Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

The concept of "collecting royalties" requires a legal infrastructure backed by a state's monopoly on force. Nothing about web3, as I understand it, will require someone to pay me in money that I can spend. People can still copy and redistribute my content (ie this post) and profit from it in various ways. The concept of a blockchain does nothing to prevent this.



But those platforms that let you use the scarce digital assets will. OT allow you to pull unlicensed copies from anywhere but from known endpoints, thus your digital copies are useless as none point to them. Similar to how you hosting www.google.com on your web server doesn't get any of the real Google traffic as none point to you.


So if the platform is doing all the heavy lifting, why do you need the blockchain again? i.e. what is the difference between this and YouTube? Blockchain is superfluous to this scheme


Blockchain is the immutable ledger, a place where if someone writes something down, it is guaranteed to not change, the immutable part. The difference between Blockchain/crypto/bitcoin and YouTube, is that the latter puts no guarantees about the content of a link, we trust Google.

If you go further, the content doesn't need to be a simple url, it could be data of any type. People get stuck on "who needs to pay for url, when I can copy the contents freely", but you're not buying simple url, you're buying a multidimensional point in the current manifestation of what we think as web3/metaverse. This point is the intersection of your private key, Blockchain used and the content(url). This is valuable because none can claim the same point, and it is guaranteed not to change.


>multidimensional point in the current manifestation of what we think as web3/metaverse

But this is useless. The video is available with or without the blockchain. If you have DRM on the video, then you don't even need the blockchain. The blockchain can't actually do anything outside itself, and if you are trusting Metaverse.inc to enforce ownership, why can't you trust them to store it too?


The whole point is that metaverse.inc is not owned by Zuckerberg or Google, but requires consensus to be changed.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: