User information for Luke G Kelly

Real Name
Luke G Kelly
Nickname
FloodAnxiety
Email
Concealed by request - Send Mail
Description
Homepage
Signed On
November 18, 2012
Founding Supporter
Bronze, since May 7, 2020
Total Posts
100 (Novice)
User ID
57619
Search For:
Sort Results:
Ascending
Descending
Limit Results:
 
100 Comments. 5 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  5  ] Older
13.
 
Re: NYT on NFT
Jan 15, 2022, 19:18
13.
Re: NYT on NFT Jan 15, 2022, 19:18
Jan 15, 2022, 19:18
 
I read through some of the comments on that article.

It always seems to be some non-techie non-gamer who is like "Oh, I see, NFTs are the future. Buying and selling digital goods, how novel!". Let's call them crytpo-bandwagoners. They somehow don't understand that people have been buying and selling digital goods for decades, despite all of the evidence and examples. Then there are people like myself, who are trying to explain why NFTs don't bring anything useful to the table that people weren't already doing. And the crypto-bandwagoners start arguing about why those people are old fogies and should get used to the idea of buying and selling digital goods. All we can do is facepalm. They think they are informed and ahead of the curve, but in reality, they are decades behind everyone and following what is essentially a tulip trend.

Maybe we should establish an internet driver's license, and all it should do is test whether the person knows what the Dunning-Kruger effect is and how to not fall victim to it.
23.
 
Re: Morning Metaverse
Jan 14, 2022, 16:25
23.
Re: Morning Metaverse Jan 14, 2022, 16:25
Jan 14, 2022, 16:25
 
jacobvandy wrote on Jan 13, 2022, 19:28:
That's a lot of words to essentially be asking, "what's stopping me from minting my own Bitcoins and becoming instantly rich?" Because NFTs are cryptocurrency like any other, just with added embedded data. Short answer, the blockchain is stopping you, the one generally agreed upon to be the only legitimate ledger. Hence the term 'non-fungible token."

Anyone can create an NFT, yes, just like anyone can create their own blockchain or their own contract token on one of the major existing blockchains. There are loads of phishing scams pretending to be other cryptos or even cryptos named after a website URL or social media handle so that it's easily spammed to millions of wallet addresses. But you can't copy the original NFT on the legitimate blockchain/contract, that's pretty much the whole point... Your counterfeit NFT will neither be compatible with nor at all recognized by the legitimate market.

These "parties/entities" you speak of, they are not involved with managing the NFTs after they've been created, that's all on the blockchain. Either NFTs are pre-generated and exist as a finite number of cryptocurrency tokens, or there is a contract on the blockchain (a block of code initially uploaded by the "party/entity") that handles creating new ones on demand within pre-set parameters. Such a contract will also be automatically disbursing the NFTs, whether for a purchase price or as a random giveaway or whatever the author decided. There is obviously a tacit agreement by anyone placing value into the NFTs that the originating blockchain/contract is the only legitimate source, and I doubt that market will bear imitators or support any games that do.

As for all of it going away if the blockchain should fail, well, that's the same sort of risk all of crypto has carried with it since it began nearly 15 years ago. The same sort of risk carried with investing in a lot of things digital. People have lost entire libraries of games, movies, or music in that time, when a service shut down or was sold off and re-branded without transferring your licenses unless you opted-in within a certain window, if that was offered at all. So most people mitigate that risk by sticking with long-established and healthy platforms. Nobody's forced to throw in with every new crypto start-up, although some folks do like to take that gamble. I don't currently own any NFTs (though I did check out Axie Infinity last year -- my previous remark about the quality of current blockchain games is based on some experience), but I believe in the potential of their utility. It goes far beyond this "link to a .jpeg" nonsense that has thus far been the subject of most mainstream conversation.
I'm disappointed in your understanding of my post. I will try to be more clear in the future. I understand how mining and NFTs are created. Copying a digital asset and creating a new NFT with the same digital asset would be a separate NFT, but the digital good is identical. Blockchains do not enforce that all digital goods in the block chain have to be unique.

Try taking a devil's advocate stance to your own position. I believe that if you think critically about your position that you'll see the problems. It boils down to: if the system isn't better in anyway, and it is actually worse in many other ways, then what good is the system? What problem is the blockchain solving?

Has the same risk. Still requires a centralized authority to avoid the problems when there is no authority. So what good is the blockchain?

Can you describe your ideal future where digital goods are traded between people? Please include why your ideal future HAS to be created on a blockchain and why it can't use traditional centralized databases? I suspect that your ideal future of digital good trading is entirely possibly and more efficient if implemented without a blockchain.

To be clear, I am fully in support of buying and selling digital goods. I've done it in the past and will continue to do so in the future. I am only against blockchains in general because as a software engineer, I would feel grossly irresponsible if I replaced an efficient system with something that performs orders of magnitude worse.

15.
 
Re: Second Life Gets a Second Life
Jan 14, 2022, 16:06
15.
Re: Second Life Gets a Second Life Jan 14, 2022, 16:06
Jan 14, 2022, 16:06
 
Kxmode wrote on Jan 13, 2022, 18:44:
Not sure how that could happen. Linden Labs already has a form of NFT in land rentals. It costs USD 175 a month for a square region, and it's not hard to generate regionals. There are thousands of them, mostly populated. According to this there are 18,338 private estates (I guess that's the term they use for regions) operating at USD 175 a month. Roughly around 3.2 million a month. And that doesn't take into account the $360 setup for any new regions.
Oh, you are right. Didn't realize Second Life has already gone down the NFT route.
9.
 
Re: Second Life Gets a Second Life
Jan 13, 2022, 18:35
9.
Re: Second Life Gets a Second Life Jan 13, 2022, 18:35
Jan 13, 2022, 18:35
 
No one has come close to building a virtual world like Second Life

No one wants to build a virtual world like Second Life, they are too busy building the virtual worlds that they want to build. Second Life is probably worried that Meta's Horizon is going to steal Second Life's users that want a VR experience. VR social users are too busy just doing their thing in the existing VR social apps. Meanwhile, everyone else that just wants to play games is playing games.

That said, while Second Life and most social VR experiences aren't my cup of tea, I hope they continue to have success. I'm just happy this announcement wasn't about them moving towards NFTs, though I'm kind of expecting that if Second Life gets into financial trouble that someone will try to "save" the service by moving to NFTs, which will basically be their final cash grab before they close the servers for good.
21.
 
Re: Morning Metaverse
Jan 13, 2022, 15:45
21.
Re: Morning Metaverse Jan 13, 2022, 15:45
Jan 13, 2022, 15:45
 
jacobvandy wrote on Jan 12, 2022, 18:03:
You can store more than enough data directly on a blockchain* to distinctly describe a specific digital item or entity as it would be represented in a game. The only requirement for making it compatible with other games would be to correctly interpret and implement that data.
Either you are saying that the data has enough information to identify it in some other external database, or you are saying that rather than encode the link to the digital good, they could encode the entire digital good. If it is the former, same thing as I said before, that is exactly what they already do. If it is the latter, and it is a game asset, then that game asset is going to be an order of magnitude (possibly several orders of magnitude) larger than a link, and to encode that into the block chain then explodes the amount of data and work that the block chain has to do. I'm not positive, but I suspect that will make it even less efficient to run than a normal server.

Still, I somehow don't believe this argument will sway you. So let's pretend that isn't a problem.

So you own an NFT for a cosmetic from a game. And unfortunately that game went offline due to poor business decisions. But you still own your NFT, and lucky for you, the entire digital good is encoded into the blockchain into an interchangeable format, and a new game is made that can use your proof of ownership to enable you to see your digital good in that new game. This game decodes the asset and sends it to my client so that I can see you wear your digital item. I take the asset and make an NFT on the same block chain and now I own a copy of that asset.

So what exactly is your NFT good for? Who is going to stop the copying?

Since copying a digital good is trivial, a digital good can only have value if the scarcity of the digital good can be controlled. To control the scarcity of the digital good requires the following:
1. An entity controls who gets the digital good
2. The same entity controls copying/transferring the digital good
3. The same entity runs the servers for using the digital good
4. The same entity runs the servers so that others can view you using the digital good

If anyone can create an NFT on the block chain, then anyone can copy anyone else's digital good so long as they can get access to the decoded digital good at some point. If only certain parties can create the NFTs on the block chain, then we are back to the same problem of what happens to the block chain when those parties go bankrupt.

Also, when the incentive for people to run hardware to power this decentralized blockchain disappears, the blockchain and any digital good you have stored in it also dies with the block chain.

I hope this explanation helped. If you are pro-NFT because you are already invested in some, I suggest you sell them ASAP.
8.
 
Re: Morning Metaverse
Jan 13, 2022, 15:21
8.
Re: Morning Metaverse Jan 13, 2022, 15:21
Jan 13, 2022, 15:21
 
theglaze wrote on Jan 13, 2022, 15:11:
Beamer wrote on Jan 13, 2022, 14:05:
theglaze wrote on Jan 13, 2022, 13:38:
...the open letter to Spotify does not request that Rogan’s show be taken off Spotify, nor does it demand that Spotify remove the Malone episode in particular. Rather, it is calling on Spotify to develop a comprehensive policy prohibiting misinformation
Toe the line, or get cancelled. Thanks, doc.

Uh, you realize the thing you quoted explicitly says it isn't asking for cancellation?
Stop trying to make Joe Rogan, a man that is making 9 figures to spread constant disinformation, a victim.
These 200 odd doctors are asking Spotify to implement a comprehensive system, where in the platform provider performs censorship duties, so that content creator 'lies' do not propagate. And only Spotify's 'truths' (or whichever powers influence it) are shared.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
So whose good intentions are paving the way, his or yours? I think your way sounds like a more direct route. Let's just continue to pretend that "facts" are not facts and continue to have faith that believing in something without evidence is just as good as evidence based belief systems.
11.
 
Re: Morning Metaverse
Jan 12, 2022, 15:46
11.
Re: Morning Metaverse Jan 12, 2022, 15:46
Jan 12, 2022, 15:46
 
The promise of NFTs is to move power and ownership in the metaverse away from big tech corporations and back to individuals as they exist within their communities. In today’s gaming landscape, players either spend money or substantial amounts of time on acquiring virtual goods that are only effectively rented from the game-maker, with no real-world value or possibility of existing outside the confines of that world. With the passage of time and as certain consoles or titles fall out of favor, all of this effort dissolves into nothing.

Blockchain gaming spells the end of this reality.

The author clearly explains why NFTs won't work in the first paragraph. Then in the second state that blockchains are going to fix it, but they never bother explaining how the blockchain is magically going to fix the problem they describe. The blockchain does not include the digital good, it is only proof of purchase. An NFT becomes worthless as soon as the server hosting the digital good goes offline.
32.
 
Re: SEGA Waffles on NFTs
Jan 9, 2022, 15:39
32.
Re: SEGA Waffles on NFTs Jan 9, 2022, 15:39
Jan 9, 2022, 15:39
 
jacobvandy wrote on Jan 9, 2022, 01:14:
But I'm more referring to how the meatspace and virtual economies are interconnected (imagine paying for groceries with the gold you collect in your favorite RPG) and all of your digital belongings carry with you seamlessly no matter where you go or what you're doing online. And if you have stuff you don't want or need, you just sell it, to anyone, anywhere, instantly. That cannot be done in traditional ways, where every publisher has their own authentication server and nothing is transferable outside of their own walled garden.

I think you might be misinformed if you believe that a blockchain is going to be a cure for the walled gardens.

Please explain to everyone why you believe a blockchain that handles transactions is going to fix the walled gardens so that assets from one game will work in another company's game? Please explain to everyone why it would only work if the transaction were handled by a blockchain as opposed to the traditional way transactions are done online?

There could be a future, where someone builds a 3rd party systems that enables games to integrate with it so that assets in this system could work with all the games that supported the system, and allow players to buy, sell and trade these assets. But nothing about what I just described requires a blockchain. What you are dreaming about does not require a block chain. What you are dreaming about would be BETTER (faster and cheaper) without a blockchain.

Decentralized is the only feature unique to the blockchain, and it doesn't really add value except for people interested in laundering money. Do you launder money or do you have a different reason to be hyping up blockchains?
6.
 
Re: Evening Metaverse
Jan 7, 2022, 15:51
6.
Re: Evening Metaverse Jan 7, 2022, 15:51
Jan 7, 2022, 15:51
 
Jonjonz wrote on Jan 7, 2022, 06:40:
Digital assets = tulips
I think you mean: "blockchain based coins = tulips"

Digital assets can still have value, naturally. But a blockchain based coin is worse than tulips, since it uses vastly more expensive technology to run when compared to traditional transaction services.
1.
 
Re: Quoteworthy
Jan 1, 2022, 15:08
1.
Re: Quoteworthy Jan 1, 2022, 15:08
Jan 1, 2022, 15:08
 
Yosuke Matsuda either knows he can achieve the blockchain "benefits" he totes without a blockchain by managing the transactions themselves (they run FFXIV, and so already perform millions of transactions between accounts every day) and is thus hoping to cash in on these types of pyramid schemes, or he is clueless. Is he looking to cash in on the latest scams? or is he ignorant?
11.
 
Re: Get The Vanishing of Ethan Carter for Free
Dec 19, 2021, 23:15
11.
Re: Get The Vanishing of Ethan Carter for Free Dec 19, 2021, 23:15
Dec 19, 2021, 23:15
 
I played this game originally in VR. It isn't clear to me that this version supports VR. If you use VR, then I highly recommend you play it in VR.
3.
 
Re: FINAL FANTASY XIV: Endwalker Strolls Out
Dec 9, 2021, 23:23
3.
Re: FINAL FANTASY XIV: Endwalker Strolls Out Dec 9, 2021, 23:23
Dec 9, 2021, 23:23
 
Finished Endwalker yesterday. I thought it was a fitting end to the story. If you have never played before you will be drowning in quality content for many months.
3.
 
Re: Morning Interviews
Nov 18, 2021, 18:13
3.
Re: Morning Interviews Nov 18, 2021, 18:13
Nov 18, 2021, 18:13
 
bigspender wrote on Nov 18, 2021, 17:43:
jdreyer wrote on Nov 18, 2021, 17:08:
For all you Epic haters out there, this is what it's all about.

But it just shows how much power Apple wields and is able to completely eliminate a game's existence on iOS. No platform company should have that power, right? Consumers should be free to install software. And developers should be free to create software, and the platform company should never stand in between them.

Imagine if MS had operated like Apple. No Steam, no GOG, no EGS.

I agree, and glad MS aren't a closed platform, but it's Apple's platform, and they should have full control over of how they want to run things (laws permitting). If they want to stifle innovation, then they shouldn't get sued for it, especially given that it's all stated upfront in their contract. (P.S. I hate apple products, style of function, style of substance is not my bag)
I'm not sure I follow. What is stated upfront in their contract? And who is the recipient of the contract that you are talking about?

If you are referring to the TOS for getting an app in their app store, then I'm pretty sure the people buying things never get made aware of the details of the contracts. Nor will the people buying things know that Apple prevents apps from disclosing A) how much Apple is taxing their app purchase, and B) how Apple gags the companies from disclosing information to the customer that would benefit the customer.

Knowing this... you still want to defend Apple? Are you stock holder?
11.
 
Re: Evening Legal Briefs
Nov 12, 2021, 18:58
11.
Re: Evening Legal Briefs Nov 12, 2021, 18:58
Nov 12, 2021, 18:58
 
jdreyer wrote on Nov 12, 2021, 15:20:
Mr. Tact wrote on Nov 12, 2021, 10:13:
I have to admit I am conflicted on this Huawei issue. I certainly believe concerns over network snooping COULD be valid. I believe the Chinese government wouldn't hesitate to exert their control and have those type of measures implemented if they felt it would serve them well. However, those beliefs alone aren't sufficient to initiate the ban. Basically, I think it is reasonable to be concerned, but it isn't clear to me if those concerns are sufficient to support the ban on the evidence I am currently aware of. Perhaps, there is evidence which supports it?
I'm sure this was accidental.
For two hours, a large chunk of European mobile traffic was rerouted through China. It was China Telecom, again. The same ISP accused last year of "hijacking the vital internet backbone of western countries."
Thanks for sharing. Very interesting indeed.

"While one may argue such attacks can always be explained by normal' BGP behavior, these, in particular, suggest malicious intent, precisely because of their unusual transit characteristics -namely the lengthened routes and the abnormal durations."

I wish they could be more specific about what was abnormal about the durations so I could judge the evidence for myself. Let's see what we find in their paper.

Oh, well, if China already banned our hardware, then nevermind. Free trade is already off the table. I no longer have a problem with this ban. smh
2.
 
Re: Evening Legal Briefs
Nov 11, 2021, 21:01
2.
Re: Evening Legal Briefs Nov 11, 2021, 21:01
Nov 11, 2021, 21:01
 
Zenimax still being Zenimax. Microsoft, tell them to stop.
1.
 
Re: Evening Legal Briefs
Nov 11, 2021, 20:25
1.
Re: Evening Legal Briefs Nov 11, 2021, 20:25
Nov 11, 2021, 20:25
 
Huawei and ZTE ban appears to be due to nothing but "connected to government", with zero evidence that there is anything wrong with the tech. This is the same trade war that Trump started. Not using a less secure tech makes sense if it is less secure, but in this case the "less secure" thing about it appears to be political affiliation in nature only.

Would love to be wrong and for there to be a legitimate reason to ban this stuff other than "made in china" being the reason. But if there was a legitimate reason found, that news would be so sensational I'm pretty sure it would not escape the reporting, so this pretty much is just the US political leaders doing trade war things with China again.

EDIT:
Turns out. Our hardware is already banned in China.

This comment was edited on Nov 12, 2021, 19:00.
20.
 
Re: Activision Apologizes; Removes Quran from Call of Duty: Vanguard
Nov 11, 2021, 15:14
20.
Re: Activision Apologizes; Removes Quran from Call of Duty: Vanguard Nov 11, 2021, 15:14
Nov 11, 2021, 15:14
 
Wow, lots of folks here upset that Activision fixed a mistake. I'm a little surprised by the toxicity honestly. I'm more surprised by the forums reactions than I am surprised by Activision's apology.

I find myself wondering, how did the book get into the game. I don't think it can happen by accident. Someone somewhere thought, "hey, let's take that religion's holy book and make it into a prop", and that got approved and put into the game. Does anyone honestly believe that that was done with pure innocence in mind? Does anyone believe that a Muslim artist convinced their manager to allow them to put it in? I suspect it was done for the "lulz" and that the individuals who thought it was funny didn't think it through. So now we have folks here defending this behavior, acting like it is more of a slight against them for removing their lulz than it is a slight against Muslims. Guess the company would rather have Muslim players play their game than have players like you in their community.

That said, I fully support anyone who is so upset about this news to never play the game. The community will be better for it.

I can't believe how triggered people get when they feel their "right to hate" is being infringed upon. smh

8.
 
Re: Court Rejects Apple's App Store Argument
Nov 10, 2021, 20:23
8.
Re: Court Rejects Apple's App Store Argument Nov 10, 2021, 20:23
Nov 10, 2021, 20:23
 
The Half Elf wrote on Nov 10, 2021, 19:58:
There is a reason I went to an Iphone, and one of those reasons is because of the walled garden of their app store. How long until the 3rd party store links start digging into my privacy? How many more phone calls or emails am I gonna get about my car's warranty etc?
This phenomenon that you mention is not limited to smart phones. All of those privacy leaks are likely not happening because of your smart phone and what apps you have installed. Robocalls, and spam will still hit grandma on her AOL dialup.

BTW, if you only want to install things from Apple's app store, you can still do that. Giving other people more options does not limit your freedom in this regard. I could be wrong though... is the mere presence too much of a temptation for you, and what you really meant to say was "How long until I can't hold back and I start installing 3rd party software."? I don't think that is the case though; you don't need Apple to save you from yourself, right?
3.
 
Re: Steam Deck Delayed
Nov 10, 2021, 20:05
3.
Re: Steam Deck Delayed Nov 10, 2021, 20:05
Nov 10, 2021, 20:05
 
Riahderymnmaddog wrote on Nov 10, 2021, 19:50:
We never had supply shortages when TRUMP was in office. Thanks Brandon!
The supply shortages started with the Trump tariffs. But these tariffs are still in effect, and for that, we can absolutely say: F Biden. These tariffs were short sighted then and still are to this day.

Free trade is good folks. F these tariffs.

(p.s. I think you confused "Let's go Brandon!" with "Thanks Obama". What does older Biff say to younger Biff when he is told to make like a tree?)
22.
 
Re: Evening Mobilization
Nov 10, 2021, 18:51
22.
Re: Evening Mobilization Nov 10, 2021, 18:51
Nov 10, 2021, 18:51
 
The Flying Penguin wrote on Nov 10, 2021, 16:23:
Apps in either store can, and have been compromised. It's just a lot worse on Android.
Why do you believe that it is worse on Android? The more reading I do on this topic, the more I'm being persuaded that it is actually worse on Apple. So can you share what you've been reading so that I can read it too?
100 Comments. 5 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  5  ] Older