this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2023
184 points (86.8% liked)

Technology

74130 readers
2768 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ThePantser@lemmy.world 121 points 2 years ago (2 children)

What is, phrase that would sound like jibberish 15 years ago

[–] PapaStevesy@midwest.social 51 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I'm reading it now and I still don't understand it. Was the league hiding?

[–] aleph@lemm.ee 30 points 2 years ago (1 children)

They didn't disclose the fact that the passes would be using blockchain technology, apparently. Quite why they thought this was necessary is not clear, but it's not inherently a bad thing.

Unfortunately for them, however, blockchain/cryptocurrency/NFTs are all interchangeable according to the general public, so this has created a bit of a backlash.

[–] QHC@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago (1 children)

From the quotes in the article, they didn't just "not disclose" so much as "lied". Regardless of subject matter, when someone cares enough to make sure something they don't want to be associated with isn't involved and then they find out it actually is, they have a right to be upset.

[–] aleph@lemm.ee 12 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

They didn't lie, though.

The quote you refer to said:

"Aware of the crypto thing," he tweeted. "We were told there was no NFT/crypto component but looks like that may not be the case. Waiting for responses to our emails/phone calls like others."

Which is a misunderstanding on the part of the author of that tweet: blockchain ≠ crypto. While it is the technology that crypto and NFTs are based on, blockchain can be used for a wide variety of different purposes.

So while the organizers probably should have been more clear about how they were going to implement the technology, it appears they didn't say anything that wasn't true.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] echodot@feddit.uk 8 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I don't understand what it is about these media outlets with their allergy to the word "and"

It isn't print you don't have to say space or ink just put "and" in the title.

This time still could be easily rewritten to make more sense and if short length is there goal then you could rewrite it to be even shorter and it would still make more sense

"An influencer-based esports league has imploded over NFT controversy"

[–] MossyFeathers@pawb.social 47 points 2 years ago (9 children)

So, if I understand correctly, the content passes use a blockchain system for authentication, but aren't intended to be used as a currency or investment vehicle and can't be resold or traded. It just uses a blockchain for authentication. The reason why it blew up is because the payment processor was originally meant for nfts and crypto.

Soooo... Basically it sounds like a bunch of people getting upset for no reason because they think blockchain = crypto. Cool. Amazing. Absolutely wonderful. Tbh I don't really care about whatever the Mr. Beast thing is, but the fact that people are confusing the two frustrates me because I could see blockchains having legitimate uses, it's just that scam artists and get-rich-quick schemes have fucked it up.

Maybe it would have turned into an nft scheme, but as it stands right now, it sounds like they were trying to use a blockchain in a legitimate manner.

[–] realharo@lemm.ee 16 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

It's just inherently suspicious, because there is no valid technical reason to do it that way (things just end up being more complicated, more expensive, etc., for no benefit, not to mention the brand damage), unless you have some future plans for it that will involve crypto/NFT crap. The fact that MrBeast has a history with NFTs also doesn't help.

Or course it's still pure speculation.

Have they explained why they chose to use it in some plausible way?

[–] Fisk400@feddit.nu 15 points 2 years ago (10 children)

What is the legitimate use you see? People in this post keep saying there are legitimate uses and gives no examples of what that is.

[–] audaxdreik@pawb.social 4 points 2 years ago

There are no legitimate uses, full stop.

As others have pointed out, it's just a fully public database. Its use case is among trustless parties, and that's why it fails. At some point, somebody is going to want to take action off the data and that's going to involve a trusted party enforcing it. Sooo ... just have the trusted party host the data (and make it public if you really care). And if all the parties are truly that trustless, 1) why are they dealing with either and 2) get a third party trustee to broker your deals

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] aleph@lemm.ee 12 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Basically it sounds like a bunch of people getting upset for no reason because they think blockchain = crypto.

Pretty much, yeah. Seems that people heard the phrase "blockchain" and instantly assumed the idea was to flog NFTs, which is unfortunate for the people behind the platform.

That said, this seems to be yet another example of people using blockchain unnecessarily. Wouldn't a centralized database/authentication server have been a simpler choice?

[–] thalience@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Wouldn't a centralized database/authentication server have been a simpler choice?

By far, which is why many people assumed that the plan was to start flogging NFTs later (once it became more difficult to back out).

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Astroturfed@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It's past the point where if people want to use block chain tech for a practical purpose they just need to shut up about it and no one will even think about what's on the back end making a system work. The crypto-bros have been so loud and annoying for too long. No one wants anything to do with it now.

[–] themusicman@lemmy.world 23 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Blockchain is so rarely the right tool for the job that I would be generally skeptical of any project which uses it.

Event tickets are definitely not a good use case.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Neato@kbin.social 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Isn't blockchain the un-editable database that tracks changes by appending new ones?

How does this benefit an authentication server? Needing it to be decentralized with multiple accurate copies sounds like a recipe for forking your auth server.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 7 points 2 years ago

I keep saying this; blockchain is just a database and a particularly inefficient database at that. That's it, that's all it is, I wish people would stop wanking off over it.

As you say it appends changes, which is a stupidly poor way of doing it because your file size just gets larger and larger over time. It'll literally never be able to get smaller because of the way it works. It'll consume more and more resources until eventually the whole planet is either blockchain or we get bored and give up with it.

The only problem it solves is the necessity for decentralisation, but that's not really a requirement for 99.99% of projects. So it doesn't really solve that many problems. It's nice that it's an option that's there if you need it but it ridiculous the general public even know about it. It should just be one of those projects that only people who browse GitHub know about.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Taako_Tuesday@lemmy.ca 46 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Only tangentially related to the issue at hand, but Mr. Beast's smile terrifies me

[–] Chozo@kbin.social 45 points 2 years ago (3 children)

It's because he never smiles with his eyes, at all.

I don't watch his content and I'm not familiar with him whatsoever, but every photo I've seen of him with that smile just looks like it's a fake, forced smile. Maybe that's actually a genuine smile and his face just does that, I don't know. But yeah, it's definitely off-putting to me, as well.

[–] Sharkwellington@lemmy.one 31 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This doesn't look like a genuine smile to you?

[–] Acters@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago

Those deadpan eyes

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Supervivens@lemmy.world 19 points 2 years ago (4 children)

Can someone explain to me how blockchain technology is controversial when there is absolutely no crypto or nft stuff involved? Just seems like pointless drama tbh

[–] 1bluepixel@lemmy.world 21 points 2 years ago

"Blockchain" is a red flag.

While the technology in itself is not inherently bad, it has such a limited use case in real life, and has been associated with so many scam projects in the crypto sphere, that it's an immediate alarm bell about the seriousness of the project.

[–] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago

I kind of think a "'Personality-driven' influencer esports league" was doomed from the start and the blockchain is a convenient scapegoat.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] LanternEverywhere@kbin.social 11 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Shitty fucking article. I read and read and read and it kept talking about lots of stuff, but not about what the actual problem was. Downvote this waste of time.

[–] FeetiePJs@kbin.social 17 points 2 years ago (4 children)

I think the article is fine. It's just the reality that makes no sense. A bunch of social media celebrities agreed to join an esports league where the celebrities would manage the teams. People could buy a pass for each celebrity that would let them vote on team decisions and give them other benefits. The company selling the passes used blockchain authentication for them. They were also, separately, involved in NFTs. People saw blockchain and NFT and thought "wait a minute, the passes are NFTs? Aren't NFTs a big scam? These passes are a scam!" Then the celebrities saw the outrage and said "What?! No one told me there would be crypto-blockchain-NFTs!" They then dropped out of the league and it was indefinitely postponed. Unless by "actual problem" you meant something that was meaningful in anyway to anyone not directly involved in this nonsense. In that case, no, there was none of that.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] dinckelman@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Our society could literally look like that picture with a completely chromed out city, with flying cars, and glass helices everywhere, but instead we have to watch "influencers" destroy their career in one statement, because they decided to fuck around with something that's clearly a zoomer ponzi scheme

[–] QHC@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago

Flying cars are the stupidest idea, especially since helicopters have existed the entire time and everyone just refused to accept that fact.

[–] morrowind@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Honestly when it comes to things preventing us from reaching utopia, I'd say dumb influencers are not even on that list. It's silly but it hardly affects the average person

[–] hark@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

It's a symptom of a crazy system.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›