it is non-fungible

The fact that they tacked this onto one of their least popular games makes me think they’re checking off a box on a list of shareholder demands without having much real interest in using NFTs for anything seriously. Given the way the word “blockchain” gives investors erections at the moment, Ubi was no doubt…

I like the additional detail of the Ubisoft execs dressed like Mormon missionaries

Blockchain technology is not innovative. “We can make it so that your health care info is tokenized and accessible by you.” So, basically what I can access using my provider’s mobile app. “We can make it so you have proof of ownership of an apartment room.” So, a ledger and contract. “You actually can own a piece of…

Yeah but they could literally do security and unique items based on the solution without NFTs.

NFTs solve nothing.

It excites share holders to see a buzzword, that they themselves may or may not understand, being attached to products.

Because “Blockchain” makes shareholders happy which keeps stocks up which is really the only thing that matters

Multiple times. Police are useless here unless it’s the rich neighborhoods.

This GTA remastered trilogy seem hellbent on becoming a prime example of how many ways to fuck up a re-release.

In fairness, I got bourbon body wash for a gift a year or so ago, and it’s a nice smell.

The peorple need your help!

I understand why this happened considering the existing items in the game, but it’s still extremely funny to me that the recipe is just “dump some weeds on it.” Exactly what the sea bass deserves.

This is easily one of the very best launch titles for any system ever.

Rowling’s behavior actually is what completely pushed me away from this app, and led to me consciously deciding to not get my family playing as well (as they have for Pokemon Go). I doubt I’m alone.

Large companies are no longer interested in making merely SOME of The Money (TM), they are exclusively interested in making ALL of The Money (TM).

Anything that doesn’t accomplish that singular goal is at risk of termination.  Steady, mild success is seen essentially as failure.

It isn’t a completely accurate description though - they are actually environmentally destroying LINKS to JPGs. Like, you don’t even get the JPG. You get a receipt that says “I own a JPG in this spot” and then the server goes down.

Thank you for referring to NFTs as “environment-destroying JPEGs”. 

This project was just so clearly a scam from the outset that I’m baffled by the fact that the creators involved are big names who really, really are in a position to know better. Honestly, the pitch itself can be boiled down to “AO3 except we get to monetize your work if it gets too popular and also you have to pay us…

when you buy an NFT you don’t own a special copy of anything. the NFT is just a file that links to a website. you don’t own that URL or even the content of the page. the person who originally created it still owns the rights to whatever is there. you just own that unique file that links to that page. this is why it’s…