTs are all scams in one way or another.
I understand. Which is why I wrote that you reworded and added information (both about some people losing and somehow that the Rug was a known feature of the project).
I originally commented to a post in which you said āthe discord made a lot of money of a project that was a scamā. That would be pretty shitty thing in my opinion. Iād feel pretty bad if I did that. Instead of agreeing and saying this wasnāt the case with whatever project you were talking about, you went on with everything is the same and therefore nothing matters.
I donāt think we disagree really. Do I wish there were way less scams in crypto and nfts. Yes. Do I think there needs to be more regulation. Yes. Do I think that itās ok to scam people for money? No not at all.
I just donāt think 99% of what is happening from people that you know from here are engaged in any of that. There has been discussion of starting a shitcoin or starting a nft project. As near as I can tell none of it has ever happened even though we could have easily done it because there is some bare level of ethics that exists. There are a couple real NFT projects being worked on (I am not involved) but they arenāt scams.
The point of my posting all this today is to mostly say I fundamentally agree with some of the āhatersā here. The core problematic elements are real and significant. What I donāt like is the general tone that the people here engaged in it are the problem. If no one here had ever bought a NFT the impact would be literal 0.
All Iām saying is that if I sold a jpeg that people valued a lot and then people valued less for various reasons (see tubcats, see topshot) Iād feel good (although I would rather it hold value for buyers, just less than what i sold it)
If I sold a jpeg that people valued a lot and then people valued less due to malicious behavior by the project owners Iād feel very shitty. If I gloated about it later, Iād feel even shittier.
If I sold a jpeg that people valued a lot and then people valued less due to malicious behavior by the project owners that I suspect would happen while the buyers probably did not Iād be doing something immoral.
Thatās my stance. You said something that appeared like #2 to me based on the wording of your post, and without further information it would be pretty hard to think otherwise. You then added and corrected the information in that post to argue that it isnāt #2.
Thatās all. Hope you understand my view now.
All good. I agree with you mostly. The NotARug thing was just basically an open scam from the get go and if you got involved in it then it was literally impossible to not realize it.
There have been a couple recent NFT projects that have been pretty much pure scams the discord people (including myself) have bought into and lost cumulatively 6 figures from. Is that ok? Of course not. So I get what you are trying to say. Iām angry about those situations when they happen to me also.
no, but iād feel shitty about it and not brag. which was what I thought occurred here before the correction/expansion.
And as meb pointed out, those people were always going to lose their money one way or another anyway. Or they know exactly what the scam is and want to gambool on timing it. Iāve done this myself with some success, but not enough to put real money at risk.
And to repeat, it is very difficult to buy these coins. They arenāt publicly listed on DEXās, and they canāt be bought at all from places like Coinbase. You really need to know what youāre doing to find and trade them. Casual users simply arenāt ever going to be exposed to them.
The cryptospace and NFTs are unfiltered capitalism. Capitalism is an immoral system and a scam. Some NFTs are outright scams and some are systemic scams. Itās just a matter of degree. But stocks are also part of the scam of capitalism. If youāre comparing crypto vs the stock market, itās not like the market is purer. Most of us donāt have a choice but to be participants in some form of capitalism. If forced to do so, why not NFTs?
4 Likes
7 Likes
Need some help here.
For reasons I donāt really understand, Iām being asked to talk about blockchain audits and how they are/arenāt similar to financial statement audits in terms of providing some kind of assurance to crypto investors.
Is anyone out there familiar with these audits? CertiK is the one Iām being asked about, but Iām trying to figure out more generally:
- What it is that an auditor would verify.
- If thereās an obvious benefit from getting your blockchain audited.
- If thereās an obvious gap between what an investor would want to know and what the audit actually assesses.
Basically, can an auditor determine:
- Whether the blockchain āworksā as itās described. (I assume yes)
- Whether the code would allow certain events/transactions that a newb investor might think should be prevented, even if itās laid out explicitly somewhere in the code. Maybe the kind of thing that might be characterized as āclick a mouse, lose a houseā. (My guess is maybe)
- Whether the auditors can determine if insiders/sponsors/managers (I donāt really know what to call them) are likely to do bad shit/dump their shares/rugpull. (My guess is no)
Any help appreciated.