Meet Larry, a very good guy, close to joining McKay’s house, and possibly the subject of one of the first cat tweets to live forever on the Ethereum blog chain.
Larry’s blockchain adventure is not his own fault (quite the opposite, actually). This weekend we finalized arrangements to adopt Larry, and I was so excited that I tweeted some of his provided with refuge pictures; Larry is so photogenic and has 1,500 likes. It also caught the attention of Twitter user @FatRaccoon, who offered to buy the rights to my tweet for $ 50 at the cryptocurrency of Etherium, ether, through a process that I am still not completely clear about, but that it consists of a unique cryptocurrency technology called non-fungible token (NFT).
The blockchain is a system for creating immutable databases through a distributed cryptographic process: competing computer networks solve complex mathematical problems so that precise records are generated that cannot be changed retroactively. Theoretically it has many uses, but it is deployed primarily to convert raw computing power into semi-imaginary internet money (like bitcoin and ether) treasured by speculators who expect to get unimaginably rich with the same degree of no effort as some Wall Street type. .
These cryptocurrencies are expendable, that is, they are indistinguishable from each other: one bitcoin can be exchanged for another identical bitcoin. NFTs are small bits of data that are encoded in a blockchain (generally Ethereum) look like a unit of cryptocurrency, but are totally unique. They can still be changed, making them look like a signed baseball card.
G / O Media may receive a commission
In theory, almost anything digital can be packaged and sold as NFT: comments on this article, random photos of my future cat posted on Twitter, NBA game clips, or works of art. It is this last use that has attracted the most attention lately. Several artists have made millions lately by selling NFT digital works at surprisingly high prices; buyers get the credit card encoded in a blockchain instead of a physical copy of the art, which may not exist (depending on the conditions of sale, reproduction rights and copyrights that would allow them to print a real copy).
This does not prevent additional copies of the artwork sold from circulating everywhere in .jpg or .gif format or anything else. What the buyer he is really getting it it is less tangible: rights to brag, influence, a collector’s item, or simply an ingenious new form of money laundering. And because of the meteoric rise of cryptocurrencies, just attaching words like “witness” or “blockchain” or “working proof” to random shit can cause their value to skyrocket.
Whether you are trading cryptocurrencies or with NFT, the transaction must be permanently encrypted in the blockchain Generally by a process called proof of work, the mathematical problems being mentioned above. As the blockchain grows over time, so does the overall level of work that needs to be done to keep it running, which translates directly into more physical processors sucking in local juice. (often fossil fuel) power plant. This essentially means that by dealing with NFT, you are encouraging the planet to bake.
This brings us back to Larry, or rather, to the tweet that introduces him. @FatRaccoon said he offered to buy my post, via a Twitter service on NFT called Percent values, as a joke.
“I feel like I have a part of the silly world we live in now and it’s fun,” @FatRaccoon wrote on Twitter DM. “Buying tweets on the blog chain seems to be online. Plus, cute cat. “
“I hope this whole system collapses in a week or makes 5 people billionaires immediately,” they added.
The legality of any of this is completely blurred to me. You can sell the “property” of a tweet, which simply thanks to the post gave Twitter one worldwide license, not exclusive, without copyright use it? What does it mean if, as in my case, it contains copyrighted material potentially belonging to another? What happens if I delete the tweet? Likewise, the economics of all this are absurd. (@FatRaccoon said that in the middle of a conversation with us, they received a scam phone call apparently related to registration to get a cryptocurrency wallet).
The most frequently asked questions on the Cent website are not exactly reassuring about the stability of all this:
The tweet will continue to be posted on Twitter. What you are buying is a digital tweet certificate, unique because it has been signed and verified by the creator … Owning any digital content can be a financial investment, have sentimental value and create a relationship between collector and creator. Like an autograph on a baseball card, NFT itself is the creator’s autograph on content, making it scarce, unique, and valuable.
NFTs make digital content unique – they will be the only person who can claim ownership of an NFT they own. This means that you will have control over the NFT, such as the ability to resell or distribute it, and will appreciate or depreciate its value like any other resource.
But there is another problem. Remember that from the job test? Well, the bigger the NFT sale, the more work needs to be done to encode it in the blockchain and the more “work” has to be put into future transactions in the blockchain. For example, according to digital artist Memo Atken’s CryptoArt.wtf crawler, who tries (approximately) approximate the general carbon footprint of the NFTs, which recorded the recent sale by artist Grimes of 303 editions of a short piece of video called Earth for $ 7,500 in cryptocurrency it cost a total of 122,416 kWh of electricity. This equates to the average total electricity consumption of a European Union resident over 34 years (presumably one who does not trade in NFT), or with an extrapolation of 79 tons of carbon dioxide added to the atmosphere of our slow dying planet. Suffice it to say that environmentalists are not fans.
According to CryptoArt.wtf, Larry’s transaction used the equivalent of about 11 kilowatt-hours. This equates to the average electricity consumption of a European Union resident for an entire day, or approximately 34 kilometers of driving with a gas-powered vehicle, a month of using laptops, or a week and a half of using desktop computers. . My last electricity bill for my residence (a two-story unit with two occupants) was 628 kWh, or 22 kWh per day, which is essentially added an additional 50% to my electricity use Monday.
These figures do not count, as CryptoArt.wtf pointed out, the energy cost of “producing or storing works, or even web hosting.” Nor do they include energy costs resell the NFT, and they don’t include the infinitesimal amount I just contributed to make the blockchain absorb even more juice in the future, which I guess is incalculable.
Defenders they have argued that NFTs and blockchains in general comprise a very small amount of global fuel consumption worldwide and that it is greener to sell a dollar-equivalent amount of cheaper-produced goods, such as shirts and prints. The first defense is how to insist coal rolling it’s okay compared to dang power plants, a lazy slacker that doesn’t address the fact that NFTs still have an effect on the weather. In the second scenario, the highest carbon footprint is due to the fact that people actually had hundreds of T-shirts, i.e. objects that exist in reality.
I raised the issue of waste with @FatRaccoon, who told me, “I work in technology and I’ve been convinced for years that everything was a house of cards about to fall apart, but it doesn’t seem like it will anytime soon, so “I could also get into the dam as long as I can. If I become a rich guy, I promise I’ll give 50% of my money to the environment.”
I asked @FatRaccoon if they agreed with my assessment which seems to be the “result of some absolutely colossal process of stupidity.”
“What keeps me getting it is that it seems to do a lot of work for the end result of saying, Hey, this jpeg is now a jpeg,” they replied. “It just works because all the people who love this shit are so invested in it that they will never let it be useless. Any rational financial system would have shut down Bitcoin, but our government likes it eh, whatever it is, and now it’s its chaos, the game without rules. ”
“We cut down 10 trees so you can own this LeBron gif by making a sick wrapper,” FatRaccoon concluded. “If you ever sell it, we’ll get some money and cut down several more trees.”
I apologize to Larry in advance for mixing him up in all of this. However, if anyone feels the need to buy any of my tweets, I highly recommend it pack of three for one.