Quote from: nutildah on February 20, 2023, 05:38:59 AM

Quote from: larry_vw_1955 on February 19, 2023, 11:47:01 PM

it's very easy to counterfeit an ordinal. just mint the content in a new bitcoin transaction and now you own a bored ape or whatever other "nft" you wanted! seems so easy right?

This has always been the case with every NFT on every blockchain. Nothing is stopping you from creating a fake Bored Ape, just like nothing is stopping you from painting a fake Picasso.

as bitcoin "nfts" become more mainstream, i guess this distinction won't matter as much because there will be marketplaces similar to opensea where people use as the "interface" to the bitcoin ecosystem but if someone is just using the ordinals explorer then everything looks the same. the only thing you can go by is which one came first. the one with the lower inscription # is assumed to be the "original". that could be problematic in certain situations. don't you think?

Quote

People who know how to read the blockchain or look for signs of forgery in paintings will be able to spot the difference between real and fake pretty easily, however.

i don't know about that. show me any image on the internet and i think it's possible to download it and inscribe it onto bitcoin and it will be an exact duplicate. as long as whatever service you use is not doing any image compression or something.

Quote

Have yet to hear a single argument against NFTs that either

- doesn't also apply to the physical counterparts they are emulating, or
- doesn't also apply to bitcoin and all other cryptocurrencies.

i'm not arguing against the utility of nfts. i understand they do have various use cases. the one use case though that i think is becoming a bit suspect is "owning" a picture. especially now that you can upload anything you want to to bitcoin. as many times as you want to and the original owner might not even be first. i'm sure you would say "no one owns a picture they just own the digital rights to it" well whatever! not even sure what that means...

Quote from: franky1

however if the file hash was included in each tx. THEN it would be impossible to de-peg and thus securing ownership to the current file hash holder in the active unspent tx where the data in the original creation tx is deemed as spent and changing a taint algo isnt able to just declare a different output as owner

you make some really good points franky. i am probably 100 percent sure that people that are using this ordinals have no idea about all those issues and don't even care at all. that's just how end users are. hopefully it won't bite them in their rear end oneday!