Hacker News Reader

Comment by 127 | Hacker News Reader

Why can't NFTs be done without a blockchain? Please explain. Just add multiple hash, public/private-key cryptography, downsample discrete cosine transform, etc. You can just create a file format and a protocol. Why do you need to dump tons of CO2 into the atmosphere just for this purpose?

View on HN

Preface: I'm not endorsing NFTs nor do I know much about them and personally I would never buy one.

> Why can't NFTs be done without a blockchain?

In the physical world it is rather involved to check wether eg. a painting is the original one and not a copy. A simple way to define original is that it came first, before any of its copies. In the digital world the blockchain acts as the canonical timeline. You or anyone else can always tell what came first.

> Why do you need to dump tons of CO2 into the atmosphere just for this purpose?

In short we don't. The author of the article conflates blockchains and PoW:

- There are blockchains that don't rely on PoW

- The ones that are currently PoW might not be PoW in the future

- The ones that stay PoW might solely use non-CO2 producing methods in the future

> The ones that stay PoW might solely use non-CO2 producing methods in the future

What does this even mean? How can a Blockchain possibly enforce that your electricity used in mining is coming from a carbon neural source?

Blockchains can't and won't enforce it. They will be forced to rely CO2-neutral renewables when fossil fuels are taxed to oblivion and/or outlawed. This also points to the absurdity of blaming energy usage of things rather than attacking the root of the issue.

PoW can't be non-CO2 producing even if solar powered. You still have to contend with e-waste and even the poop of the janitor in your calculations.

Everything is life uses energy. We can only minimise the harmful effects of energy production, not (yet?) eliminate it. I first and foremost want global warming to slow/stop and imho for that we need a global restriction and/or ban on harmful ways of energy production. I can't see any other way. Everything else is either a distraction or ideologically driven, eg. "crypto wastes energy" really means "I think crypto is useless hence is deserves no energy". Once everything is forced to run on renewable energy sources then we will be in a much better position regardless of crypto.

You’re trying to apply common sense to mania and speculation

In your example, the money flowing into the market would need to come from regular people rather than crypto speculators, which would be much less lucrative.

You'd want some system of verification and notarization by parties involved. Analogous to real world where art is inspected, verified, and notarized. If you own the mona lisa you'd wanna be damn sure you have the real thing. Kinda like a certificate authority.

Blockchain like structures use consensus to uniqueness. A protocol that attempts to replicate this meets the loose definition of blockchain.

As the other commenter explained, concensus doesn't require CO2, but most of these have been recent developments.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com