It's a scam, piramid scheme, that doesn't offer anything to the artists and with how awful to the environment the whole crypto-bullshit is, it should be banned

God I hope that does not happen.

Anyway, my thoughts on the topic are pretty much the same as this tweet

https://twitter.com/mcapriglioneart/status/145090136392008090913

To elaborate slightly: there are already countless ways to actually support artists financially for those who want to do that, and it seems like no coincidence most of the (non-stolen...) NFTs look like they were made by someone who was never exposed to any kind of art, ever, beyond mainstream adult cartoons or whatever. I won't even get into the environmental impact and other shit here...

An artist participating in "the NFT game" is enough reason for me to not ever look at their webcomic and in fact block them on every social media.

I am against NFTs as they are a scam and terrible for the environment, and everyone who willingly participates in them DESPITE the well-known knowlegde of how terrible they are, is not a person i want to interact with or support.

with regards to my response:

and in in regards to the replies i've seen thus far i'm so relived

like it been said there's mounting evidence of the environmental impact which in the middle of a global climate crisis is literally not needed. then there's the impact on artist which i've seen a lot more theft and scamming than actual success so ya i want nothing to do with it or it's participants

plus it just gives of a generally cult-ish vibe when you look at the behaviors of some participants and followers so it's a double no thanks. i'd rather not be invoked into whatever's goin on on the other side of the fence no matter how much greener the grass seems

An image I like to share when it comes to NFTs bc i know a lot of people cant even begin to imagine the possible damage for only a single NFT:

OnSingle-NFT.jpg552x631 79.4 KB

I would never get into the NFT trend. It's a major scam and I don't see the point in it. There have even been cases where artists' works have been stolen and sold as an NFT which scares me because I've had my IP art stolen by other sites in the past and now I have to worry about this crap? The environment thing is also another part of why I'll never get behind it.

My thoughts on NFTs are that it's a scam I don't wanna have anything to do with. The impact on the environment is too big, the art theft cases related to it are far to many and many other factors are a hard nope.

I think one of the most fundamental issues of NFT on it's current state is that it doesn't protect an artist's intellectual property as well as it promises. It lacks the measures to properly verify ownership of the NFT BEFORE uploading it to the cryptomarket, which is the key method on how people steal art.

I wouldn't be caught dead in the NFT game.

The environmental impact is real. That alone is enough to keep me out of it (beyond the fact that NFTs make no sense at all). I know the argument tends to be that the tech for it simply needs to evolve first, and then they won't have such a huge cost but...here's the thing.

It's not up to just a few of us to decide that the path to lower costs is worth it when it comes to the environment--which billions of people and other creatures live in. We can't make that decision for them, especially when it's just digital art. It's literally just digital art. It's not some big grand thing that could save millions of lives. It's stuff our screens reflect back to us in a pattern our eyes see as a picture.

It's not like the environmental cost of space exploration which can and has lead to insane advancements in other tech and related fields-. There's a renewed interest in reducing the amount of energy it takes to do anything, every year. NFTs aren't the cause of that.

My art isn't worth the environmental cost, and I'm certainly not deserving of any kind of fortune at the great expense of the world around me. That's my stance on it, and I refuse to partake in NFTs directly and indirectly through support.

The most immediate thought that comes to mind regarding NFTs and comics is how it could divide the fanbase, on moral grounds, which is applicable to art in general, not just NFT comics. There's been a lot of outcry about NFTs in general. But I don't know if it could do long-term damage to an artist with NFTs. As people, we can be extremely forgetful and move on rather fast, and also tend to try to justify the actions of those we have parasocial relationships with because severing that relationship would mean letting go of something we found joy (entertainment) in.

It honestly baffles me how people are essentially gambling with the ownership of digital images that aren't like other JPEGs, and in doing so are just casually wrecking the environment as if we have a second one to fall back on

As of today I don't really like NFT, basically because they don't have utility other than speculation. At the end what you "own" is in most cases just a link to an image which anyone has free access to. I understand why people are interested in them, they seem an easy way to monetize art, which does sounds appealing, but I believe the ones making money are just a few lucky ones. And most of people just buy them to sell them at a higher price, not because they appreciate the art (but that can apply to regular art and physical goods too).

I think they can have potential if they are given some actual utility. For example giving some bonus content to anyone holding a specific NFT, like early access, discounts, etc. But then I'm not sure if NFT could provide any improvement to current solutions or if the utility would justify the overall cost of using NFT.

Besides utility, then there are other concerns like the environmental impact and the scammers/thefts. For one side it's true there are scammers, but that it's not exclusive to NFT. Being NFT, twitter or a blog, anyone can steal any content you put on internet and claim it as theirs. So in this matter I don't really see a difference. Yes, it sucks if someone else tries to make money with your content but in most cases there's nothing you can actually do to prevent it (fortunately my content is bad enough that I haven't experienced this, as far as I know).

Then what it seems to be the main reason against NFT, the environmental cost... It's a fact that NFT, and crypto in general, have a significant impact. There are numbers about how bad crypto is, but how does it compare to the power consumption of tapas, webtoons, patreon, instagram? (maybe NFT is worse, but some reference is needed to put everything in perspective).
At the end it's difficult to compare as, while you can find some numbers here and there, I don't know what it is actually taken into account or how reliable those numbers are. For example a study said a single bitcoin transaction consumes as much as 1000 VISA transactions, does that takes into account the power consumption of banks, ATMs and everything the banking system, and therefore VISA, relies on? I'm not here to defend crypto, just saying that things might not be so black or white.

I guess one thing I never understood about NFTs was why support an artist through those when you can just buy a commission from them? Sure, not every artist does commissions, but I'd think it would be WAY better than literally doing a mass amount of damage to the environment

Either commissions, Patreon, Ko-fi, or physical prints. I would much rather support an artist through those and have a physical print from them to hang on my wall instead of a string of numbers.

You'll see me dead before I join the most obnoxious circlejerk of a community that is the crypto-nerds.

The very concept of NFTs affecting already existing media (charlie bit me video, etc), how it could lead to more strict restrictions on how we access/save/use files from the internet if successful, how easy it is to "steal" NFTs people share with little to no change on the quality and compression of the original product, and the kind of people and soulless art behind it, makes me hope it doesn't last long.

I don't think the idea by itself is bad, perhaps some of it could even help artists from having their art uncredited and used for purposes unknown to the creator of the art, but it feels like a dirty move from coorporations and the like to get more people into crypto.

One just can hope the future gives a far more efficient technology, and less dumb ways to use it.

Also, no. Why would I NFT my comic?
I'll always welcome money because S T U D E N T D E B T but what's the point of making money from a comic few people can access to spread and share with friends?

I made a hard pass on the crypto currency years ago, NFT is no different and I will actively restrict/block anyone related to it. I simply don't wish to engage or humor anyone affiliated to it either
Not to mention that it won't hurt my life experience to filter that stuff out. Got plenty of entertainment ready at hand that don't involve toxic practice or marketing.

It's a GOOD question!
With all the voices on Tapas, let me shed you some light.

First, I need you to remove and forget about all the NFT knowledge you had learned from whoever and whatever person you learn it from.

Secondly, I need you to understand what is Decentralised Storage System and IPFS.

Third, I need you to re-learn how a Non-Fungible Token works and help artists in the future.

If you are unable to do that, sorry, better keep the idea to yourself at this time.

If you can do it. Let's continue...

Key point 1: NFS as Proof of Membership
Where it is a tool to ensure your supporter is able to directly reward you and access your content after they pay you. It is like a service, it helps you to manage your supporters without the need for a centralised platform.
Example Tapas, you need to go through Tapas to connect with your subscriber. With NFT, the interaction between you and your subscribers are two-way, direct. You may code your system to manage the NFT owner, like a membership system.
- Is that an advantage? Yes and no! NFT will only help famous and larger artists who already have some followers and fans that they are able to be independent on their own. But small artists like those in Tapas still need a CENTRALISED community here to support each other. So NFT generally does not benefit the smaller artists in a whole.
- Personal take: at the moment, too many hypes and scams in the realm. A lot of people are on NFT just for the money and not for the art. So we need time to wait for it to cool down. Again, it will still go to the question above. Will it benefit small artists like us? Nope.

Key point 2: NFS as Intellectual Property Rights
The more valuable feature of NFT is that you may permanently date your works on IPFS and secure it and no one shall be able to tamper the data that is already on the chain. That is some strong form of protection over your work. However, is that something you can bring to the court for any potential violation of IP rights?
- Let's look at the case of Beeple. He explicitly uses the trademark of Disney and sells his work as an NFT. Disney was unable to bring him to court for many reasons. One is the method of exchange for the NFT is not in an enforceable currency, another issue is, the location where it took place.
- Thus, it comes to a question, if we are the original author, how can NFT protect our IP other than protecting our claim of the published date? At the moment, it does nothing other than that. Due to no country having established any policy or rules regarding that. That's why we haven't heard Disney took any legal action on Beeple yet. And he is lucky, that he gets away with it. But all came back to the fact that others may still steal your work and sell it. Therefore, NFT is not a good IP protection tool.

Key Point 3: NFT as Tool of Royalty
One advantage of NFT is its ability to reward the author with the pre-programmed royalty system. Example, author issue NFT, sell it to owner A, and then owner A sell it to owner B, the part of the selling profit will be rewarded to author automatically. This system is designed to fix the problem of existing auction system that does not benefit the original author.
- The royalty system does help the author, but it will only work when the author themselves can become famous and highly desirable.
- This system can also be useful if you use NFT as membership. It means your membership can be transferable yet you still earn profit from part of the transfer activity.
- This might be something promising for artists. However, one must read the smart contract to learn whether this system was programmed properly into or not. At the moment, a lot of NFT services smart contracts are still not publicly accessed, means, they are not fully open source! You'll be surprised, the site might tell you they are open source, in fact, how many of you seriously go and check their git and try to run their git? I would like to let you know this truth, very very little! Artists, most of us are not engineers and not educated in computer science (I am professional, and also a "person in the art" <- legal term) thus, a lot of them fall in a trap of fraudulent NFT platforms.

Summary...
To issue an NFT, it is expensive! The cheapest that I know of, well still cost around USD1 for a single file. If you are not using the IPFS, there is no point to do an NFT. Unless you are focus on key point one, which is the membership management, yes, may be you will have better success. But if all you want is to get rich quick like Beeple, you better don't involve in the realm! As for the environmental concern... well, I guess those who wrote about those long long argument never really know where the major environmental impact really from. I can always post more long long long articles that counter that. but then, will they read it? nope! As in Tapas, there aren't many novel readers, most are comic readers. So I doubt people will read my reply too. LOL.
okay, so let me just do the same thing... yes, by sharing some long long article for the pro-blockchain argument on the environmental issues. So this is not trying to start a war in this forum okay, if you really into it, you may read it. if not into it... it is still okay to be ignorant. Here's one SHORT article, please take note about the source of the article is from OECD:
https://www.oecd.org/finance/Blockchain-technologies-as-a-digital-enabler-for-sustainable-infrastructure-key-findings.pdf1
And another additional note about the environment. If you are still drinking with a plastic straw, if you are still ordering take-away with disposable containers, you're contributing to the harm of the environment way worst than using decentralised technology!

Who am I? I'm a professional technologist. My comments above were not paid and It should not serve as any financial advice.

But I hope one day the decentralised technology shall redeem itself and may the next generation of interconnectivity and trust be developed into something that can benefit the world. Peace!

LOL. We have a term for that: TL;DR

I don't do NFTs, it seems like the ethereum dudes get the most of it and not the artist.

I find this joke pretty funny, NFTs are nothing but a scam by morons who get mad at people for using the save picture feature on every device

I'm pretty frustrated reading this thread, tbh. There are a lot of folks in here yelling pretty loud that don't know what they're talking about. There are a lot of people passing judgements about crypto in this thread that don't own or know the first thing about crypto or the crypto space. This is how misinformation gets started and gets spread.

Take the environmental concerns for example. Do you even know why the carbon footprint for some crypto is so large? There are many MANY different blockchains, and are secured in a variety of different ways. Some are proof of work, some are proof of stake, some are proof of authority, etc. On top of that, there are significant variations on each of these proof methods that make each blockchain unique. Proof of work often gets blamed for being the environmental offender, though there are networks like Helium that use a wholly different version of proof of work that requires almost no energy at all by comparison. There are also many blockchains that are making moves to eliminate the vast majority of their carbon footprint by moving to different proof methods. Ethereum for example will be going proof of stake towards the end of the year. I haven't even touched on multilayer blockchains here, or the incentivization for carbon neutral renewables by the crypto miners themselves, dumping money into the renewable energy markets.

NFTs are stored on a vast number of different blockchains, each with their own unique ecosystems and pros and cons. Crypto is an extremely complex and rapidly changing environment. Claiming that "all NFTs are bad for the environment" is not only naive, but straight up wrong. Claiming that crypto in general is a scam or a pyramid scheme shows a complete lack of experience with the space. These are gross oversimplifications. These are things you say when your opinion is second hand, and regurgitated from opinions you read on the internet. Do your own research. Nothing is black and white, especially something as vast and complex as cryptocurrency, and you need to have real active experience in something in order to understand it properly.

Please stop yelling opinions about things you don't understand. You're doing far more damage than good.

I don't like how people hyper focus on the environmental side when there are a lot of issues with NFTs that people do not talk about.

A great example of how deep and complex this topic is, which is exactly my point. This is not a black and white issue, and is vastly different depending many factors like on who's minting the NFT, what blockchain it's on, what the NFT contains, current and future regulations, copyright laws, financial laws, etc. etc. etc. I could go on.

I'm an active professional in the technology and art fields, but I'm not an expert in international law, global financial markets, or bleeding edge encryption tech, and afaik neither is anybody else in this thread.

I think there could be some value to NFTs for artists but I have not had much interest in learning more about it. I am, however, familiar with some use of NFTs for tax write offs and money laundering.

Areas with anonymity and unclear regulatory implications are the wild west; that's why we see these scams popping up with DeFi in general. @NickRowler and @TedGravesArt have a good point on that. I don't have a heavy opinion since I'm still pretty ignorant though

It can definitely have value but it's not in a great state right now