I can't even send $1000 to the correct address without thinking I somehow messed it up and lost $1000. Will these NFTs be on Ethereum? There are airdrops on ETH that can trick people into giving an attacker control over the wallet. There are so many stumbling blocks in play. It's not going to be pretty. I highly doubt it's going to work within a legacy system. It's going to end up being a weird novelty that doesn't work very well and get's forced for a long time. Fake it till you make it.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Ok, I think we are talking about two different things here. Apparently you are talking about existing chains that support NFTs - of course legacy system can't use them. I'm talking about NFTs as a concept, that is already present in legacy system, just not in a blockchain-NFT form. There are a lot of benefits in migrating legacy property rights from paper and proprietary (bank/broker) electronic forms into NFTs on public open source blockchain. As long as you don't get too far with such transition. Your concerns about the transactions being "too easy", which might make phishing and theft safer for the perpetrators, therefore more profitable and frequent, are not without merit. That's why I don't think transition of property rights from paper to blockchain would change much in terms of what steps you need to take to make a transaction. I don't know how it looks in other countries, but when I was buying my flat, I met with the seller at the notary where we signed the contract, the official checked documents and relaid them to the court where new entry in real-estate register was added. In the process there were many opportunities for competing paper trails to emerge. If the same process was encoded on blockchain, everything could be done in couple of minutes, with less chance for fraud or mistakes. But you'd still need the notary to certify with his signature that the seller was the one that was on record as an owner and not just the person that has the valid key, that you are not "under influence" or threatened etc. The fraud would still be happening, but there would be a lot more steps to take to make it happen with "success".
For simpler property rights, like stocks, moving to blockchain would most likely be smooth, since trading already has no extra steps (unless you are buying amounts that require you to disclose your holdings - that could be automatic). There would still be accounts and brokers to co-sign your trades for the sake of KYC, differentiation of "licensed investors" from common folk, reporting and taxation, but some things like naked shorts would stop being just illegal and would become impossible, which is a plus. I'm not sure what kind of technical solutions would be applied to such blockchain, because it needs to be public to ensure immutability, with proper keys you need to be able to see your own trades, but it should not reveal all trades (BitShares model is too open).
One thing is for sure. In order for the law to recognize property rights encoded as NFTs on blockchain, the legislators need to have full control over its rules, since setting the rules is their job. That's why it would not be any of existing blockchains (but it might be a clone of one if its mechanisms fit the purpose). Only official entities would be block producers, but to ensure transparency and immutability (and therefore increase legitimacy in the eyes of the public) there should be no limit on validators of existing blocks.
In order for a technology to take over it has to be ten times better than the incumbent system.
It's very obvious that crypto will be that to money.
Not so obvious that NFTs will be that to contracts.
In the end it will probably just take a bit longer to catch on.
I imagine the world will look completely different by the time it does.