Technology

59342 readers

5221 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

839

Remember when NFTs sold for millions of dollars? 95% of the digital collectibles are now probably worthless. (markets.businessinsider.com)

submitted 1 year ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

278 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Remember when NFTs sold for millions of dollars? 95% of the digital collectibles are now probably worthless.::NFTs had a huge bull run two years ago, with billions of dollars per month in trading volume, but now most have crashed to zero, a study found.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Now you’d only need an incentive for someone to develop something better and way more complex than Steam without making anything close to the same profit from it.

Uh, yeah. GameStop is making it, from what I hear. They can't keep selling old physical copies forever and the new board knows it. They're already partnered with some blockchain firms to build it. Means + motive on a platter.

As to why a developer would go for it? This kind of token can be sold on any such marketplace, but can have a royalty baked in so that no matter who sells it or where, they get a perpetual revenue stream. I usually hate rent-seeking behavior, but in the case of software you need a way to pay for continued support, and this solves it.

[–] emberwit@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You're adding another person to the equation (the player that sells their game) and everyone is supposed to profit? Someone will make a loss compared to the status quo for this to work out and it's never the marketplace operator.

[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

When we buy a game, there is already an intermediary. The GoG, Steam, Itch, whatever. This would be the same number of middlemen. The unique selling point would actually be disintermediation, since buyers would be able to resell the game and creators would be cut into the 'used game' market, giving them an incentive to maintain its quality long-term. There are other useful angles as well, but that's the one I like best.