User talk:Dalecri
| This user is a student editor in University_of_Ottawa/CMN2160_(Winter) . |
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, Dalecri, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with Wiki Education; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.
I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.
Handouts
|
|---|
Additional Resources
|
|
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:23, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
NFT history wildly wrong, please help
[edit]Hi Dalecri. I see that you've made some edits to the "NFT" article and would like to provide a new reliable source article for an important part of the history. Now that the NFT article is protected, I was hoping you could help with these edits.
First, "colored coins" and early trading cards are fungible. Each coin/"card" has many copies and they are all the same. Thus they are NOT "non-fungible" tokens. Counterparty did, indeed, enable single-unit, non-divisible tokens which could be considered NFTs, but without metadata explicitly stating an asset claim. Here is one example: OLGA, minted 7 years ago (2014-06-12T18:26:11Z GMT) which the creator says was a gift to his girlfriend, Olga. Again, the Counterparty-based trading cards were minted with hundreds of units each.
Second, the line about Anil Dash should mention Namecoin as the underlying blockchain. Counterparty did not allow for metadata explicitly stating an asset claim. Namecoin does. What makes Anil Dash's NFT special is the claim to a specific artwork is embedded in the chain itself and tradeable as a "pointer" NFT. In this sense, it is no different than the beeple NFT or other such modern NFTs.
Third, the first pixel/artwork-on-chain (i.e. non-pointer) NFT project ever was Etheria which is referenced at the end of this Techcrunch article about Cryptopunks. This first-ever blockchain collectible environment was launched in 2015, less than 3 months after Ethereum itself, presented at Ethereum's first developer conference, and was interacted with by the small Ethereum community at the time. Cryptopunks keep claiming they were the "first NFT" but the Techcrunch article and the blockchain itself disprove this assertion.
Etheria v1.0 contains the first on-chain artworks ever and the first blockchain UGC. Etheria (v1.1+) is notable for being exchange-tradeable before NFT exchanges even existed. No RS for these claims yet, though the blockchain history is raw, uncut truth and all of this can be verified on Etherscan.
- More concisely, from my research, here is what the timeline should look like (with appropriate RS):
- Kevin McCoy & Anil Dash - A single-unit, non-divisible Namecoin marker with explicit metadata claim to an artwork. May 2014
- OLGA - A single-unit, non-divisible Counterparty(on BTC) "coin" claimed to represent a gift, no metadata. First on BTC, June 2014.
- Etheria - First on Ethereum. First pixel-on-chain NFT. First UGC NFTs. First on-chain artworks. First exchange-tradable, even before exchanges. Launched Oct 2015 (via TechCrunch, though not all of these claims are covered in the article.)
- Rare pepes - The beginning of the modern "cryptoart" surge. 2016
- Curio Cards May 9 2017
- Cryptopunks June 2017
- Mooncats August 9 2017
- Cryptokitties November 28, 2017 (Cryptokitties explosion marks the end of the early era, IMO.)
- Notably EXcluded: Colored coins, trading cards: Cards in these series were minted in the hundreds of units, thus *fungible*, the opposite of the article.
Anyway, thank you for your attention to this hot topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by User5109nfsaln (talk • contribs) 16:46, 19 April 2021 (UTC)