Or if someone else buys the domain name and now your fancy url resolves to porn.
Sure, but your entry in the block chain that is just a link to nowhere isn’t much more exciting that telling people about the cool skin you once had in a defunct game.
emeralddawn45@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
Rose@lemmy.zip 1 day ago
In one instance, you’d have indisputable proof of ownership, but only your word in the other. The former is not that different from money, which is not even paper these days but a record in a database.
Mondez@lemdro.id 11 hours ago
Indusputable proof of ownership of what exactly? The expired domain the nft points to? Nope. Whatever the link once pointed to? Nope. You only have owner ship of that particular urls representation in that particular block chain which confers you exactly nothing else. Not much different to the state you’d be left in with skins in a defunct game as I said.
Rose@lemmy.zip 10 hours ago
I’d say a link stored in a network that is decentralized and independent of one central entity has more inherent value than a record of money in a bank. Link rot is a thing, but so is the Web Archive and its alternatives. It’s just that there have to be people who value that record in the same way the value money, but that’s not how it is. Nevertheless, it’s something compared to having absolutely nothing after Valve shuts down.