Hi – I’m new here and trying to understand IPFS, and especially for storing an NFT collection that will be sold / minted.
If I use something like Pinata to keep the files pinned – and as the NFTs get minted (purchased), is it possible to transfer the IPFS storage to the new owner? For example, if I’m paying for pinning the individual NFT graphic file - and the NFT is sold, the NFT metadata will contain a link (URI) to the file in IPFS. But how does the file itself transfer the storage?
I’m wanting to understand that if I stop my pinata account, so I’m no longer pinning the files at some point - and I’m no longer paying for any storage - will the files go away? Or does the new owner (who purchased them, and maybe purchased again on secondary market) take that over? in terms of where they are held? Would they ever disappear?
Just trying to understand that aspect of NFT purchase and transfer of ownership. Would love to get perspectives on how this would be handled… because the smart contract only has the pointer to the graphic file. Who is maintaining it’s hosting/availability over time?
Thanks much! Just trying to understand the landscape.
They just pin it on their node or pinning service.
IPFS doesn’t even know your storage is a thing.
There is no ownership concept or anything like that on IPFS.
All IPFS cares about is block hashes. As long as some blocks with the same hash (that must mean they have identical content) are available IPFS can rebuild the original file. IPFS doesn’t care if it’s in your pinata account, nft.storage or my node, ideally it’s even be in all of them at once.
Depends, if no one else is hosting it yes, else no (IPFS will just download this other copy instead).
Ideally it’s what happen, I don’t have stats but I think very few buyers actually do that.
Because people are ?
There are services and apps that will scan owner’s account and pin them automatically. (so imagine you run a script and all of your NFTs gets pinned to your local node) ideally that how it works. I think very few people use that.
In practice it’s often the original creator or the marketplace.
You can also checkout https://nft.storage it’s a free pinning service for NFT data which backup to filecoin (disclaimer I work for the company that made it).
You’re a day late and a dollar short to the NFT grift. I’m really hoping that IPFS can distance itself from this disaster and doesn’t take a hit to its reputation. I’m not looking forward to people saying, “You want to use IPFS? Isn’t that the thing that was used for that NFT crap?”
I try to just ignore the NFT stuff around here but I think the IPFS community embracing it is a Faustian bargain.
What is the service/app that someone who owns NFTs can use to pin them — and what if they do not have their own local IPFS node (which I can’t imagine everyone running one)?
So - NFT’s (whether you like them or not as it relates to digital files/art) are never actually transferred to the purchaser… the purchaser ONLY buys the metadata… lol… at least until there is an actual transfer of ownership - i.e. the purchaser must put that file/graphic in their own IPFS location OR somewhere…
Because otherwise, no IPFS node must hold that actual file – it could in fact disappear… yes? What am I missing? And is it possible to write a process that allows someone to purchase/mint an NFT, and then use Filecoin to store the actual file (which if it’s on IPFS or already in the Filecoin chain) should be able to just be transferred… (best I know to call it) - but it’s got to be connected with the ownership of the NFT itself, right?
I’m thinking Filecoin could be used here – and the URI where the file is located that is stored in the NFT smart contract - it MUST stay with the NFT - so could there be a process written that allows for the “pinning” (for lack of a better term) of the file for a period of time via Filecoin? That could be renewed? or? Just looking for a solution…
Simply having a copy of a file/graphic, whether in IPFS, Filecoin, or your filesystem does now transfer ownership.
yes
Nothing. NFTs are a scam.
Yes, you can already mint an NFT and store anything on Filecoin that you’d like but now someone has to pay to store the thing that you don’t really own so it’s even more grifty than just an NFT but why not? After that you can sell a futures contract on your NFT.
You don’t own it so there’s nothing to transfer other than the very real obligation to continue paying for your Filecoin storage which actually makes sense because people pay to store things they don’t own all the time because there is value in having access to it.
Nope. There’s nothing to connect. You don’t (necessarily) own it so there’s nothing to connect.
A solution to what? Needing a more elaborate scheme to con more people out of their money?
Am I not being friendly to NFT? Absolutely, but I’ve tried to contain my dislike of them and only respond with factual statements. I’m not a big fan of when people reach out and say, “Hey I’m starting a business and looking to make a bunch of money. Can you give me some free advice on how to get started” but I’m at least sympathetic to someone trying to create something of value. If you want to go play three card monte down at the corner of the block, go ahead, but don’t ask me know the run the grift.
Zacharywhitley - I understand your viewpoint on NFTs – and that’s fine - entitled to it. But it seems like IF there is a purchase of a digital asset (and I know Zach you think it’s all bogus) - and that fact is recorded on blockchain with a CID or other link/pointer to the actual file that was purchased - then we’d have both the “title” or “deed” - and the location for the actual “thing” - in this case a digital file.
In that sense, I think someone CAN purchase the digital “thing” and there would be a record of it on blockchain. Where it breaks down is if that “thing” could be deleted and no longer be accessible.
So - does that mean that a Filecoin payment should be collected during the purchase (just like “shipping” is for an ecommerce transaction) - that would be a payment to store that file for a period of time - with instructions possibly provided to the purchaser for how they can continue to keep it “pinned”? without having to run their own local node? (which most users will never do)?
OR should I explore the ARWeave storage solution that is set up so the initial payment to store th data, ensures it will be stored in perpetuity based on the interest that the amount earns over time that pays for the storage in perpetuity.
Just looking for a solution - not more about “NFTs are a scam” statements - because while I got the perspective, I’d like more solution discussion than that. I’m in full acknowledgment of the issue – but I know there is a concept of “ownership” of digital files – heck, that is how Getty Images sues people or sends them bills for ridiculous amounts, when someone uses one of their images on a website today, for example. Same would/could hold here… but we need to move to NFT 2.0 processing/systems, it seems…
Would love more discussion of this - would Filecoin or NFT.storage be able to provide this (using IPFS in the background) to ensure that the file lives in perpetuity? and what would be required to guarantee this?
So what I’m hearing is, “Yes, I know it’s a scam but I was hoping to have a more technical discussion on how to steal people’s money rather than a discussion on whether or not that is a good thing to be doing”.
Calling me out? LOL, I’ve just asked questions about storage and you shared your [strong] opinion about NFTs being a scam.
Got that, but it doesn’t address my questions, which I think are pretty logical and thoughtful. I’m sorry that you can’t tolerate the questions and the inquiry, on a subject you have your strong judgment about.
Start your own thread about NFTs being a scam if you want, but pls refrain from hijacking my post.