Last weekend I found a bunch of “Dead Zombies (THE DEAD) following me on Twitter, and there are people with this avatar everywhere:
Layman: This green guy is a CryptoPunk. CryptoPunk is a 24 x 24 pixel art NFT series with only 10,000 in total. It was created by Larva Labs in June 2017 and is a veteran NFT. With new NFTs appearing every hour now, CryptoPunk is both rare and valuable in terms of its age.
Therefore, as the value of NFTs has soared in the past few weeks, CryptoPunk is leading the way. The most expensive Punk in March sold 4200 ETH . Today, it is worth 7.57 million U.S. dollars. If you want to buy yourself a Punk, you also have to spend 51.85 ETH for the cheapest one. This is the “reserve price”. At this price you will get a more ordinary Punk. And to buy a rarer Punk, ape, alien or zombie, like the ones seen above, you will have to pay more ETH.
Some other things about CryptoPunk:
- Owning a Punk is a status symbol, just like owning a Ferrari or a designer handbag.
- Punk owners often use the Punk picture he owns as their profile picture (PFP).
- Using a Punk that does not belong to you as an avatar will cause dissatisfaction among others
Last weekend, hundreds of people replaced their avatars with a zombie-like Punk. This NFT was sold for 1,201.725 ETH ($3.75 million) last Friday. This time, no one expressed dissatisfaction with so many people showing Punk wearing an incomplete party hat emoji, because they all have this NFT.
At Friday’s auction, 478 people joined together to participate in PartyBid. This is a new product created by the Anish Agnihotri and PartyDAO team. It allows people to team up to bid on these NFTs to pool their resources and compete with giant whales. Punk for millions of dollars. They call themselves the Party of Living Dead. And they won.
Source: Chuck Anderson
PartyBid makes NFT more social. The literal meaning of party in the front part of the name expresses its sociality. The mechanism behind it also provides opportunities for hundreds of people to buy, own and manage expensive NFTs together. Its social nature is obvious from the design of its website, which looks like a product of the combination of Figma and Masterworks-cursors and comments will fly around the web page in real time. Like last Friday’s auction, hundreds of people were represented by moving cursors and emojis, and they clearly felt they were moving fast on the website. This experience is difficult to describe in words: you can look at the picture above, you’d better visit the website yourself.
Like zombies, NFTs should be dead. How is this going?
My understanding is this.
Last Thursday night, I participated in the Good Time Show hosted by Sriram Krishnan and Aarthi Ramamurthy in the Clubhouse, and I joined Gabby Dizon (YieldGuild), 3LAU, Donnie Dinch (Bitski), Jarrodd Dicker (The Chernin Group), Jon Lai (a16z) and Jesse Walden (Variant) discuss Metaverse together.
Readers of Not Boring believe that Metaverse is already familiar. We have been talking for months. I should not associate Metaverse with anything that may be related to Metaverse.
In the past few weeks, the metaverse has become mainstream. Matthew Ball has published his nine-part Metaverse. Satya Nadella talked about the Metaverse of business management (it feels very interesting!). Mark Zuckerberg has mentioned Metaverse millions of times in the past few weeks. Ben Thompson wrote an article about Metaverse.
NFTs will obviously play a role on Metaverse. When everything is digitized, it is important to prove that you own something and can take it anywhere on the Internet. But this is not the category of Metaverse, but social networks.
In the “Good Time Show” talk, Jarrod Dicker mentioned the importance of community and status in web3, which triggered a thought: NFT conforms to a lot of Eugene Wei “Status-as-a-Service (Status-as-a-Service) )” in the article about the conditions required for a successful social network.
Before the arrival of the complete Metaverse, there were already more than jpegs. NFT began to feel a lot like a new kind of social network, which sits on top of other social networks and communities—similar to a Superverse—and nothing more than what Wei proposed in the article “Status as a Service” Better evaluation framework.
Status as a service
If you have read and understood the article “Status as a Service”, you can skip this paragraph. )
Eugene Wei has served as a brand leader at Amazon, Hulu, Flipboard and Oculus, and is one of the best technology critics on the Internet. In fact, everything he wrote has become a classic, and “Status as a Service” was written by him in February 2019 and may be his most influential article.
This article makes the articles in my Not Boring column appear very short. It has a staggering 19,825 words. If you haven’t read it yet, I strongly recommend you to read it. But for now, I will summarize some of the main points related to this article.
Start with two principles
- Humans are monkeys seeking social status
- Mankind is looking for the most effective way to maximize social capital
Although these are not controversial claims, Wei believes that we will not analyze social networks in terms of status or social capital. Money will be simpler-there are a lot of data, and only those that can be measured can be analyzed-but he said (this is my emphasis):
Social capital is the main indicator of financial capital in many aspects, and therefore its nature requires more detailed analysis. It is not only a good investment or business practice, but analyzing the dynamics of social capital can also help explain various seemingly irrational online behaviors.
Two years before the emergence of NFT fanaticism, Wei unconsciously used less than 1,000 words in his article to lay the foundation for analyzing what is happening now. NFT blurs the boundaries between social and financial capital. As the media has quickly pointed out, buying jpegs for thousands or millions of dollars seems very irrational.
Those who deny NFTs make the same mistake as Wei believes that people make when analyzing social networks: they ignore the importance of social capital. Traditionally, people use Metcalfe’s Law to explain the network effect that promotes social networks: “The value of a telecommunications network is proportional to the square of the number of users connected to the system (n^2).” According to Metcalfe’s law, the more users a social network has, the greater its value to each new user.
The problem is that Metcalfe’s law does not perfectly explain what happens in the real world. Only Metcalfe’s law can be used to predict which network gets bigger first, and it will continue to build an increasingly difficult lead because it becomes the most valuable network for each new user. But Facebook defeated MySpace, and Instagram and Snapchat took away young users from Facebook. People’s choices are not so completely captured.
This is not to say that network effects and Metcalfe’s law are wrong, but it does not analyze that the reasons why someone uses social networks may exceed pure utility. Therefore, Wei proposes a new framework to analyze the power of social networks. , Adding social capital to it.
Source: Eugene Wei
Wei evaluates the strength of social networks from three dimensions: social capital, entertainment and utility. In this article, it focuses on social capital and utility.
The utility is relatively easy to understand. If you are looking for answers to questions on Quora, or you can easily find your high school classmates whose phone numbers have been lost on Facebook, these products will provide you with utility.
On the other hand, social capital is even more difficult, depending on whether a “successful status game” can be established. To help explain why some new social networks can succeed and some cannot, it uses a metaphor: cryptocurrency.
He said that the new social network is similar to ICO (Initial Coin Offerings) in four respects:
- Every new social network will issue a new type of social capital, namely tokens.
- You must show proof of work to get tokens
- Over time, it has become increasingly difficult to mine new tokens on each social network, creating inherent scarcity.
- Many people, especially the elderly, scoff at social networks and cryptocurrencies.
This is really a very good analogy. Take Bitcoin and Twitter as examples.
- Bitcoin blockchain issues Bitcoin ( BTC ). Twitter “release” follower.
- Miners get BTC for providing network security. Twitter users get followers for posting humorous, funny, or mind-boggling content within 140/280 characters.
- The cost of mining BTC is now higher than before, and the difficulty will continue to increase until 21 million BTC are mined. In the early days of Twitter, you could get followers by posting what you ate for lunch; today, people want to watch longer tweets.
- This is self-explanatory.
15 years ago, Bitcoin and Twitter did not exist. Both are very influential forces today. They reward early adopters and incentivize them to build a network, and then make it more and more difficult to mine new coins, realizing the network from scratch.
These four points are all important, but the most useful is the proof of work in this status game. If everyone who signs up for Twitter can get 1 million followers because of registration, then there would be no social capital with 1 million followers. The fact is that multi-trackers become valuable because of scarcity, and it is the requirement of proof-of-work that makes scarcity scarce.
Aside from entertainment, Wei talked about five arcs that social networks can follow, four of which are the trade-offs between social capital and utility over time.
Source: Eugene Wei
1. Effective use first, then social capital. “Come for the tools, and stay for the network.” Instagram attracted users at first because of simple image editing tools, and then became a network based on images. On this basis, people attracted a large number of followers and established huge business.
2. There is social capital first, and then effective use. Wei emphasized that Foursquare, Wikipedia, Quora, and Reddit are products that use the promise of social capital to allow people to work on them for free, and then become practical tools for the public.
3. Effective use, but no social capital. Information transmission applications are very useful for communicating with people they know, but not helpful for users who want to build social capital.
4. There is social capital, but the utility is low. Wei put Facebook in this category and mentioned that many of his friends no longer use Facebook, which has no impact on their lives (this is also the case for me, and I think many readers too).
The fifth category is the “Holy Grail” level, that is, both social capital and effective use . The example Wei found is China’s WeChat, which combines a circle of friends (social capital) like Facebook with a lot of utility. Regarding this, I once wrote:
People use WeChat to send messages to friends, shop, read news, play games, pay in physical stores, etc. Basically everything you do on your mobile phone can be done on WeChat.
WeChat has created a killer of social capital and utility from the very beginning, which has not really been replicated in the West.
However, even for those who find the right direction on social networks, Wei pointed out that there are two forms of asymptote that can limit growth or lead to a complete collapse.
Social asymptote #1 is the proof of work itself. Not everyone in the world can obtain social capital on any particular social network, which forms the upper limit. I like to use TikTok very much, but I never make TikTok videos because I am not good at dancing and I am not willing to put in the effort to do what the Tiktok algorithm requires me to do. TikTok is still growing at a ridiculous rate, but if even someone who loves social networks like me is unwilling to use it, there is actually a ceiling here.
Social asymptote #2 is the expansion and contraction of social capital.
In terms of social capital expansion, when a social network becomes too successful and too many people are using it, the company behind it will inevitably need to introduce algorithm push to deal with all voices. Wei believes that the algorithmic push introduced by Facebook is what users are most likely to like, because the most scarce resource in a rich digital world is the user’s attention, so it is necessary to push what they are most likely to be interested in. This makes sense, but for any company that relies on Facebook to connect with its audience, it’s a hurdle.
In terms of social capital crunch, as more and more people join, social networks will become less cool. A typical example is that when parents started using Facebook, all young people switched to Instagram and Snapchat. Once the cool kids start to leave, those who are not so cool will follow, and then the next group will follow, and because more not so cool groups (parents in this example) continue to join, the cool content of Facebook Will drop quickly.
“At this time,” Wei reminded, “It is best to move the product or service as far out as possible on the utility axis, otherwise the rate of loss will be unstoppable like a nosebleed.”
The essence of this argument is:
- Social networks need to be analyzed based on content other than their network effects.
- There are three analytical dimensions: social capital, utility, and entertainment.
- A new social network is like an ICO, especially because a successful social network will use a moderately difficult proof of work to create scarcity and status.
- There are many paths to social networking, but the best thing is to have high social capital and utility from the start.
- There are two asymptotic lines, even a successful social network is difficult to break through: the ceiling of proof-of-work and the inflation/deflation of social capital
- Those networks that started with high social capital must solve the problem of how to construct utility before encountering these asymptotes, so that they can survive and develop.
Wei gives some examples in the rest of the article to enrich these arguments. Similarly, readers should read, but for the sake of this article, I need to emphasize some particularly valuable points:
- Social capital can be used as transient energy. “You can use social capital accumulation incentives like this as a way to transform the potential energy of status into any form of kinetic energy needed for investment.”
- The new workload proves to extend this status game. Why social networks need to add new forms of proof-of-work to extend this half-life game, and what they can learn from game companies. “Las Vegas casino games pay real money, and they set an attractive bottom line for the return on investment of the game. Some MMORPGs (massively multiplayer online role-playing games) provide players with other benefits, For example, a sense of community, which is longer than the pure skill challenge of playing games.”
- Social capital is transformed into financial capital and vice versa. These exchanges allow us to assign tangible value to social capital. This understanding of value is like people selling intangible assets such as high-level characters in the “World of Warcraft” on the open market.
- The lack of portability of the social graph also frustrates users. This question is particularly important and emphasizes the main difference between traditional social networks and NFTs, so I will quote them here:
From the point of view of existing social networks, it is a good thing to restrict map transplantation, but from the point of view of users, it is frustrating. In view of the antitrust consumer welfare standards, it is difficult to solve the social network problem. One solution is to restrict the power of large network effect companies and require them to allow users to carry their maps to other networks (as many people have suggested). This will weaken the power of social networks in terms of social capital, and force them to compete more in terms of utility and entertainment.
What if you could enter a more portable and decentralized social network? It’s time for NFT to play.
A brief history of NFT
As a quick review, NFT refers to Non-Fungible Toke. The power of NFTs is that they make digital assets scarce. Scarcity makes digital assets valuable, like exotic cars or artwork or rare stamps. If there is no way to prove that you have the official version of the purchase, Beeple’s “Everyday” will not sell for $69.3 million.
NFT started as CryptoKitties in 2017, but they really became hot in early 2021 (I wrote an article about them for the first time at the end of January). Beeple and NBA Topshot led the way when BTC and ETH soared to all-time highs. Crypto upstarts did what the rich would do-buy art. NFT received incredible treatment and was dismissed like a toy.
Source: The New York Times
Then, in April, the price of cryptocurrencies fell, and the popularity of NFTs also fell. People who are skeptical of NFT mutter: “Look, when someone starts paying millions of dollars for jpeg, I know it’s a bubble!”
In June, the cryptocurrency website Protos published an article like the picture below. In addition to it, many blogs published such articles, all of which mentioned a 90% drop in trading volume.
The second sentence of the article is “NFT has reached its peak on May 3, and a single day sold NFT worth $102 million.” The carnival is officially over, although: “But according to Protos’ data analysis, in the past NFT sold only 19.4 million U.S. dollars in one week.”
Then, in the past month or so, interesting things happened. NFT is back with great momentum. In the past 24 hours, only two markets , OpenSea and Axie Infinity, have sold NFT worth 106 million US dollars.
According to DappRadar, in the past 30 days, the transaction volume of the top ten NFT markets reached 1.86 billion U.S. dollars.
This time, it feels as if the NFT is driving the price of ETH and BTC, not the other way around, because despite the fact that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is paying more and more attention to supervision under the new chairman Gary Gensler, and the Warner of the Infrastructure Act -The Portman amendment may also cause harm, but the price of these tokens has risen.
So why are NFTs coming back, and why might they exist for a long, long time? Let’s look back and see how our friend Eugene Wei analyzed it.
Investment is status
We’d better start with the two principles Wei mentioned:
- Humans are monkeys seeking status
- Mankind is looking for the most effective way to maximize social capital
Some things are very rooted. The fact is that we monkeys seeking status are turning to become digital monkeys as the most effective way to maximize social capital.
In this summer of NFT, the monkey series NFT has been in a leading position.
In the past month, the third NFT collection by transaction volume was Bored Ape Yacht Club (BAYC, Bored Ape Yacht Club). Like CryptoPunk, there are only 10,000 Bored Apes.
The Bored Ape Yacht Club website calls itself “a set of limited edition NFT series, in which the tokens can also be used as your membership to the Ape Swamp Club.”
Source: Bored Ape Yacht Club
Unlike CryptoPunk, BAYC is a brand new NFT, which was released on April 30th. But it has been called the third most popular NFT series, probably because it combines social capital and utility. Kyle Chayka of The New York Times recently wrote an article titled “Why Bored Ape Avatar Is So Popular on Twitter” in which Matt Galligan, the founder of XMTP (who used the monkey as his Twitter avatar) said, “It It has become a kind of status symbol, like bringing a luxury watch and wearing rare sneakers.”
Even outside the digital wall of Yacht Club, apes are very popular. Two of the four most expensive CryptoPunks of all time and the two sold at the highest prices in July are rare apes:
Source: Larva Labs
If it seems irrational for people to spend millions of dollars on pixelated ape jpegs, then “analysis of social capital dynamics may help explain all irrational online behaviors.”
Therefore, instead of denying something that is clearly becoming a reality, let’s go a little deeper and analyze the NFT in the dimensions given by Wei. We will also include the dimension of entertainment.
Social capital. NFT is social capital with skin. It is “position brought by investment”. There are only 10,000 CryptoPunk and Apes, some of which are particularly valuable in this limited set, and therefore enjoy high status. Owning a CryptoPunk or a Bored Ape, and often showing it on your Twitter, Discord or Telegram avatar, this shows some of your personal situation. This means that you either entered the crypto circle very early or were rich, or you entered the crypto circle very early and are now rich. The use of high-priced items to increase social capital is not new—look at art, expensive cars, yachts, private jets, handbags, or any scarce item that a very wealthy person buys to show status. It’s just that NFTs are easier to identify and more public.
utility. NFT is also useful, such as investment, as a ticket to enter a Discord group, and even as a digital thing you can hang on the wall. Over time, NFT will develop and penetrate into more audiences, and NFT will give its owners the opportunity to participate in events and get a unique experience.
These things are already happening, buy a Bored Ape to give the owner the membership of Bored Ape Yacht Club. NFTs like Axie can provide real utility-their ownership means the employment of thousands of people. Meebits comes from Larva Labs, the creator of CryptoPunk. It has 3D models and animations that can be used as characters in the game.
Meebits from Larva Labs
entertainment. Although Wei did not explore this dimension in depth (before the TikTok and Sorting Hat article), the most successful social networks are very entertaining. TikTok can be said to be an entertainment network as well as a social network. The same is true for YouTube. People will “dive” and tweet for a few hours every day without interacting, purely for passive entertainment. NFT is also entertaining: it is interesting to observe these sales, someone is already establishing an image and network role in playing ape or Punk. Bidding on PartyBid is both a social activity and an investment.
The entertainment of NFT has just begun to develop. Punks Comic is creating comic books based on 16 Punks characters, and there are more comic books. They will also be expanded to Board Apes soon.
Source: Punks Comic
This is just the first step that is compelling. Many people who are optimistic about the NFT believe that all major cultural events in the future will have a commemorative NFT, which will also have an impact on the event itself and change according to what happens in the real world.
Therefore, NFT provides social capital, utility and entertainment. How do they respond to Wei’s suggestion that the new social network is similar to an ICO? Given that they are all cryptocurrency projects, this question is almost too simple:
1. Each social network issues a new form of social capital, a token.
2. You must show proof of work to earn tokens.
3. Over time, it will become more and more difficult to mine new tokens on each social network, creating built-in scarcity.
4. Many people, especially the older ones, sneer at social networks and cryptocurrencies.
There are some subtle differences here.
NFT is more directly linked to social and financial capital. One way to obtain valuable NFT is to enter the field early and participate when the NFT is forged, or when the wider community is not interested in it very early. Another way is to buy one directly. The former method is more biased towards proof of work—find out early supported projects—the latter method is closer to proof of equity—take out your ETH to support and participate in the project.
There are also some direct similarities: many people, especially the elderly, will sneer.
Even if I admit: NFT is still a bridge too far to be a social network.
They don’t look like social networks; they are more like small communities. But local and exotic car clubs are this type of social network, just like country clubs, they are too small in scale to have enough analytical significance.
But NFT can show the status and social capital to the world online. However, if Facebook, Snapchat, TikTok and Twitter are all social networks, NFT feels different from them.
I think they are different things, but this is also a correct strategy.
In the “Status as a Service” section, Wei wrote a section titled “Why Status-Driven Network Copy Work Proven to Be a Bad Strategy” . Basically, using the same core proof-of-work mechanism as the existing social network, and then adding some functions is not feasible, because it requires the same skills, and people tend to gather in the social network with more people The internet. Bitclout is similar to Twitter, but has cryptocurrency characteristics. It still rewards people for the same things as Twitter-saying things that are humorous, funny or smart. The difference is that if you succeed on Bitclout, your tokens will become more valuable and you can make money. The direct exchange of social capital for financial capital may be enough for people to repeat their work or transfer their work to a new platform, but this is challenging.
Instead, you need to reward a completely new behavior. NFTs may be sufficiently different to be feasible, and they do not require people to leave existing social networks that they like. In fact, it would be better for the NFT collection and all its owners if everyone showed off and talked about their NFT on existing social platforms they like. This trend will directly create more demand, but it can also create indirect opportunities. If a Netflix executive sees people talking about CryptoPunks on Twitter , they might make it a show to reward the owner. If someone at Christie’s auction saw everyone on Discord talking about Art Blocks, they might put Squiggle out for auction, bringing fame and influence to the entire collection.
Chromie Squiggle #5994, ArtBlocks by Snowfro
When this happens, each NFT owner (or owner group) will build up huge social capital, and they may exert influence on the network. If CryptoPunk has a Netflix show, the starring Punk may become their own celebrity and build exogenous social capital that they can use in a series of social networks.
NFT is not a social network in the traditional sense. There is no NFT company. They do not have a place of attribution, no place to gather all the NFT owners and NFT companies. Maybe OpenSea is such a role? Or blockchain games/virtual worlds like CryptoVoxels, Decentraland or The Sandbox. Or someone will build an anonymous social network. NFT ownership is equivalent to admission tickets, just like having an email address like @harvard.edu to use Facebook. Most likely, this is not any of the above cases. It is a new thing-a Superverse.
What I mean by “super” does not mean “top!”, what I want to express is that NFT may be an existence on other social networks, or a “super version” of other networks.
As Wei said, “Limiting the porting of graphs is a good thing for existing social networks, but it frustrates users.” He said that if regulators force social networks to make their graphs portable, it will “ Weaken the power of social games in terms of social capital, and force them to compete more in terms of utility and entertainment.”
What if it is not a regulatory agency, but a new entrant to prove the power of portability? When I wrote, “Cryptocurrency is a native token for large online games,” I mean this portability. You can gain status in one place, own it without platform risk, and you can still bring it on the entire Internet. NFT is the same situation, no matter which platform rises and falls. Any social network with an avatar (that is, all social networks) is fertile ground for spreading NFT. The owner has put their Punk in their Twitter profile picture or their RTFKT in their Instagram picture.
And it’s not just the movement of individual people. Groups that collectively own specific NFTs, such as the Party of the Living Dead or DAOs with NFTs, can be transferred to any new platform together, with Discord as the base camp, and from there send out the golden tasks to all new areas. On new and existing platforms, these members can bring in external social capital with valuable NFTs, and build their NFT incarnations as a group. This Twitter series talks about segmented NFTs like small networks and the ability to turn 10,000 scarce assets into 10,000 scarce assets supported and promoted by hundreds of thousands or millions of people.
Wei wrote about Chris Dixon’s idea of ”coming for tools, staying for the web”. NFT makes it possible for us to come as a tool, and then bring the network to any place with the most social and financial value.
In all the arguments about NFTs, it is also very important to point out the warning here: the price of a particular NFT or the total demand for NFTs may fall, or even drop sharply. Even non-foaming funds will have foamy funds. Recently, another antique NFT collection in 2017, Ether Rocks, has surged in demand, and these stones cost more than $100,000. Even the creator of the project called it a “pet stone on the blockchain”. This resurgence seems to be a test of the strength of the community—the extent to which they can make things valuable.
In other words, NFT seems to really have the characteristics of resisting the two asymptotic lines proposed by Wei.
Resistance asymptotic #1, proof of work, NFT has the ability to add unlimited new work to prove, Wei said that it can extend the half-life of this status game. The two examples he used to extend the life of games are Las Vegas casino games and MMORPGs, because they have the same characteristics as NFTs. Similar to casino games in Las Vegas, NFT can “use real money to set an attractive bottom line for the return on investment of participation”. Similar to MMORPG, NFT’s sense of community is more durable than pure skill challenges of playing games. In other words, NFTs will face restrictions on the adoption rate and affordability of cryptocurrencies. NBA TopShot and Fractional are moving in the right direction. Undoubtedly, there will be more innovations to make NFT accessible to a wider range of people, but at the same time retain the benefits of scarcity, or replace scarcity with other benefits (such as community) sex.
Resistance to Progressive Line #2, the expansion and contraction of social capital, NFT has the advantage of decentralization. Although some platforms may use algorithms to display NFTs, NFTs are portable and owners can choose to use and display them anywhere. They also seem to be less affected by “evaporative cooling”, because NFT is not a whole-they are a group of small communities, each with its own standards. Although there are only 10,000 Punks, there may eventually be thousands of DAOs or sub-ownership groups, each of which forms its own small community with its own standards and rules. The segmented structure should make them more resilient. In addition, the proof of equity and the owner can choose when to sell it, and it may take a lot of time and money for parents to buy these CryptoPunks like they occupied Facebook.
It is still in a very early stage. Even if I like these things, I don’t own Punk, Ape or any other major collections. It is also necessary to build more infrastructure and construct more “components” that connect different NFT projects. But it seems that NFT has the characteristics of building a new form of social network-a Superverse that surpasses the existing Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat, Discord, TikTok and other networks, and more in line with the needs of users over time, develops better.
New NFT projects can be launched using the effective combination of social capital and financial capital. Ownership brings social capital, utility and entertainment. There are constantly adding proofs of work, from finding the next big event to creating brand extensions like Punks Comics, to marketing specific NFTs, to increasing the visibility of the entire series. The owners of Punk have already advertised on billboards in New York City, Miami and London to promote the NFT of the series. NFT is part of a large online game, so the rules and opportunities are always evolving and increasing. When money, status, and community are combined, powerful things are born.
As always, I was the first person to admit that all this sounds crazy. NFT is more like a fashion than a new type of social network. But thanks to Eugene Wei for giving us a framework for evaluating the power of social networks, and NFT’s performance in this framework is amazing. The 19,825 words in “Status as a Service” basically do not oppose the idea that NFT is a social network; in fact, almost every part has content that supports this idea.
The next big impact thing looked like a toy at first. The next large social network may not look like a social network at all at first. The future will be crazier than we expected. A social network based on jpeg ownership must meet this requirement.
Posted by:CoinYuppie，Reprinted with attribution to:https://coinyuppie.com/why-is-nft-a-new-type-of-social-network/
Coinyuppie is an open information publishing platform, all information provided is not related to the views and positions of coinyuppie, and does not constitute any investment and financial advice. Users are expected to carefully screen and prevent risks.