Quote from: BlackHatCoiner on December 18, 2021, 02:07:03 PM

Quote from: pooya87 on December 18, 2021, 01:57:47 PM

This reminded me of another fundamental problem with NFTs, both the owner and anybody else in the world can also download the "art".

This isn't a problem, but a feature. Yes, anyone can download the art, but none of them can provide a proof of ownership of the art except the current owner. Anyone who gives me this article and tells me NFTs are useless is benighted the least.

It's like telling me they own BTC without providing me a valid signature. Okay, you can enjoy looking at the address, but you don't have the rights to move the BTC. When you transact BTC, you do exactly the same thing; you transfer the rights of those BTC. A sign that says it's not yours anymore.

That's not like that at all. Bitcoin doesn't represent something else in real world. Each bitcoin is its own and is a unit of currency. Each NFT token on the other hand represents something else in this case a piece of art, and if that piece is destroyed for example that token becomes meaningless.

It is more like if anyone who wished to could summon an exact version of a painting like Mona Lisa that was drawn by Leonardo da Vinci in their home hanging on the wall that was identical in all aspects each others. The fact that Louvre museum has a version of it with a certificate doesn't mean much any longer.

Quote from: PrimeNumber7 on Today at 12:51:03 AM

For example, the Los Angeles County Register of Deeds could issue NFTs to real estate owners representing ownership of their property.

The question always is not about what you can do but why would you want to do that.
In this case storing such things on a distributed global ledger is meaningless! Storing it in a centralized database in that county or country is already working well enough.

Quote

The owner of a property could transfer their property to another person by transferring their NFT to another person. In this example, the Los Angeles County Register would need to agree (probably via statute) to recognize an NFT as ownership of a property. If you are buying a NFT representing ownership of real estate property, you would need to make sure the LA County Register actually issued the NFT (which can be done via reviewing the blockchain), and you would need to trust the LA County Register of Deeds, however, you need to do the later anyway if you are buying property in LA County.

Explanation of this process and the fact that the centralized body of LA county register is a must proves that you don't need a decentralized NFT on a decentralized public ledger (assuming the blockchain used is all that and not faking it like the existing token platforms).

Quote

The above could reduce the costs associated with selling your property, as it would make things such as title searches much easier, and would nearly eliminate title insurance payouts, which should reduce the cost of title insurance.

No it won't. Blockchain is the most expensive and inefficient form of database whether it is about storage, security or searching inside it.
With current centralized system, all you have to do is to search inside that centralized database that the LA county register keeps. They take care of everything including but not limited to: storage, verification, indexing, updating,... they could even alert you if the ownership was transferred while you are making the purchase.

With decentralized blockchain solution you will have to first download the entire blockchain (1122.89 GB for ETH) verify it, index the entire chain or parts of it so that it becomes searchable (will increase storage requirement) then search inside of it! Then you have to stay in sync and download and verify every block (produced every couple of seconds in ethereum) so that you can know if the ownership was transferred!