Bitcoin crash coming (3 Viewers)

[HaRDHouSeiNC]

It does not solve the problem of the volatility. Since the money is just sitting there, but I needed to do something with it, I cashed it out. I guess I could buy it back (pretty great price right now, btw) but since I don't need to USE crypto at the moment, it would just be an investment. Obviously, I know fuckall about this stuff.

I am for crypto. Shit like this makes me less "for crypto". You are turning the choir away from the flock.

uuummmmm
hes literally explaining crypto safety so IDK brah

 

[Highli99]

Ok, I am sure you are right...everybody is always telling me something that I need for this.


wat?

wat wat?

If you leave your crypto on an exchange like coinbase, they have custody of your keys, which means physical possession of the token. The whole point of crypto is to take the intermediaries out of the equation. So you think it's your crypto until the exchange fails (see FTX) and you can't access the tokens you thought were yours.

A simple a hardware wallet like my nano plus will store the private keys of my tokens in a way so secure that even the government can confiscate them unless I provide the password. But I can still send tokens wherever I want in a few seconds. It's easy to move tokens from coinbase to a cold wallet. Takes seconds actually. I even shower some boomers I work with how to do it.

The coolest part is that even if your wallet gets stolen or destroyed you can restore a new one in a few minutes as long as you keep your password keys. Guard those with great care.

Ledger Nano S Plus Crypto Hardware Wallet (Matte-Black) - Safeguard Your Crypto, NFTs and Tokens https://a.co/d/bf0BOZ8

 

[ekricket]

This is a not a short read, but it's very informative and helps explain the phenoninom regardless of your personal opinions about crypto.

https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2022-the-crypto-story/

Any of us who have complained about PayPal fees, getting banned for using the platform for poker, or have noticed how little their savings account pays compared to how much their credit card charges should recognize the potential of block chain to uniquely solve those problems.

When I buy crypto, which is less than 1% of my net worth, I am buying a belief that block chain technology is the future. My confidence in that is very high, even though my confidence in any particular token is much lower.

Block chain is a very disruptive technology that aims at our biggest financial institutions. Those institutions will not sit by quietly while their business models are disrupted. They will fight, softly at first, then with everything they have. Lobbiest will get PAID. As the fight intensifies their rhetoric will become more emotional and hyperbolic. They will eventually go down screaming.

One thing of interest from that article

“ But many of the basic ideas of a blockchain—a ledger of every transaction that’s demonstrably shared by every computer on the network—can be implemented privately. If you get together with 11 of your friends and agree that the 12 of you will do transactions with one another, keep a ledger, verify all the transactions, and use cryptographic hash functions to make sure the ledger isn’t changed, then you can just do that. If you all trust each other and don’t let anyone else join the network—or if you let only people you trust join the network—then you don’t have to worry about malicious miners taking over your network. It’s just you and your friends.

This has advantages for security, particularly for explaining security to bank regulators. You also don’t have to make the blockchain public if you don’t want to, and there are efficiency advantages. It’s only 12 of you confirming transactions, so you can do it faster. Presumably you’re doing this for a reason—you want the ability to do these transactions with each other—so you don’t have to get paid for confirming transactions. You don’t need mining or staking: Those are ways for public blockchains to reach a consensus among people who have to prove they have a commitment to the system. The 12 of you all know one another and built the system, so your consensus is good enough without any further proof. You can just vote on it.”

So basically we could create Chipcoin or pcfcoin and just manage it ourselves. Pay for our chip purchases and sales using this internal coin.

 

[Highli99]

One thing of interest from that article

“ But many of the basic ideas of a blockchain—a ledger of every transaction that’s demonstrably shared by every computer on the network—can be implemented privately. If you get together with 11 of your friends and agree that the 12 of you will do transactions with one another, keep a ledger, verify all the transactions, and use cryptographic hash functions to make sure the ledger isn’t changed, then you can just do that. If you all trust each other and don’t let anyone else join the network—or if you let only people you trust join the network—then you don’t have to worry about malicious miners taking over your network. It’s just you and your friends.

This has advantages for security, particularly for explaining security to bank regulators. You also don’t have to make the blockchain public if you don’t want to, and there are efficiency advantages. It’s only 12 of you confirming transactions, so you can do it faster. Presumably you’re doing this for a reason—you want the ability to do these transactions with each other—so you don’t have to get paid for confirming transactions. You don’t need mining or staking: Those are ways for public blockchains to reach a consensus among people who have to prove they have a commitment to the system. The 12 of you all know one another and built the system, so your consensus is good enough without any further proof. You can just vote on it.”

So basically we could create Chipcoin or pcfcoin and just manage it ourselves. Pay for our chip purchases and sales using this internal coin.

Exactly!

 

[ekricket]

Exactly!

Ok let’s do it. Call them Gaming Tokens.

 

[Johnblue]

This is a not a short read, but it's very informative and helps explain the phenoninom regardless of your personal opinions about crypto.

https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2022-the-crypto-story/

Any of us who have complained about PayPal fees, getting banned for using the platform for poker, or have noticed how little their savings account pays compared to how much their credit card charges should recognize the potential of block chain to uniquely solve those problems.

When I buy crypto, which is less than 1% of my net worth, I am buying a belief that block chain technology is the future. My confidence in that is very high, even though my confidence in any particular token is much lower.

Block chain is a very disruptive technology that aims at our biggest financial institutions. Those institutions will not sit by quietly while their business models are disrupted. They will fight, softly at first, then with everything they have. Lobbiest will get PAID. As the fight intensifies their rhetoric will become more emotional and hyperbolic. They will eventually go down screaming.

Bitcoin is the discovery of the wheel. (Blockchain)
“Cryptos” are different brands of mag wheels.

Bitcoin is not going anywhere. The price will go up and down, over the next decades, but it will settle in the millions of USD per coin eventually and then it will be less volatile.

 

[JustDave]

One day, nation-states, huge corporations, banks will do final settlements in bitcoin. This is the best use case for bitcoin. And I think this is where it’s going.

some kind of cryptocurrency, MAYBE. BTC, No. BTC is an AWFUL cryptocurrency.

 

[Johnblue]

some kind of cryptocurrency, MAYBE. BTC, No. BTC is an AWFUL cryptocurrency.

Why?

please shill your shitcoin now.

 

[DMack]

Sadly I’d say a few here probably celebrated that and like that ability to punish their opponents

Absolutely no doubt. They like to determine who pays their “fair share” and at what price. They virtue signal to anyone on their side while doing whatever they can to keep any extra penny from being taxed in their accounts. But their flags wave extra high when their group comes out to stroke each other’s backs. That is the real fraud, not crypto.

 

[DrStrange]

There are ~12,000 different crypto coins currently in play. With few exceptions, they all share the purported benefits of crypto - block chain verification, no third party to transactions, no government oversite/regulation, etc. Why isn't one version of crypto just as good as the others? There can't be that many different methods to implement, can there?

It seems obvious we aren't going to see wide-spread adoption of all 12,000 coins in commerce. It would be pretty difficult if even only a hundred coins were commonly in commercial use. Getting paid in one coin, shop for groceries in a second, pay your bar tab in a third . . . well, you get the idea. God help the poor merchants dealing with a hundred different coins every day. Even this dystopian future presumes than 99% of coins disappear leaving only the cream of the crop

Many people feel that essentially all of the coins are junk, except for a favored one or two. How does the world decide which coin(s) to adopt and what happens to the holders of the losing tokens? < hint, they lose their money >

Let's try to agree that being "a good investment' does not make a coin into a "practical substitute for modern currencies" It could work that way or not.

Similarly, being a "bad investment" doesn't mean a coin can't emerge as a successor to the US Dollar.

I am in the camp of crypto is a bad investment and will never be adopted as a useful successor to modern currencies. Yet crypto will still be useful for a wide array of criminal activity ranging from tax evasion to murder for hire to slavery to prostitution to extortion to terrorism. Somehow a few of the coins will remain viable if for no other reason than to help facilitate the underworld of crime. I. E. not everyone is going to bust.

I hope early adopters have been taking profits. Someone who has made many times their money shouldn't "let it ride" in full. Think more of someone who has major money in play rather than someone playing cheeseburger scale speculation. It seems widely agreed 99+% of the coins are going bust after all.

 

[Highli99]

There are ~12,000 different crypto coins currently in play. With few exceptions, they all share the purported benefits of crypto - block chain verification, no third party to transactions, no government oversite/regulation, etc. Why isn't one version of crypto just as good as the others? There can't be that many different methods to implement, can there?

It seems obvious we aren't going to see wide-spread adoption of all 12,000 coins in commerce. It would be pretty difficult if even only a hundred coins were commonly in commercial use. Getting paid in one coin, shop for groceries in a second, pay your bar tab in a third . . . well, you get the idea. God help the poor merchants dealing with a hundred different coins every day. Even this dystopian future presumes than 99% of coins disappear leaving only the cream of the crop

Many people feel that essentially all of the coins are junk, except for a favored one or two. How does the world decide which coin(s) to adopt and what happens to the holders of the losing tokens? < hint, they lose their money >

Let's try to agree that being "a good investment' does not make a coin into a "practical substitute for modern currencies" It could work that way or not.

Similarly, being a "bad investment" doesn't mean a coin can't emerge as a successor to the US Dollar.

I am in the camp of crypto is a bad investment and will never be adopted as a useful successor to modern currencies. Yet crypto will still be useful for a wide array of criminal activity ranging from tax evasion to murder for hire to slavery to prostitution to extortion to terrorism. Somehow a few of the coins will remain viable if for no other reason than to help facilitate the underworld of crime. I. E. not everyone is going to bust.

I hope early adopters have been taking profits. Someone who has made many times their money shouldn't "let it ride" in full. Think more of someone who has major money in play rather than someone playing cheeseburger scale speculation. It seems widely agreed 99+% of the coins are going bust after all.

I agree with most of the above but also think the notion that coins are only useful for illicit activity is missing a huge part of the potential.

Funny that we are discussing this topic on a forum dedicated to clay/plastic discs that are used as a substitute for money in games of skill and chance.

Chips are analog crypto lol.

 

[Lemonzest]

There are ~12,000 different crypto coins currently in play.

I think everyone agrees that the vast majority of projects are going to zero. There are probably millions of websites that are ghost towns that no ones visits. However, the top 10 or so websites everyone uses and changed society.

even this dystopian future presumes than 99% of coins disappear leaving only the cream of the crop

The process of iterating is trial and error. Buying random tokens now is akin to buying stock in a small tech startup in silicon valley. Most tech startups fail (90%?) but some of them become Apple and Amazon.

Investing in crypto is a lot like playing poker. There are people that made millions and others that lost their shirts. Make no mistake investing in crypto is a game. Some people are good at it and some people are playing in a sandbox they don't understand. There is significant information asymmetry with crypto insiders versus plebs.

Crypto is already adopted as a useful successor to modern currencies. This isn't something to look into the future and ponder. It is already happening and has been used successfully for some time.

I have to push back on the whole argument of crypto being used primarily for criminal activity. My guess is the vast majority of criminal activity is still done with cash.

 

[Highli99]

I think everyone agrees that the vast majority of projects are going to zero. There are probably millions of websites that are ghost towns that no ones visits. However, the top 10 or so websites everyone uses and changed society.


The process of iterating is trial and error. Buying random tokens now is akin to buying stock in a small tech startup in silicon valley. Most tech startups fail (90%?) but some of them become Apple and Amazon.

Investing in crypto is a lot like playing poker. There are people that made millions and others that lost their shirts. Make no mistake investing in crypto is a game. Some people are good at it and some people are playing in a sandbox they don't understand. There is significant information asymmetry with crypto insiders versus plebs.

Crypto is already adopted as a useful successor to modern currencies. This isn't something to look into the future and ponder. It is already happening and has been used successfully for some time.

I have to push back on the whole argument of crypto being used primarily for criminal activity. My guess is the vast majority of criminal activity is still done with cash.

I bet the number of prostitutes and drug dealers that accept pay pal and venmo exceeds those that accept crypto by millions.

 

[Darson]

There are ~12,000 different crypto coins currently in play. With few exceptions, they all share the purported benefits of crypto - block chain verification, no third party to transactions, no government oversite/regulation, etc. Why isn't one version of crypto just as good as the others? There can't be that many different methods to implement, can there?

It seems obvious we aren't going to see wide-spread adoption of all 12,000 coins in commerce. It would be pretty difficult if even only a hundred coins were commonly in commercial use. Getting paid in one coin, shop for groceries in a second, pay your bar tab in a third . . . well, you get the idea. God help the poor merchants dealing with a hundred different coins every day. Even this dystopian future presumes than 99% of coins disappear leaving only the cream of the crop

Many people feel that essentially all of the coins are junk, except for a favored one or two. How does the world decide which coin(s) to adopt and what happens to the holders of the losing tokens? < hint, they lose their money >

Let's try to agree that being "a good investment' does not make a coin into a "practical substitute for modern currencies" It could work that way or not.

Similarly, being a "bad investment" doesn't mean a coin can't emerge as a successor to the US Dollar.

I am in the camp of crypto is a bad investment and will never be adopted as a useful successor to modern currencies. Yet crypto will still be useful for a wide array of criminal activity ranging from tax evasion to murder for hire to slavery to prostitution to extortion to terrorism. Somehow a few of the coins will remain viable if for no other reason than to help facilitate the underworld of crime. I. E. not everyone is going to bust.

I hope early adopters have been taking profits. Someone who has made many times their money shouldn't "let it ride" in full. Think more of someone who has major money in play rather than someone playing cheeseburger scale speculation. It seems widely agreed 99+% of the coins are going bust after all.

Love this post!

Crypto is still nascent - yes there is some serious money involved now but it's no where near the adoption required for it to be mainstream. Any speculation now is just speculation looking towards the future - whatever that may look like. And I don't think anyone really knows.

I will add this as a thought - where would the internet be without porn? Or downloading MP3s (music theft)? The path to mass adoption may be through a less than savory segment of the economy but it still lead it to mass market consumption.

 

[Lemonzest]

Any speculation now is just speculation looking towards the future

There are only two types of investments. One is based on cash flows and the other is based on speculation or "greater fool" theory. There is only a handful of crypto projects that actually generate cash flow. The crypto space is almost completely speculation. I don't think that is necessarily a bad thing though just an honest assessment of how it is. To those that made millions they probably don't worry themselves that their profit came from speculation and not providing a meaningful product or service.

Crypto isn't really an investment. All of these tokens are more like a crypto casino. Some will become rich and others will go broke. People presenting crypto as an investment are optimistic as no one really knows how the space will evolve over time. As I mentioned above I do think the information asymmetry between insiders and everyone else is problematic.

Having said all that I am a fan of the underlying utility.

 

[JustDave]

Why?

please shill your shitcoin now.

There are ~12,000 different crypto coins currently in play. With few exceptions, they all share the purported benefits of crypto - block chain verification, no third party to transactions, no government oversite/regulation, etc. Why isn't one version of crypto just as good as the others? There can't be that many different methods to implement, can there?

It seems obvious we aren't going to see wide-spread adoption of all 12,000 coins in commerce. It would be pretty difficult if even only a hundred coins were commonly in commercial use. Getting paid in one coin, shop for groceries in a second, pay your bar tab in a third . . . well, you get the idea. God help the poor merchants dealing with a hundred different coins every day. Even this dystopian future presumes than 99% of coins disappear leaving only the cream of the crop

Many people feel that essentially all of the coins are junk, except for a favored one or two. How does the world decide which coin(s) to adopt and what happens to the holders of the losing tokens? < hint, they lose their money >

Let's try to agree that being "a good investment' does not make a coin into a "practical substitute for modern currencies" It could work that way or not.

Similarly, being a "bad investment" doesn't mean a coin can't emerge as a successor to the US Dollar.

I am in the camp of crypto is a bad investment and will never be adopted as a useful successor to modern currencies. Yet crypto will still be useful for a wide array of criminal activity ranging from tax evasion to murder for hire to slavery to prostitution to extortion to terrorism. Somehow a few of the coins will remain viable if for no other reason than to help facilitate the underworld of crime. I. E. not everyone is going to bust.

I hope early adopters have been taking profits. Someone who has made many times their money shouldn't "let it ride" in full. Think more of someone who has major money in play rather than someone playing cheeseburger scale speculation. It seems widely agreed 99+% of the coins are going bust after all.

basically that^

From an implementation standpoint it just isn't a very good crypto currency. A lot of early implementations of something never are. It's Yahoo or Altavista, it isn't Google.

I have no crypto investments. No shit coins to pump. I took my profits and went for ice cream a long time ago.

Are people still really into NFTs or have we moved past that phase? I kinda tuned it all out once I realized people were actually serious about them.

 

[Lemonzest]

I am a long term believer in NFTs. Hint: If you were born anytime before 1980 then it probably isn't a market for you. My guess is most 60 and 70 year olds didn't like Elvis either when he came out gyrating his hips and summoning evil spirits.

Owning one of a kind digital assets seems obvious for the future. As with art 99% is shite and the other 1% is priceless fetching astronomical sums.

Regardless of age people on PCF that collect rare or one of a kind sets of poker chips should understand this better than most. The value of a rare set of chips goes way beyond their utility to play poker. It is a piece of history, culture, and art. Other collectors likewise agree on that value which creates a market. A rare set of NFTs isn't that dissimilar to a rare set of chips.

 

[ekricket]

I am a long term believer in NFTs. Hint: If you were born anytime before 1980 then it probably isn't a market for you. My guess is most 60 and 70 year olds didn't like Elvis either when he came out gyrating his hips and summoning evil spirits.

Owning one of a kind digital assets seems obvious for the future. As with art 99% is shite and the other 1% is priceless fetching astronomical sums.

Regardless of age people on PCF that collect rare or one of a kind sets of poker chips should understand this better than most. The value of a rare set of chips goes way beyond their utility to play poker. It is a piece of history, culture, and art. Other collectors likewise agree on that value which creates a market. A rare set of NFTs isn't that dissimilar to a rare set of chips.

I heard this story quite a bit before 1980, sometime in the 60’s to be sure. It’s a classic, the theme repeats itself in many forms, there’s nothing new under the sun. Things aren’t special now, any more than they were back when Elvis changed the world. But for some of you kids you may not have read this before.

https://www.laphamsquarterly.org/swindle-fraud/whitewashing-fence

 

[Johnblue]

basically that^

From an implementation standpoint it just isn't a very good crypto currency. A lot of early implementations of something never are. It's Yahoo or Altavista, it isn't Google.

I have no crypto investments. No shit coins to pump. I took my profits and went for ice cream a long time ago.

Are people still really into NFTs or have we moved past that phase? I kinda tuned it all out once I realized people were actually serious about them.

From an implementation standpoint it is the supreme crypto. The

No other crypto can withstand attacks from hackers, no other crypto can claim true decentralization. No other crypto can claim a finite, unchangeable number of “coins”

The exact things that you think make bitcoin “less than” other cryptos, (slow, hard to change, etc) are what make bitcoin the only safe harbor.

I don’t need my life savings to be lightning fast. I need it to be extremely secure and not lose 2-10 percent per year like the USD in my sons piggy bank.

 

[ekricket]

I don’t need my bank account to be lightning fast. I need it to be extremely secure.

But what if you are fleeing an oppressive regime that’s chasing you with machine guns and off road atv’s and won’t let you have any physical cash? You need your laptop and a secure connection fast and a way to turn your crypto into life saving fiat to bribe your way across a border or something.

You are going to want speed over secure in situations like that probably.

 

[Johnblue]

But what if you are fleeing an oppressive regime that’s chasing you with machine guns and off road atv’s and won’t let you have any physical cash? You need your laptop and a secure connection fast and a way to turn your crypto into life saving fiat to bribe your way across a border or something.

You are going to want speed over secure in situations like that probably.

Bitcoin has been running like a clock for 12 years. Every 10 minutes a block is printed.

It’s a design feature, and it’s partially why bitcoin is so secure.

Look up “block size wars” the argument was hashed out about eight years ago, and over and over again by crypto noobs ever since.

LUCKILY, bitcoiners then choose security over speed.

 

[Highli99]

the argument was hashed out

Nice choice of words

 

[ekricket]

LUCKILY

Seems to be a key component of crypto

 

[Johnblue]

Seems to be a key component of crypto

people really need to separate bitcoin from "crypto".

bitcoin is an internet protocol, akin to TCP/IP, its an immutable ledger that is defended by 10,s of thousands of competing miners, and 100,000's of thousands of private nodes. literally every day, bitcoin becomes more secure, harder to hack and a stronger network to participate in.

when people truly understand bitcoin, it makes no sense to not participate.

its not a venture funded company IPO ICO start up like literally every other crypto since.

i got my first bitcoin when CA banned internet poker. Realized quickly how money controls freedom.

Realized bitcoin is like the Declatation of Independence. its freedom money.

 

[doublebooyah85]

Shit ton (billion) is being stolen right now from FTX hope no one had coin there

 

[BNM]

Next week, the week of 11-Dec-2017. Will eventually drop below $2000 in the coming weeks in very choppy trade. Calling it now @ $15,658.60/BTC

Or not. Also calling that as backup call.

Who is calling for BTC at $15,658.60 in the next few days/weeks? As it was in the beginning…

 

[Budha]

I am a long term believer in NFTs. Hint: If you were born anytime before 1980 then it probably isn't a market for you. My guess is most 60 and 70 year olds didn't like Elvis either when he came out gyrating his hips and summoning evil spirits.

Owning one of a kind digital assets seems obvious for the future. As with art 99% is shite and the other 1% is priceless fetching astronomical sums.

Regardless of age people on PCF that collect rare or one of a kind sets of poker chips should understand this better than most. The value of a rare set of chips goes way beyond their utility to play poker. It is a piece of history, culture, and art. Other collectors likewise agree on that value which creates a market. A rare set of NFTs isn't that dissimilar to a rare set of chips.

Serious question - what makes an NFT “secure” and “one of a kind”? It is after all, digital, meaning with the appropriate knowledge and skill, (which arguably exists in great abundance), it could be copied.

How would a buyer validate and verify the digital copy being sold is the original and only one (or 1of 5, etc)

This is what I have not been able to get my arms around. (I have not cared enough to research on my own, so am admittedly uninformed on NFT’s - lol)

 

[Lemonzest]

How would a buyer validate and verify the digital copy being sold is the original and only one

The underlying technology of bitcoin solved the double spend problem.
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/an...ock-chain-prevent-doublespending-bitcoins.asp

This is what the hubbub is all about with regards to blockchain technology. Transactions can be verified and there is a permanent record (on the blockchain itself).

If someone claims they own my NFT but have made a fraudulent copy I can point them to the exact blockchain transaction which proves I currently own said NFT. Instead of trusting we can verify.

In theory if someone made an exact perfect copy of the Mona Lisa it would be worth the same as the original Mona Lisa if no one could tell them apart. You couldn't make an exact copy of an NFT. While it may visually look the same the blockchain will verify authenticity and ownership.

Most NFTs right now are just digital images. So it is easy to just right click and save to your desktop. What you have on your desktop has the same value as taking a picture of the Mona Lisa. Regardless of how good your picture is, your picture is worthless and the Mona Lisa is priceless.

Because this method of verification exists it allows for markets to emerge.

 

[Highli99]

The underlying technology of bitcoin solved the double spend problem.
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/an...ock-chain-prevent-doublespending-bitcoins.asp

This is what the hubbub is all about with regards to blockchain technology. Transactions can be verified and there is a permanent record (on the blockchain itself).

If someone claims they own my NFT but have made a fraudulent copy I can point them to the exact blockchain transaction which proves I currently own said NFT. Instead of trusting we can verify.

In theory if someone made an exact perfect copy of the Mona Lisa it would be worth the same as the original Mona Lisa if no one could tell them apart. You couldn't make an exact copy of an NFT. While it may visually look the same the blockchain will verify authenticity and ownership.

Most NFTs right now are just digital images. So it is easy to just right click and save to your desktop. What you have on your desktop has the same value as taking a picture of the Mona Lisa. Regardless of how good your picture is, your picture is worthless and the Mona Lisa is priceless.

Because this method of verification exists it allows for markets to emerge.

Exactly, and applications could easily go analogue think about house titles, car titles, collectible chain of custody, etc. This is where disruption really occurs because it threatens existing, entrenched industries especially the finance industry.

 

[Budha]

The underlying technology of bitcoin solved the double spend problem.
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/an...ock-chain-prevent-doublespending-bitcoins.asp

This is what the hubbub is all about with regards to blockchain technology. Transactions can be verified and there is a permanent record (on the blockchain itself).

If someone claims they own my NFT but have made a fraudulent copy I can point them to the exact blockchain transaction which proves I currently own said NFT. Instead of trusting we can verify.

In theory if someone made an exact perfect copy of the Mona Lisa it would be worth the same as the original Mona Lisa if no one could tell them apart. You couldn't make an exact copy of an NFT. While it may visually look the same the blockchain will verify authenticity and ownership.

Most NFTs right now are just digital images. So it is easy to just right click and save to your desktop. What you have on your desktop has the same value as taking a picture of the Mona Lisa. Regardless of how good your picture is, your picture is worthless and the Mona Lisa is priceless.

Because this method of verification exists it allows for markets to emerge.

Ok, so I understand blockchain (at its core) and how it relates to “chain of custody”, authenticity, etc., relative to “bit-coins” and crypto transactions. In simple terms, coins are mined, and from their inception, are essentially within the blockchain “framework”. So there is a chain of custody (if you will) from point “0”.

With NFT’s, say a work of art, maybe original digital movie stills, or something like that. They are not part of the blockchain framework from their inception. They are only introduced into “blockchain” upon their first transaction and if using crypto. Is that correct?

Is there a digital “fingerprint”, that could 100% determine the “one and only” original from a digital copy?

(I’m truly curious on these things, just never had the energy to research. So my questions are well intentioned)