Question about NFTs and environmental concerns

trekfangrrrl

Hey Trek fam, I have seen a lot of talk lately about NFTs spurred on by the Trek Continuum thing. Before I go any further let me just say that looks completely lame and I have zero interest. Having said that I have seen a lot of people coming after it based on environmental concerns. I know basically nothing about all of that, but I do have this question:

Is creating an NFT spaceship more or less harmful than creating a plastic spaceship (of which I have many)?

This is a genuine question and not a trick. But the reason I'm asking is because if I already know creating plastic products is harmful, not to mention the human slave labor used to assemble a lot of stuff. So what I'm trying to work out in my mind is would I be a hypocrite saying "you shouldn't buy NFTs, they're bad for the environment" if I am willing to buy harmful stuff for pure entertainment (not some actual needed item which may contain plastic).

If you have some knowledge about the NFT harm and how it compares to me buying plastic ships purely for fun I would love to hear your thoughts and much love!

phoenixc

Plastic models that people keep a long time are not the problem, the problem with plastic is the so-called "biodegradable" plastic that is used in single-use items like soda straws, plastic bottles, etc.

It really isn't even biodegradable, it just dries up and cracks under UV light like is found in sunlight and ultimately disintegrates down into a very fine powder that was thought to be inert and harmless. The problem is that it usually stops disintegrating before it reaches that dust-sized state out in the wild, becoming small jagged pieces about the size of ground pepper and get into the bodies of people and animals and cause problems (and even smaller pieces seem to a problem too).

NFTs are a potentially harmful pollutant too, but in a legal environment instead of a natural one since, if manipulated in predatory ways, they have the potential to damage rights and creativity by acting to short circuit fair use laws and other similar rights. On top of that, they are kept on servers, distributed over the internet, and whatnot using equipment that continually uses energy and contain a certain amount of hazardous material in their construction.

So I would say just keep on with the plastic models, they are really not much, if any, worse than NFTs in the long run.

trekfangrrrl

phoenixc#0738 wrote: »

Plastic models that people keep a long time are not the problem, the problem with plastic is the so-called "biodegradable" plastic that is used in single-use items like soda straws, plastic bottles, etc.

It really isn't even biodegradable, it just dries up and cracks under UV light like is found in sunlight and ultimately disintegrates down into a very fine powder that was thought to be inert and harmless. The problem is that it usually stops disintegrating before it reaches that dust-sized state out in the wild, becoming small jagged pieces about the size of ground pepper and get into the bodies of people and animals and cause problems (and even smaller pieces seem to a problem too).

NFTs are a potentially harmful pollutant too, but in a legal environment instead of a natural one since, if manipulated in predatory ways, they have the potential to damage rights and creativity by acting to short circuit fair use laws and other similar rights. On top of that, they are kept on servers, distributed over the internet, and whatnot using equipment that continually uses energy and contain a certain amount of hazardous material in their construction.

So I would say just keep on with the plastic models, they are really not much, if any, worse than NFTs in the long run.

Thanks for the reply! And very awesome info, thanks. However I am not sure if I explained my concern correctly. My concern was not even so much the "biodegradable" part, but the actual creation part. How much harm does the actual creation of the plastic then the manufacturing of the toy product cause in comparison with the harm caused by the NFT? Does that even make sense?

orangenee

Well, plastic mostly comes out of fossil-fuels. Though somewhat recently it's become possible to refine it from cotton and various other natural sources (bioplastics). Fossil-fuels WILL run out, hence current events in Eastern Europe. Can't speak much for the manufacturing process or any ethical concerns though.

NFTs, basically throwing your money into a black hole. You pay all that money for nothing. See George C. Parker for further details. Which is why they've been dunked on so much.

angrytarg

I think the problem with NFTs is rather that it's essentially a pyramid scheme, but not that it harms the environment in an extraordinary way. Maybe some people confuse it with Cryptocurrency which - the way it turned out to be generated - eats up massive amounts of energy and hogs a lot of hardware to benefit singular persons over many people. And, essentially, it's the same pyramid scheme of course.​​

foxrockssocks

Yeah environmental concerns are usually vastly overstated any time anyone uses that as an excuse. Plastics aren't remotely harmful to the environment if actually disposed of properly, like in a landfill, or "recycled" which is what happens in western countries, even California. Unfortunately many countries just dump stuff into the ocean and rivers *cough CHINA cough* but life adapts and plastics are mainly hydrocarbons at the end of the day so there is energy to be had there for adaptable life forms.

NFTs are simply a scam/pyramid scheme/money laundering tool, or similar thing, and should be avoided at all costs because of that.

jonsills

NFTs also use what's called a "proof of work" blockchain - that is, every time a transaction involves that identifier, the systems involved have to prove that they can work through a particular incredibly difficult series of mathematical equations. This burns electricity, the amount increasing as the required complexity of the calculations increase. Proof of work has been used so often that the equations currently require massive amounts of electricity, which in many areas is produced by burning oil or coal, with accompanying environmental damage. Imagine trying to sell your NFT for the millions of bitcoins you've been promised, and the transaction (requiring verification of the chain for the NFT *and* the bitcoins) using up enough electricity to power a Central American country for a month. Now multiply that by the number of people trying to cash in on this whole fad before it collapses like the Ponzi scheme it is.

That's a lot of drilling, mining, and pollution.

ryan218

There's also the fact that your small model starship requires the extraction, refining, and manufacture of plastics ONCE. The block-chains which are needed for NFTs to work have to run CONSTANTLY for YEARS.

In the long-term, NFTs actually have the potential to be more harmful than plastics.

angrytarg

Wait, so you actually have to have the server-farms running, even if you don't "do anything" with your NFT? I thought that only applies to mining cryptocurrency.​​

phoenixc

NFTs and cryptocurrency actually have more in common than a lot of people think.

angrytarg

I know the technology is similar but I thought once the coin or NFT is generated it's just a piece of code that sits idle until it's part of a transaction. If that code has to be maintained and eats up energy while it just idles then that's even worse than I thought.

ryan218

angrytarg wrote: »

I know the technology is similar but I thought once the coin or NFT is generated it's just a piece of code that sits idle until it's part of a transaction. If that code has to be maintained and eats up energy while it just idles then that's even worse than I thought.

All code needs to be maintained. If it's on the Internet, there is a server running somewhere with that piece of code on it.

The issue with block-chains is that every time something queries the ownership of an NFT (and sites will do this regularly) the system will, as I understand it, run the entire block-chain to verify ownership all the way back to the point-of-origin to prevent fraud, like a digital paper-trail. The more that NFT is traded, the longer that block-chain becomes, meaning the more resources servers need to allocate to run that block-chain.

Compare to buying a second-hand car: in the UK, you don't personally need to see a complete list of the vehicle's previous owners back to it's initial registration; you just need to see proof the person you are purchasing the vehicle from is the legitimate owner/keeper, and who the keeper was before them - contained in the 'log book' (current keeper and previous keeper).

I only explained in that much detail because I know second-hand vehicle purchases are restricted in parts of the US.

Block-chains go all the way to the NFTs original creation, getting longer the more that NFT is traded.

rattler2

Knowing a vehicle's damage history might be better than all the previous owners though. But that's an optional service that was made that isn't connected to any dealerships.
Pretty sure you'd like to know if the car was swamped in a hurricane and repaired than who the original owner was.

angrytarg

And here I thought you could theoretically store that stuff offline and it's only verified if needed. Is the blockchain lost when it's server is destroyed?

foxrockssocks

angrytarg wrote: »

And here I thought you could theoretically store that stuff offline and it's only verified if needed. Is the blockchain lost when it's server is destroyed?

No, the blockchain is decentralized. There is no server, its information stored everywhere and replicated across the blockchain. However NFTs don't really need more energy than is already being used by cryptominers. Yes they are fundamentally linked but they are not separate, additional systems or anything. They are using the exact same chain and even if no one used NFTs, the blockchain behind them will still exist. The ownership information is built into the blockchain somehow. That is going to keep growing whether you trade the NFT or not because of the nature of the tech.

The whole point of NFTs, though, is to create artificial scarcity in a world where it would otherwise be able to be infinitely reproduced at will. It fundamentally goes against the concept of free sharing of information, and even makes no sense in video games where you really want everyone who wants to fly an Enterprise to be able to do so, and pay for it. There are some applications where it might make sense to have a very secure identifier on something digital, but generally NFTs are just a big massive scam.