This is Counterparty, on NoM.
Check out their dispensers. I think we can do something similar.
1 Like
Where do I find it?
I don’t understand it yet, but I’m reading about it.
1 Like
You don’t need to know everything about XCP but 5-10 mins of research should be enough to understand what I mean.
Users can set a max supply greater than 1 if they want duplicates of the same token. I was surprised to see this is still a popular concept for Bitcoiners.
Ideas for collection sizes:
- max supply 1 per individual NFT (cost 1 ZNN)
- max supply >1 per individual NFT – no longer “non-fungible” (cost 1 ZNN but your collection is much larger)
For distribution, collection owners can do any of the following:
- mint the max supply
- distribute manually (p2p payment or free)
- distribute automatically (airdrop)
- create the collection with a throwaway address (the dispenser) and configure a non-standard minting and distribution mechanism
- the mint and distribution could be limited by a fee
- this is what xchain does
1 Like
What is the goal, strategically, of mimicking an old protocol on the NoM? Would it bring more users? Is the tech they built relevant today and how? For which usecases? Which narrative does it help us market?
Anything that will attract more users is worth pursuing. As a L1 network, one must be able to create non-fungible tokens. It’s a requirement and we’re here to define the spec.
To be clear, this is the spec for one of potentially several NFT protocols on NoM that are limited by the constraints of ZTS.
ZAS isn’t even part of this discussion.
I’ll say this should be seen more as an interesting, fun experiment. Maybe it gains user adoption over time, maybe not.
The XCP crowd thinks their protocol is still relevant and useful, so I’d say that beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
2 Likes
ETH itself is a scam because it’s centralised garbage, and its NFTs are giga scams because you’re just buying a reciept that points to some random place where the jpeg is actually stored. That jpeg can be rugged. The jpeg can also be screenshotted.
The only NFTs worthy of zenon’s brand and ethos is on-chain storage/ decentralised storage and also steganography capacity with easy UX to have hidden signatures and things inside of it
If we copy ETH and make shitty NFTs … not gonna help us win over hardcore bitcoiners. it’d be a misuse of the NoM and I don’t think prominent people in our community should be advocating for this. do what you want, but that’s my 2 cents.
2 Likes
Agree. IMO it’s more about FAFO. If we don’t fuck around, we will never find out. Let’s try some stuff and have fun.
2 Likes
Thank you for the resources!
Storing data onchain is advantageous for Bitcoin, because fees are paid based on how much data is included in the transaction.
Unlike Bitcoin, NoM fees are limited to 1 ZNN. Also, the stored data is limited to ~17kb on NoM, which is rather low.
NFTs are already possible on NoM, but right now they’re not referencing any data (images, videos).
Yes, that’s pretty much the purpose here, doing something fun. Down the road we could migrate to NFTs storing the data onchain.
1 Like
We should be something fun BUT that makes sense VS the NoM. Not copying ETH NFTs.
1 Like
Copying Eth’s NFTs isn’t a bad thing, particularly because we could mint and transact them without fee’s
It’s also the most popular NFT standard by far - and would tie in nicely with web3 and games
I don’t see why we can pursue more than 1 solution in the short and long term
2 Likes
I don’t necessarily “like” it, but what you have spoken, is the truth.
Nobody cares about fee when it comes to NFTs. Let’s see beyond that. Don’t go the easy way. How did SOL NFTs work and are they still interesting now ? Rethorical question, there’s no volume to be seen. On ETH there is still activity. Why? Fee doesn’t matter.
Seems to me decentralization might be top-of-mind for a lot of NFT holders, otherwise why is there a slight trend of ETH NFTs being converted to ordinals/brc20’s? Clearly, fees are not the reason, lol. A lot of this ETH centralization FUD might be working.
We can leverage that ETH NFT exodus and be like: why go to BTC for NFTs when there is a better alternative? We got cool tech that improves decentralization and scalability over time, plus we are feeless and can provide smart contract capabilities, join the cool-looking aliens and forget about moving your NFTs ever again.
of course fees matter - activity doesn’t equal happiness with the situation, merely acceptance likely due to lack of comparable/convenient alternatives
Like I said, if we can get Eth style NFTs up and running quickly and pain free it’s a no brainer to me. Aspirational endeavors can still be worked on in unison and be delivered down the line