# Tom Holkenborg gets into the NFT game



## Nate Johnson (Jun 15, 2021)

Interesting subject, with an interesting approach (he's going to work one on one with the auction winner to create a custom 'score for their life') 

First time I've seen overwhelmingly negative comments on his YouTube channel....


----------



## easyrider (Jun 15, 2021)

🙈


----------



## AlexRuger (Jun 15, 2021)

I really wish people would stop approaching NFTs as auctions. It's helping their case about as much as treating cryptocurrency as an investment vehicle rather than an actual currency.

The tech powering NFTs has the potential to change music copyright, licensing, and payment forever. It's not outside the realm of possibility that your .wav, once "submitted" to the blockchain, could essentially function as an NFT, with all the necessary ownership data embedded as metadata. If it's broadcast or otherwise used in any way, payments could be paid out in _real time_. Imagine a world with no cue sheets, no PROs, no chasing down contracts, no waiting months or years between the use of a track and the payments of its royalties...it's utopian, sure, but this tech could get us there or somewhere like it.

So, while auctions are certainly _a _valid use of that tech, the fact that it seems everyone and their mom is getting in on this in auction form _only _kinda gives it a bad smell and I think contributed to the recent price crash.

I think a far more impactful way for a high-profile musician to enter the NFT space would be to, say, release a score in concert with one of the many new music-focused NFT platforms. Not as a _thing _someone can buy, necessarily (though obviously this tech helps in tracking digital purchases and streaming numbers), but primarily for demonstrating the copyright potential/walking the walk so others follow suit.

No shade to Tom, though. He's a forward-thinking dude, I'm sure this is just him dipping his toes into the water.


----------



## chrisr (Jun 15, 2021)

AlexRuger said:


> I really wish people would stop approaching NFTs as auctions. It's helping their case about as much as treating cryptocurrency as an investment vehicle rather than an actual currency.


Well said - I really hope the future might look something like that (blockchain). It would certainly empower artists.

I gut reaction to the jxl thing is revulsion.... but then... he's only doing what centuries of composers and artists have done before. Interesting to see that there's potentially a reputational cost to him in this venture - wonder if he cares? I imagine the negative impact upon his reputation would be less if he just created a free-standing work and then sold it as an NFT.


----------



## easyrider (Jun 15, 2021)

AlexRuger said:


> No shade to Tom, though. He's a forward-thinking dude, I'm sure this is just him dipping his toes into the water.


With all due respect, isn’t this just a cash grab for something that doesn’t exist…?

Lets not make this into something it’s not….

Im not knocking Tom….if he can get money upfront for a job he hasn’t done yet then good luck to him….but that is what it is…

🙂


----------



## MauroPantin (Jun 15, 2021)

I love blockchain technology, and I think it will be omnipresent in our lives in a few years. Having said that, I'm not a fan of NFTs. 

I think it's a fad, much like 3D films and VR headsets (at least the bulky ones we have available at the moment) and I just don't see the value in auctioning digital files just for ownership or collections. Maybe I'm old fashioned or obtuse but I really don't get it, it seems irrational. And I think a majority is kind of the same opinion, it's just that there is a lot of money to be made so they go ahead anyway with minting stuff or buying some so called "collectible". 

Like Alex, I am hoping this technology can be used at some point for copyright and cue sheets, I see a lot of use cases there. 



easyrider said:


> if he can get money upfront for a job he hasn’t done yet then good luck to him….but that is what it is…


Sounds like every package deal ever in the film music industry. They're basically "Here's 80k, bring me back a score and keep the change, kiddo", so in that sense I don't see much of a difference.


----------



## Brasart (Jun 15, 2021)

I'm not one to add to the negativity, but it's probably one of the most stupid things he could've done, surprisingly shameful from such a cool guy — hope he takes this pushback into account.


----------



## jononotbono (Jun 15, 2021)

Brasart said:


> but it's probably one of the most stupid things he could've done, surprisingly shameful from such a cool guy


Why is it stupid?

Honestly, I have no idea why him doing whatever he wants is stupid.


----------



## Brasart (Jun 15, 2021)

jononotbono said:


> Why is it stupid?
> 
> Honestly, I have no idea why him doing whatever he wants is stupid.


NFTs are an ecological catastrophy, any current dealings with this technology is irresponsible, and all that talk about empowering artists is pure nonsense


----------



## Loïc D (Jun 15, 2021)

Soundtrack of my life?
A simple sinewave would do the trick…


----------



## Voider (Jun 15, 2021)

Brasart said:


> NFTs are an ecological catastrophy, any current dealings with this technology is irresponsible, and all that talk about empowering artists is pure nonsense


I believe that the true ecological catastrophy is the fact that we still run on nuclear and coal power, we could've already been easily running the whole planet by sun, wind and water power if humans wouldn't have decided not to do that so they can still sell "energy" to us which would've otherwise be free for everyone, and even if not, not harming the environment in any comparable way to now.

NFT's, Bitcoin & co are just pointing us at those problems..


----------



## easyrider (Jun 15, 2021)

Voider said:


> I believe that the true ecological catastrophy is the fact that we still run on nuclear and coal power, we could've already been easily running the whole planet by sun, wind and water power if humans wouldn't have decided not to do that so they can still sell "energy" to us which would've otherwise be free for everyone, and even if not, not harming the environment in any comparable way to now.
> 
> NFT's, Bitcoin & co are just pointing us at those problems..


That’s Capitalsim for you…

The blockchain consumes massive amounts of computing power too….If you’re an environmentalist and dabble in NFT’s you‘re a hypocrite.


----------



## easyrider (Jun 15, 2021)

MauroPantin said:


> Maybe I'm old fashioned or obtuse but I really don't get it


Take a painting such as the Mona Lisa, which is one of a kind. You can take a photo of the painting or buy a print download a .jpg but there will only ever be the one original painting.

The only thing different is if you owned the Mona Lisa you could touch it….smell it etc…

😂


----------



## doctoremmet (Jun 15, 2021)

Does cryptographic computing and storage cost significantly more than storing funny GIFs on servers? Or more than running the “old fashioned” banking system? Or more than running a forum? Backing up selfies on Google Photos? Honest question.


----------



## easyrider (Jun 15, 2021)

jononotbono said:


> Why is it stupid?
> 
> Honestly, I have no idea why him doing whatever he wants is stupid.


One has the right to think someone else’s actions are stupid too…..😂


----------



## easyrider (Jun 15, 2021)

doctoremmet said:


> Does cryptographic computing and storage cost significantly more than storing funny GIFs on servers? Or more than running the “old fashioned” banking system? Or more than running a forum? Backing up selfies on Google Photos? Honest question.


Yes…..the processing power to encrypt and decrypt the blockchain data is huge….

Thats why there are mining factories in the Antarctic without roofs on to dissipate the heat of these huge farms…

Crypto currency will crash soon enough and the end user will be able to buy a gfx card again to edit some video. 😂


----------



## Kent (Jun 15, 2021)

In case you haven't seen this article yet: 

It is largely for these reasons that there is a largely negative reaction to this, just as there was to (for example) Jacob Collier.


----------



## Voider (Jun 15, 2021)

easyrider said:


> The blockchain consumes massive amounts of computing power too….If you’re an environmentalist and dabble in NFT’s you‘re a hypocrite.


So is playing games, doing "esport" instead of real sport - yet billions do it. 10 years ago a phone was good to call someone, not a 24/7 device in your pocket that you need to fill up with power every single day. Driving cars is bad for the environment and I am sure there are nice places to spend vacation on near everyone's town so you don't need to fly across half the globe. And if we zoom in even further 9 out of 10 people are buying a new plastic bag everytime they visit the grocery store or a backery instead of bringing their own.

So when we're talking about "being a hypocrite" I guess none of us is doing pretty well unless one lives in a lonely cabin in the woods like a caveman.

So instead of pointing at the very end of a problem it's imho smarter to look at the source of a problem, because if we can solve that, it will ultimatively solve all problems that come with it. In this case it's our outdated ways of producing energy which nature is giving us for free but we refuse to make use of.


----------



## jononotbono (Jun 15, 2021)

Brasart said:


> NFTs are an ecological catastrophy, any current dealings with this technology is irresponsible, and all that talk about empowering artists is pure nonsense


Right ok well I didn’t understand what you were talking about but thanks for explaining that. Don’t be offended but I’m not here to talk about anything like that so I shall bow out of this and get back to the music side of things. Cheers


----------



## Kent (Jun 15, 2021)

Voider said:


> So is playing games, doing "esport" instead of real sport - yet billions do it. 10 years ago a phone was good to call someone, not a 24/7 device in your pocket that you need to fill up with power every single day. Driving cars is bad for the environment and I am sure there are nice places to spend vacation on near everyone's town so you don't need to fly across half the globe. And if we zoom in even further 9 out of 10 people are buying a new plastic bag everytime they visit the grocery store or a backery instead of bringing their own.
> 
> So when we're talking about "being a hypocrite" I guess none of us is doing pretty well unless you live in a lonely cabin in the woods like a caveman.
> 
> So instead of pointing at the very end of a problem it's imho smarter to look at the source of a problem, because if we can solve that, it will ultimatively solve all problems that come with it. In this case it's our outdated ways of producing energy which nature is giving us for free but we refuse to make use of.


There is a big difference in having to exist in a broken system and choosing to engage in something orders of magnitude more damaging.

From that article I shared:



> Numbers vary, but minting artwork on the blockchain uses somewhere between weeks, months, years, (and in rare instances _decades_) of an average EU or US citizen’s energy consumption.


Huge difference.

Using a car or a phone, etc., is something that should be done responsibly, as in many cases one *has* to to exist in the modern world.

Minting NFTs...is not that.


----------



## Brasart (Jun 15, 2021)

jononotbono said:


> Right ok well I didn’t understand what you were talking about but thanks for explaining that. Don’t be offended but I’m not here to talk about anything like that so I shall bow out of this and get back to the music side of things. Cheers


Sure thing, I didn't want to sound too cold to you, sorry if it appeared so! Always love your input so don't worry about discussing this too, it's always welcome


----------



## Voider (Jun 15, 2021)

kmaster said:


> There is a big difference in having to exist in a broken system and choosing to engage in something orders of magnitude more damaging.


If power consumption is a problem because we've failed until now to make the transition into clean power production, then NFT's, Bitcoin & co have to exist in a broken system. The broken system is the root of the issue. Instead of fighting progress it might be better to make the progress so we don't need to fight against it. If all those articles and angry youtube commentators and journalists would focus on bringing the power production problem into awareness we could focus on what really matters - solving it.



kmaster said:


> Using a car or a phone, etc., is something that should be done responsibly, as in many cases one *has* to to exist in the modern world.


Nowadays you can get to any place by local public transport, there's literally hardly a reason beyond the luxury of _just having it_ or being a little bit more flexible to own a car. I'm 30 now and I made it until now in my entire life without a car, instead my bicycle, trains and trams did the job. You'll find exceptions like people who have family that lives way abroad and they want to visit them sometimes, but for majority of humanity that's not the case.



kmaster said:


> From that article I shared:


That's a lot, no doubt.


----------



## easyrider (Jun 15, 2021)

Voider said:


> So is playing games, doing "esport" instead of real sport - yet billions do it. 10 years ago a phone was good to call someone, not a 24/7 device in your pocket that you need to fill up with power every single day. Driving cars is bad for the environment and I am sure there are nice places to spend vacation on near everyone's town so you don't need to fly across half the globe. And if we zoom in even further 9 out of 10 people are buying a new plastic bag everytime they visit the grocery store or a backery instead of bringing their own.
> 
> So when we're talking about "being a hypocrite" I guess none of us is doing pretty well unless you live in a lonely cabin in the woods like a caveman.
> 
> So instead of pointing at the very end of a problem it's imho smarter to look at the source of a problem, because if we can solve that, it will ultimatively solve all problems that come with it. In this case it's our outdated ways of producing energy which nature is giving us for free but we refuse to make use of.


Thats Capitalsim….it’s a broken system to keep the bourgeoisie in power and the plebeians in check.

I can do what I can within the constraints of this system…but that’s what it is….

The reason we are still using fossil fuels in 2021 is money….the technology is there for solar powered cars on mass but this is dangerous for the powerful elite…

They want Gas cars for as long as possible and their sheer size, influence and power dictate the status quo…

Ttying to be responsible within the broken system is all we can do.Buying NFTs is not that.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Jun 15, 2021)

Luckily, I have no idea what an NFT is. In other news, musicians are whores - shocking. So yeah, whatever.


----------



## tmhuud (Jun 15, 2021)

I think I had one of these in my shoes once. Ultraviolet light gets rid of it….


----------



## NoamL (Jun 15, 2021)

1. Imagine if I made a postcard.

2. On one side of the postcard it says "Whoever holds this postcard owns this postcard."

3. And on the other side of the postcard I wrote some instructions for how to go see the Mona Lisa. ("Go to France. Go to Paris. Go to the Louvre. Go inside the Louvre and take 300 steps to the right, then go up the stairs to the 2nd floor...").

4. Then imagine that I told you that owning this "unique, irreplaceable" postcard was the same thing as owning the Mona Lisa eternally for all time, even though it is not the Mona Lisa; it is just instructions to generate the "viewing experience" of the Mona Lisa; it was not created by the Mona Lisa's owner or with their approval; it does not even grant you exclusive rights to see the Mona Lisa as anyone else can still go see it the normal way and the instructions are the same instructions you can find elsewhere for free; the instructions will only work "eternally for all time" so long as the Mona Lisa eternally stays at the Louvre and will become useless if the Louvre decides to move the painting even to another room; and anyone else can create a trivially different "unique irreplaceable" postcard "pointing" to the Mona Lisa.

5. Then imagine I tried to sell you the postcard for $3 billion.

6. Finally imagine that every time you want to sell or transfer the postcard you have to sacrifice a mature cow to Zeus by burning it on a pyre. Every time this postcard changes hands you have to raise and slaughter some cattle, no exceptions. Even if you want to transfer the postcard to a friend for free, a cow's gotta die. Otherwise the postcard magically doesn't "work" because you didn't make Zeus happy. If you don't have any cattle you have to pay for one to be raised, fed, watered and housed for 10 years. The person selling you the postcard tells you this is not a problem but actually the MAIN feature of the postcard. The fact that you can't sell the postcard without slaughtering a cow is what makes other people so sure you really own it. Other transactions are only secured by mere possession or by arbitrary slips of paper called contracts. Contracts can easily be forged (your friend says) but a cow can't. A cow is a tremendous unforgeable investment of energy and resources, and ritually wasting (instead of eating) the investment every single time the postcard changed hands, is what makes the postcard so valuable. Also, the fact that this technology will require the slaughter of millions of cattle per day to secure all the postcard transfers happening in the world is going to "encourage" farmers to develop new, energy efficient ways of raising cattle any day now. This is 100% definitely going to happen, even though the small number of people adopting "painting postcards" technology has already caused the price of a hamburger to double in the last 4 years. The fact that millions of economic transactions take place every day that AREN'T "secured" by ritual cow sacrifice is what's the actual problem here.


----------



## tmhuud (Jun 15, 2021)

That’s deep man.


----------



## ok_tan (Jun 15, 2021)

I see a market for fake cows!


----------



## quickbrownf0x (Jun 15, 2021)

It's kind of stupid for me to comment and judge on the ecological footprint of all of this stuff, saving the planet, etc. when at the same time, I have this giant server rack gently purring away 24/7/365, with 4 monitors attached and so on, simply because I'm too lazy and spoiled to have to fire everything up every morning, sit there and wait maybe 5 minutes for my VEPros and template to load. And who wants to do that? Nobody!  I guess I'm a selfish bastard, sometimes, but there you go. At least I'm that self-aware. *shrug*

So who am I to judge Tom?


----------



## Henu (Jun 15, 2021)

Sorry Tom, that hype train passed the station already three months ago. And now you look a bit embarrassing having been just arrived to the platform and waving your ticket, because everyone knows by now that the train already crashed, burned and exploded.


----------



## Hadrondrift (Jun 15, 2021)

Aren't NFTs those bit strings on a blockchain where the creator of that bit string hopes to find a rich person to buy that bit string from him for a few million dollars? One of those "greater fool" pyramids, similar to cryptocurrencies? Sorry, but that is how I've valued these NFTs so far. Because, to put it casually, otherwise you could sell mp3s on amazon.

For the reason I have evaluated them so far in this way, an artist, who offers scores as NFTs on a blockchain, must accept from me the criticism, he also just hopes that someone jumps on a artificially heated hype train, in the favor of the artist.

Does the buyer of the NFT actually get the copyright as well? Because, if not, it gets even more crazy, but okay...


----------



## AlexRuger (Jun 15, 2021)

easyrider said:


> With all due respect, isn’t this just a cash grab for something that doesn’t exist…?
> 
> Lets not make this into something it’s not….
> 
> ...


I don't see it as any different than how we pitch for jobs, except backwards. Rather than composers saying "I'll write music for your thing for $x" (wherein the lower $x is, the better for the person making the decision), Tom is saying "I'll write some music for $x" (wherein the higher $x is, the better it is for him). I really don't see a problem with it -- it's honestly kind of refreshing to turn the tables for once and have the _composer's music _be what's in demand, as opposed to _the job_. The fact that it's in the form of an NFT, rather than a more standard contract, is just a sign of the times. Of course it's a "cash grab!" It is his job, after all. It's no more a "cash grab" than taking pre-orders on Junkie XL Brass -- i.e. taking money for something that doesn't exist yet. It's a more-than-standard practice and is totally fine, provided you deliver.

I'm not salty about him doing this, whether "this" is "an auction" or "an auction in the form of an NFT" or "making an NFT at all." I don't condemn any of it. I'm just a little worn out seeing _everyone _do it _exactly this way, _rather than actually using the concept of NFTs to their full potential. 

It's like _every _pop song in the 80s using a Jump-like sawtooth pad. Like, sure, that's _one _use of synths, but there's a whole hell of a lot more you can do with synths, and at this point, yet another Jump-esque song kinda feels like it's holding things back as opposed to moving things forward. Just as with synths in pop culture, and VR, and everything else, the use-cases of NFTs will mature. I just kinda want it to be sooner rather than later. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


----------



## Rasoul Morteza (Jun 15, 2021)

Whilst you're all at it, take a brief look at decentralized streaming projects like Theta and Audius. The space is undoubtedly very young, but I have a strong conviction that it will soon transform how artists share their work with the world and get paid appropriately, to their benefit. Current structures in place display clear tendency to becoming less reliable, sustainable and logical over time to the average artist who wishes to make a decent living without being stampeded by giant tech.


----------



## Toecutter (Jun 15, 2021)

kmaster said:


> In case you haven't seen this article yet:
> 
> It is largely for these reasons that there is a largely negative reaction to this, just as there was to (for example) Jacob Collier.



Thanks for the link, I live in a cave doing music and family all day and had no idea what NFTs were... feels like I live in an alien planet sometimes... like wow "cryptoart" wasting the planet away, this is such an odd concept for me but that article helped a little.


----------



## NoamL (Jun 15, 2021)

quickbrownf0x said:


> It's kind of stupid for me to comment and judge on the ecological footprint of all of this stuff, saving the planet, etc. when at the same time, I have this giant server rack gently purring away 24/7/365, with 4 monitors attached and so on, simply because I'm too lazy and spoiled to have to fire everything up every morning, sit there and wait maybe 5 minutes for my VEPros and template to load. And who wants to do that? Nobody!  I guess I'm a selfish bastard, sometimes, but there you go. At least I'm that self-aware. *shrug*
> 
> So who am I to judge Tom?


I agree and see your point.

But the difference is I use my computer to make music. In "crypto currency" the money is not actually encrypted, transaction histories, user IDs and coin totals are public. The cryptography puzzles are just using up energy in a way that is easily verifiable that you did spend the energy, and the rules of the network are that whoever verifies they spent a lot of energy gets to define which money transactions are real. Since electricity has zillions of other practical uses, you'd have to believe that the security of bitcoin transactions was really valuable to justify spending the energy to build a moat around it. But without the moat, bitcoin is useless as anyone can fake transactions. So, like, is this a self fulfilling prophecy or a circular argument?

It's like if there's a limited amount of water in the world, how much sense does it make to build the world's largest moat just so you can say "This is THE largest moat on the planet -> so whatever it's around must be the most secured thing on the planet -> therefore whatever is inside the moat must be the most valuable thing on the planet because everything else is less secure -> therefore it was worth it to put all the world's water in this moat!"


----------



## Toecutter (Jun 15, 2021)

NoamL said:


> 1. Imagine if I made a postcard.
> 
> 2. On one side of the postcard it says "Whoever holds this postcard owns this postcard."
> 
> ...


Thanks for explaining this like the idiot I am XD Such a strange concept... why is this even a thing? Taking advantage of people's stupidity and inclination to buying anything perceived as "exclusive"? Good old fashioned greed?


----------



## NoamL (Jun 15, 2021)

Toecutter said:


> Taking advantage of people's stupidity and inclination to buying anything perceived as "exclusive"?


Yeah pretty much, just like Beanie Babies, people bought them for crazy prices because they thought there was someone else down the line who would be willing to agree they're worth at least that much.


----------



## lashman (Jun 15, 2021)

Toecutter said:


> Thanks for explaining this like the idiot I am XD Such a strange concept... why is this even a thing? Taking advantage of people's stupidity and inclination to buying anything perceived as "exclusive"? Good old fashioned greed?



it's just a pyramid scheme for rich people 

with the added _benefit _of actively destroying the planet


----------



## easyrider (Jun 15, 2021)

Web founder Berners-Lee to auction source code as NFT https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-57474504


----------



## quickbrownf0x (Jun 15, 2021)

NoamL said:


> I agree and see your point.
> 
> But the difference is I use my computer to make music. In "crypto currency" the money is not actually encrypted, transaction histories, user IDs and coin totals are public. The cryptography puzzles are just using up energy in a way that is easily verifiable that you did spend the energy, and the rules of the network are that whoever verifies they spent a lot of energy gets to define which money transactions are real. Since electricity has zillions of other practical uses, you'd have to believe that the security of bitcoin transactions was really valuable to justify spending the energy to build a moat around it. But without the moat, bitcoin is useless as anyone can fake transactions. So, like, is this a self fulfilling prophecy or a circular argument?
> 
> It's like if there's a limited amount of water in the world, how much sense does it make to build the world's largest moat just so you can say "This is THE largest moat on the planet -> so whatever it's around must be the most secured thing on the planet -> therefore whatever is inside the moat must be the most valuable thing on the planet because everything else is less secure -> therefore it was worth it to put all the world's water in this moat!"


I love a good moat. Saving up for one, right after I buy the full 8Dio Misfits collection.


----------



## jononotbono (Jun 15, 2021)

quickbrownf0x said:


> I love a good moat. Saving up for one, right after I buy the full 8Dio Misfits collection.


If you are eligible, you could move to the Isle of Wight. There’s a moat round the place and everything.


----------



## shapednoise (Jun 15, 2021)

Loïc D said:


> Soundtrack of my life?
> A simple sinewave would do the trick…


If your life’s a sine wave, you are living ya best life. 
mines cluster of noise and shrieking screams.


----------



## shapednoise (Jun 15, 2021)

doctoremmet said:


> Does cryptographic computing and storage cost significantly more than storing funny GIFs on servers? Or more than running the “old fashioned” banking system? Or more than running a forum? Backing up selfies on Google Photos? Honest question.


Yes.


----------



## Andrew Aversa (Jun 15, 2021)

Besides the aforementioned environmental issues - which are far greater than most other activities we do - the speculatory fever around cryptocurrencies & NFTs is causing plenty of other problems. Most notably the global chip shortage which is affecting not just personal computing but automotive, among others.

The idea that NFTs, or blockchain tech, could solve problems like copyright / cue sheet tracking (etc) sounds good in theory but... we already have the tech for this. For example, fingerprinting and identifying music is a thing that entities like YouTube do now (to a scarily accurate degree.) It's a solved problem.

Where artists end up getting hurt is enforcement. ANY contract is only as good as your ability to enforce it. If you are owed royalties, and a company isn't paying you, it doesn't matter whether you sold them an NFT, or signed a contract on paper, or had a handshake in front of the president and a million witnesses. Much like wage theft, big companies easily get away with taking advantage of individuals (and this is especially true in the music industry) because individuals don't have the money to take them to court.


----------



## AlexRuger (Jun 16, 2021)

Andrew Aversa said:


> The idea that NFTs, or blockchain tech, could solve problems like copyright / cue sheet tracking (etc) sounds good in theory but... we already have the tech for this. For example, fingerprinting and identifying music is a thing that entities like YouTube do now (to a scarily accurate degree.) It's a solved problem.
> 
> Where artists end up getting hurt is enforcement. ANY contract is only as good as your ability to enforce it. If you are owed royalties, and a company isn't paying you, it doesn't matter whether you sold them an NFT, or signed a contract on paper, or had a handshake in front of the president and a million witnesses. Much like wage theft, big companies easily get away with taking advantage of individuals (and this is especially true in the music industry) because individuals don't have the money to take them to court.


Well, that's the thing, isn't it? It's not a solved problem. The biggest flaw in your example (YouTube) that I can think of being that often times copyright owners have their content struck down, but there are dozens more. The current system is _not _adequately enforced, and when it _is _enforced at all, it's often done so clumsily. Doesn't sound like a solved problem to me.

And we're not talking about whether you "sold" someone an NFT. We're talking about _tracking. _Whether someone _broadcast _or otherwise _exploited _(in the legal sense) a piece of music would simply be a matter of record. Who owns and is owed what, how long it was broadcast, how often, when, where, what timezone, etc -- all incontrovertible fact, and _public, _no less. That's one of the worst parts of the current system: people pass the buck every time they're held accountable for not paying up, saying it was so and so's fault or that they're "not aware" of such and such, etc. The bullshit is unbelievable, and they can get away with it because the current system gives them plausible deniability, and is so slow and convoluted and complicated that enforcing even blatant infractions is incentivized against.

Copyright on the blockchain would remove a lot of the _need _for enforcement. Dealing with this stuff across nations' borders will always be difficult, but within a given country, there is absolutely zero reason as to why 100% of music tracking couldn't be accurate down to the _millisecond,_ with a minimum of personnel involved. PROs, with all of their inefficiency and absurdly unfair treatment of smaller composers, could disappear in an instant. With individual compositions tracked as NFTs on the blockchain, you and I could easily calculate _exactly _how much I'm owed, down to the penny, and if I'm not paid the correct amount, guess what? Proof is easy. Finding out who's responsible is easy. Therefore _enforcement _is easy, because all you need to do is grab the nearest lawyer, and they'll take this open-and-shut case to the responsible party's lawyer, and their lawyer will go "ha, yeah, fuck," and they'll pay up. Because there is _no hiding _with the blockchain. It's the exact opposite of anonymous.

I'm all for it. I've seen enough of my friends get absolutely screwed by the current system to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars that I'm more than happy to vote to burn the current system down and replace it all with a server.

That said, I'm more than aware that those who stand to lose something by no longer being able to hide behind inefficiency and plausible deniability will fight tooth and nail to keep such a system from taking root, and they're the "powers that be," as it were, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.

Anyways, any composer touching NFTs should do better than just using it as glorified eBay. We have a responsibility to shepherd this technology with care, because that's the only way it'll result in a better system.


----------



## Voider (Jun 16, 2021)

Andrew Aversa said:


> If you are owed royalties, and a company isn't paying you, it doesn't matter whether you sold them an NFT


Afaik NFT's are even better in this regard - if you sell a piece of music, and the one you sold it to sells it again, you'll get paid with a portion of the transaction again and again, each single time it's being further sold on the 2nd hand market.


----------



## JeffvR (Jun 16, 2021)

Oh well


----------



## MauroPantin (Jun 16, 2021)

The blockchain technology itself isn't specifically the problem. It's the way transactions are processed that is environmentally irresponsible, a process called "Proof of work". And even if it wasn't and it was done with 100% renewable energy it's still wasting perfectly good hardware and driving prices up artificial ways that make buying computer parts unreasonable. Someone recently created one that is mined on hard drives and SSDs... so if you've been thinking of getting some more sample real state get it now.

Blockchain as a tech has a lot of potential but also needs a lot of adjustments to get real world practical use. NFTs are not practical use, IMHO. In most cases it is not being transacted because of the inherent value of whatever is being sold. It's not like the digital artist community was auctioning 1/1 collectible prints online non-stop at astronomical prices on eBay before this came up. It's just a fad, considered cool because of the underlying technology, and a fantastic excuse to get a piece of the cake while the bubble is still around. Some people are making five figures for a week of work, it's too tempting to pass up, particularly in the developing world.

Not trying to throw shade at Tom, personally, but I think he's successful enough in pecuniary terms to be above these kinds of things. I know he's a forward thinking artist, and blockchain is the latest thing, but... does he really need to participate in this speculative market as it is? Again, not judging him, just I guess I'm a bit disappointed in that the concerns about the current blockchain paradigm are apparently not being considered or addressed.


----------



## tcollins (Jun 16, 2021)

So, if like myself, you were reading this thread and wondering how you could possibly have zero idea what it's about, here are a few links that I found helpful:

About Blockchains

NFTs (Non-Fungible Tokens) Not NFRs. That's something completely different.

Why They Are Bad

From what I can tell, it's a system for trading digital assets, like computer art.

Check Out This Item for sale at $16,300. 

What I haven't really understood is how all of this translates into very high energy use? Uploading a graphic you've created shouldn't dim the lights in your city, so there's obviously more to it.

EDIT: OK, here's a link: Bitcoin Mining.

Also, how does crytocurrency translate into real money, for instance to use for buying food or for paying your huge electric bill?


----------



## doctoremmet (Jun 16, 2021)

tcollins said:


> Also, how does crytocurrency translate into real money, for instance to use for buying food or for paying your huge electric bill?


Some businesses and other organizations allow you to pay with crypto. In practice hardly anyone does, since Bitcoin, Ether etc. are mainly held as (highly) speculative “investments”. Imagine having used one bitcoin for buying a pizza in 2012, to find out its “value” is now $40k-$60k ... yes... you better hold on to it then... so in practice I don’t grasp how anyone can seriously consider this to be a means of actual payment...


----------



## tcollins (Jun 16, 2021)

doctoremmet said:


> Some businesses and other organizations allow you to pay with crypto. In practice hardly anyone does, since Bitcoin, Ether etc. are mainly held as (highly) speculative “investments”. Imagine having used one bitcoin for buying a pizza in 2012, to find out its “value” is now $40k-$60k ... yes... you better hold on to it then... so in practice I don’t grasp how anyone can seriously consider this to be a means of actual payment...


That's kind of what I was thinking. Interesting that things like the GIF auction (in the link) shows the value in dollars. That implies that there is some way of "cashing in", or some actual value relative to the dollar. That's what is confusing to me. If someone has $100,000 in Bitcoin, I find it hard to believe that they could deposit it in their bank. Or can they?


----------



## sluggo (Jun 16, 2021)

Bitcoin, Ethereum, Cardano, Polkadot, Chainlink, Matic, Algorand.


----------



## doctoremmet (Jun 16, 2021)

tcollins said:


> That's kind of what I was thinking. Interesting that things like the GIF auction (in the link) shows the value in dollars. That implies that there is some way of "cashing in", or some actual value relative to the dollar. That's what is confusing to me. If someone has $100,000 in Bitcoin, I find it hard to believe that they could deposit it in their bank. Or can they?


Sure, you can sell the coins for real $ and deposit that.


----------



## sopwith (Jun 17, 2021)

Welp I'd imagine we might not see many more NFTs from JXL - the auction ended at $20,000 for 20 minutes of music, less the 10% environmental donation, less the commission from the platform. Probably not his usual hourly rate.


----------



## José Herring (Jun 17, 2021)

sopwith said:


> Welp I'd imagine we might not see many more NFTs from JXL - the auction ended at $20,000 for 20 minutes of music, less the 10% environmental donation, less the commission from the platform. Probably not his usual hourly rate.


It had kind of a strange vibe to it. You'd have to shell out $250,000 to actually get ownership of your commission which I find kind of odd. I know that Hollywood may seem like a big deal when you are making millions of dollars doing music for movies but for the average public, the film that the music goes into is only worth $20 a head. The album 9.99, ect. I always thought that was the double edge sword of applying the marketplace value to artistic work. In the mind of the public art just isn't worth much. The average public spits out about $100/month on entertainment. So convincing somebody to shell out $20,000 I consider it a victory for JXL.


----------



## José Herring (Jun 17, 2021)

My other thought is what if the guy that bought the original commission didn't lead a particularly epic life? What if he was a successful life insurance salesman living in Milwaukee, had 3 kids worked 9-5 everyday. Kids went to UofW or something and he divorced his wife in 2015 because she had an affair with his business partner. I mean seriously! The average Joe's life just isn't that exciting.


----------



## GtrString (Jun 18, 2021)

I see a lot of gold digging in Alaska with NFT's, and try to understand the business case. I guess it helps if you have a solid brand like TomH.

Also noticed Ditto Music's new NFT deal, where they link copyright shares with NFT's - The Opulous platform https://www.opulous.org - is Blockchain ready to screw artists already? That was fast!

And what's all this talk about NFT's empowering artists - in what way is this a solution? Solution to what? What problem does NFT's solve for artists in particular?


----------



## chrisr (Jun 18, 2021)

Tom: "So Don, what's the story of your life?"

Don: "Well, when I was 8 these aliens landed and started killing everyone in my home town, I had to fight my way out with chainsaw and also learn how to fly a chopper pretty quick. Then when I was 22 I discovered a secret nuclear bunker guarded by zombies - that was a fun weekend! Now I'm in my 50's I've got into cage fighting with armed gorillas, mostly as a way to keep fit .... you think you can write something that covers all that Tom?"


----------



## charlieclouser (Jun 18, 2021)

tcollins said:


> Also, how does crytocurrency translate into real money, for instance to use for buying food or for paying your huge electric bill?


Besides hiring an assassin or buying a Colombian drug-smuggling submarine, some "normal" business accept various crypto currencies as payment, with the exact exchange rate of crypto <> fiat currency being calculated at some agreed-upon point in time, usually the moment you complete the transaction. What that exchange rate is at that exact moment might be hard to pin down, but no harder than calculating the exchange rate of Euros to dollars when you land in NYC with a pocketful of Euros. Since the value of crypto fluctuates wildly and quickly, when paying your electric bill it might work out to 0.00277988 BTC one minute, and 0.00279432 BTC two minutes later. The actual conversion rate at the moment of transaction might be an average of the spot prices on a few different "exchanges" for instance.

Most conversions from fiat to crypto are done via these "exchanges", like Coinbase, Binance, or Gemini (which is run by the Winklvoss twins of Facebook-founder fame, and who were early and BIG crypto investors / speculators and have made an absolute fortune... on paper anyway). You transfer real money into the exchange via wire transfer or even debit card, and buy crypto much as you would buy shares of Apple or Gamestop. The exact exchange rate changes by the millisecond, but that's no different to stock prices on Wall Street. Those crypto assets can be held in an online wallet under the custody of the exchange (possibly a vulnerability if the exchange gets hacked or has unscrupulous actors involved), or they can be transferred to a wallet address you choose. 

A wallet address can be though of like an email account: There is a public key which anyone can know and which acts as the address to which someone would send crypto to you - this is akin to your email address. It's safe to tell it to anyone, put it on your website, or next to the checkout at your liquor store in order to accept crypto payments when people buy beer. 

Then there is a private key - this is akin to your email password. If someone finds out that key they can act as if they are you and transfer your crypto to any other wallet they want - probably one that they control. Unlike an email account that is administered by a hosting company like Apple or Google, there is NO password-recovery process or "I forgot my password" button to click. You forget the private key, you're done. The crypto isn't gone, but you won't be able to get at it or do anything with it. 

Since these keys are not really user-defined like when you pick your email password, you can't have your private key be "password1" or whatever - it's a massive string of garbage characters that you'll never remember, and would even be difficult to manually type in without making a mistake. (This is slightly over-simplified - there is a "seed phrase" aka "recovery phrase" that is used to create the keys, and this is typically not complete gibberish like the actual private key, but still - lose the seed phrase and the private key and not even the NSA can get it back for you... we think.) 

That's why some people leave their crypto in the hands of the online exchanges, who guard your private key (hopefully!) and who provide you with a portal for which you CAN make your password "password1" and for which there is usually some sort of recovery process. However it's much safer to use your own cold-storage wallet, which can be as simple as a piece of paper with the keys printed on it and locked in the safe, or one of the various hardware wallets like Trezor or Ledger. These devices can store many, many separate wallets for a variety of different coins, and act as an authorization device to sign outgoing transactions. An individual can create as many wallets as needed (just like having multiple gMail accounts), and crypto speculators / cowboys might have dozens / hundreds / thousands of wallets active so they can "wash" crypto by moving it back and forth between wallets over and over again. 

Why use all these wallets to "wash" transactions? Because even though the wallet owner's identity is not published in any centralized list online, by clever sleuthing it is sometimes possible to identify or locate wallet owners - say there's a news story about how a football star bought a mansion in Mallorca for $22 million in BitCoin: sleuths will scour the blockchain ledger looking for a transaction around that amount within a certain timeframe, and may be able to narrow down the possible wallet addresses that signed such a transaction. That ledger IS public, and although it only shows that XXX coins were moved from wallet A to wallet B, if you've got the skills (and time) it can be possible to back-trace transactions to some extent. Tying a wallet to an actual person is not so easy unless that person is in the news all the time, like if Elon Musk buys Mars using BitCoin - assuming the Martians will even accept BitCoin.

But that's one reason to have a boatload of wallets to shuffle coins between, and to create new ones just for certain transactions (like buying that Colombian submarine), and then use hundreds of transactions of various sizes to move coins from multiple wallets to a single wallet, use THAT wallet to buy the submarine, and finally drain them all and let them go cold. (Obviously there are various strategies in washing coins, and I'm simplifying things a lot even from my very limited knowledge.)

Since crypto is by definition decentralized, there is no inherent transaction fee structure, so using stacks of wallets to wash coins costs nothing except electricity - and not very much. It's the "mining" of the coins that's using all the juice. If I just want to buy your Kontakt license directly from you using BitCoin, there's no third-party taking a cut (like eBay / Reverb / Visa) - we agree on a price, you give me your wallet address, I use my private key to sign a transaction from my wallet to yours, done. But those exchanges that facilitate simple conversions between crypto and cash usually do charge a transaction fee, just like a bank might charge an ATM withdrawal fee. And of course you could tack on a transaction fee to sell me your Kontakt license as a way to hedge against any drop in the coin's value between the time of transaction and when you can convert it into cash you can use for something else.

In the past few years Wall Street is getting into crypto investing big-time, and there are firms that are tailored to institutional-level investors like hedge funds, pension funds, university endowments, etc. They don't "use" crypto for anything, it's purely a vehicle for speculation, as one might do by trading various foreign currencies. The volatility is massive but crypto can act as a hedge against volatility in other sectors - for those brave enough to push the button. And of course there are 20-something crypto zillionaire kids who bought DogeCoin last December at $0.003 and sold it in May for $0.636 - even though Doge is a low-utility "meme-coin" that was started mostly as a joke, if you can buy anything for $1 and then sell it for $200 that's savvy investing. That's turning $10,000 into $2,000,000 in five months, all from your iPhone. 

There are dozens / hundreds of those low-utility meme-coins (also known as shit-coins) that are often just pump-and-dump schemes on which most buyers lose it all - but some buyers make money if they can figure out how not to be the last one standing when the music stops. The mechanics of shit-coins can be tricky as the big exchanges like CoinBase and Gemini usually don't handle them, so you're stuck using exchanges that might be located in Kim Jong-Il's basement for all we know. It's common that shit-coins will get bought not using wire-transfers of actual currency, but by using a higher-tier coin like BitCoin or Ethereum to purchase those lower-tier coins - and then hoping the exchange doesn't disappear with your coins before you can move them to your own wallet!

Blockchain technology is a fascinating application of mathematics, and crypto currencies are an even more fascinating real-world application of the blockchain tech on which they rely, but it is a little bit like speculating on rare Yeezy sneakers or tulip futures because the bottom could drop out at any minute. BitCoin has tripled in value over the last year, so it's no wonder big-timers are going in heavy and early-adopters are buying Lambos, but a single tweet from Elon can tank the value quicker than Ronaldo can tank Coca-Cola stock - and that's pretty quick.

To the point of this thread, NFT's are basically a way to use blockchain technology to "sign" digital assets in a way that denotes "ownership", similar to how a crypto owner can sign transactions of coins to other wallets. The crucial difference is that the utility of a crypto currency lies entirely in one's ability to transfer ownership of it to someone else, whereas the utility of that $16,000 GIF lies in my ability to look at it, which I just did, and I have now sucked most of the juice out of that particular orange for free. Of course, I can't sell it, and the owner might be able to use DMCA take-downs to erase it from the internet (good luck, dude), but who cares? I saw it, I chuckled, life went on, and if I'm never allowed to see it again I don't care. Very different application of the technology than BitCoin. The full picture of whether and how NFT's can be leveraged to benefit the creator and not just the investor / speculator is not yet in focus, but will probably become more clear very quickly.

Fun stuff, but NFT's are *shrug* to me right now. Not sure what I would use the tech for or why, unlike with crypto, because I'd be more interested in buying a Colombian submarine than a $16,000 GIF.


----------



## Nate Johnson (Jun 18, 2021)

charlieclouser said:


> Besides hiring an assassin or buying a Colombian drug-smuggling submarine, some "normal" business accept various crypto currencies as payment, with the exact exchange rate of crypto <> fiat currency being calculated at some agreed-upon point in time, usually the moment you complete the transaction. What that exchange rate is at that exact moment might be hard to pin down, but no harder than calculating the exchange rate of Euros to dollars when you land in NYC with a pocketful of Euros. Since the value of crypto fluctuates wildly and quickly, when paying your electric bill it might work out to 0.00277988 BTC one minute, and 0.00279432 BTC two minutes later. The actual conversion rate at the moment of transaction might be an average of the spot prices on a few different "exchanges" for instance.
> 
> Most conversions from fiat to crypto are done via these "exchanges", like Coinbase, Binance, or Gemini (which is run by the Winklvoss twins of Facebook-founder fame, and who were early and BIG crypto investors / speculators and have made an absolute fortune... on paper anyway). You transfer real money into the exchange via wire transfer or even debit card, and buy crypto much as you would buy shares of Apple or Gamestop. The exact exchange rate changes by the millisecond, but that's no different to stock prices on Wall Street. Those crypto assets can be held in an online wallet under the custody of the exchange (possibly a vulnerability if the exchange gets hacked or has unscrupulous actors involved), or they can be transferred to a wallet address you choose.
> 
> ...


I had NO idea how deep this whole crypto game has gotten. Dang.


----------



## dgburns (Jun 18, 2021)

chrisr said:


> Tom: "So Don, what's the story of your life?"
> 
> Don: "Well, when I was 8 these aliens landed and started killing everyone in my home town, I had to fight my way out with chainsaw and also learn how to fly a chopper pretty quick. Then when I was 22 I discovered a secret nuclear bunker guarded by zombies - that was a fun weekend! Now I'm in my 50's I've got into cage fighting with armed gorillas, mostly as a way to keep fit .... you think you can write something that covers all that Tom?"


Tom to Don -

‘Hey Don, you just described the first ten minutes of just about every film I scored.‘


----------



## charlieclouser (Jun 18, 2021)

Nate Johnson said:


> I had NO idea how deep this whole crypto game has gotten. Dang.


With my limited knowledge and experience, I can only offer a thumbnail view, but it is a whole world and a culture unto itself. I learned most of what I know from the 22-year-old son of a neighbor - the dad is an established and successful composer and the son has been in crypto for only about 7 years but is already bringing in more than his dad's (substantial) BMI royalties. The son is holding large amounts of a half-dozen of the top-tier coins - enough to be able to day-trade on the exchanges and have transaction fees be negligible against the gains he sees. He is deeply knowledgeable about the math and tech, and understands cryptography and number theory in depth, so he also invests in second-tier coins like Chainlink that he feels have solid math behind them. He doesn't mess with bottom-tier shitcoins like Doge except as a goof, using the spare change from his bigger transactions, but these are still five-figure buy-ins! So he's absolutely laughing right now.

Different coins have different limits of how many coins in total can be mined and how the difficulty of mining increases as supply nears the limit, and that's the math he is looking at with coins like Chainlink or whatever. It is this increasing difficulty in mining that is behind the enormous energy consumption of BitCoin that you read so much about. The analogy he made to me was; imagine you get paid $1 each time you identify, by number, a pixel on an 8k computer monitor that is colored green, and whenever someone identifies a pixel it turns red. At the start, you can just throw a dart at the monitor to pick and almost pick random numbers, and chances are good it will come back green and pay you a dollar. As time goes by, it gets more difficult, until finally you're squinting at the screen with a magnifying glass counting pixels, looking for the exact numerical address of one green pixel in a murky field od solid red. Over-simplified but this analogy helped me understand why Chinese miners have buildings full of video cards trying to solve the equations that will reward them in BitCoin or other crypto currencies, and how this process can consume so much energy. As each coin is mined, the process gets harder, and the energy required to mine the remaining coins goes up. Basically it's the mining that uses nuclear-plant-level energy, not the storage, use, or transfer of coins.

By the way he favors Gemini as an exchange for medium-serious self-directed investing, NYDIG for institutional-level transactions, and also has a CoinBase account for messing around with shitcoins. Interestingly he trusts the Gemini exchange enough to use it as an online wallet, since the Winklevii are so heavy into cryptography and security, and Gemini is based in NY state and fully regulated and insured as if they were an ordinary bank or brokerage. So it's as close to safe as it can be. Gemini absolutely reports gains made in crypto as investment earnings, so it's no fly-by-night Ukranian exchange where everything is off the books.

Despite the participation of established financial firms, it's still pretty wild-west out there. But not that much more dangerous than playing with meme stocks like AMC or GME. You gotta be prepared to turn on a dime though...


----------



## purple (Jun 18, 2021)

Crazy how people lose their shit over crypto's environmental footprint when there are a million things that are far worse and get a pass for some reason. When you realize who is threatened by crypto (banks, insurance companies, nasty governments, etc.) it becomes clear why there's suddenly so much negative media attention around it and why a lot of these same concerned individuals aren't talking about the shit that actually _is _responsible for climate change.

Heres a fact: Most of the energy used by miners is renewable, often surplus energy that would otherwise go to waste... Estimates I've heard put it at 70%, but take that with a grain of salt. It's hard to calculate these things honestly so any silly numbers you see on either side of the argument are guesses at best.

Another fact: almost no new blockchains use proof of work (the thing that makes them energy intensive), and ETH (second biggest blockchain) is moving away from it in 6 or so months...

A crazy fact: Idle phone chargers plugged into the wall have a much larger carbon footprint! By idle I mean a charger plugged into the wall and not even charging anything! Seriously! If you want to help the environment stop eating so much beef and bike to work.

It also seems that people think crypto is just a huge cash grab. It's not, although in its early years it still can seem like one. It's an evolving field of tech that will change the way we handle a lot of things. Think of it as automation that will replace lots of middlemen, like insurance companies, banks, brokerages, and potentially even a ton of government functions. What happens with new tech? People speculate, invest, or develop. To the outsider it looks dumb, but they'll regret dismissing it. The arguments about its disastrous environmental impact seem to come from the point that it's all just frivolous nonsense and a waste of energy. It's not.

Over the last few months I've had people who couldn't even explain what proof of work is telling me in detail how exactly me buying an NFT is like tearing down half the Amazon is. And I'm like, what? That's not how it works at all.

In this case, it's definitely a publicity stunt/cashgrab, and it's a shame that's what NFT tech is known for. But in the not so distant future it will be so much more. And so relevant to many in this industry too.


----------



## Andrew Aversa (Jun 19, 2021)

Most people concerned about the energy waste of crypto are absolutely not giving other environmental issues a pass, I can guarantee that. Also, saying that most new cryptocurrencies don't use PoW is kind of meaningless if they have virtually no market cap/usage; the big boys (Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin, etc) are all PoW and as long as they're the overwhelming majority of the currencies used - with no signs of that changing - then it will continue to be ecologically disastrous.


----------



## Auf dem Wolf (Oct 24, 2021)

I'm no expert, but from some exposure to the fine art world of NFTs I can see a lot of artists having serious financial success through the medium. I'm not just talking about the big dogs selling at Sotheby's, but lesser-known artists that bring in the price of a modest house with one art-drop. I also see many of the top NFT platforms providing the ability for the artist to claim a % of the secondary sales market. That is a first as far as I know.

I'm attempting to come at this topic with an art-first perspective. I'm as allergic to money-first thinking as is possible (for a contract worker in a capitalist economy). BUT, I can see how NFTs can empower artists to be compensated in a way that is external to the traditional market. 

Right now the space appears dominated by visual art, but I imagine the space will branch out into all forms of mediums. I mean, it already is. And with all this chatter of the Metaverse...

* Totally agree Andrew. I am waiting for a chain to evolve that does not rely on PoW (finger crossed) before I attempt entering the space. Sold all my crypto (it wasn't very much) for the same reason.


----------



## audio1 (Oct 24, 2021)

Sadly, there is a good chance somebody with vanity money will pay a lot of money for this.


----------



## timprebble (Oct 24, 2021)




----------

