The way that Ice Poker works is first you need to get someone to delegate you a wearable. Or you can buy your own, they are like 2 ETH right now, you can mint one for 1 ETH I think. Anyway, once you have a wearable, you get 3000 chips every day. You need to complete 3 missions, like "see the turn 15 times, make two pair 7 times, and make a full house". These award 15 ICE, 80 ICE, and 120 ICE. Ice is currently around 16 cents. Then based on how many chips you have you either get a multiplier or a fractional multiplier. So you will actually get between 2x to 0.1x payment based on how many chips you have. If you have 6000 chips you get a 2x multipler. The games are 10/20.

So yes, you are capped, the most you can make is all three missions and the 2x multiplier. $68.

I guess you could call it a free roll cash game. It would actually be a great learning experience for noobs because the games are fairly loose and pretty passive but significantly tougher than play money since there is actual value to the chips.

Axie Infinity is an important data point, because the Axie NFTs have been plumetting in value. An Axie team that cost $750 6 months ago might cost $150 today. But it is a pretty interesting economy/ scene.

I've only played axie a few times, but I'll just go over the broad details for people here who have never heard of it. I'm definitely not an expert but I did a bit of a deep dive in research recently.

So Axie is the most popular play 2 earn game. It's very popular in the Philippines where people who get scholarships (a manager lets u play their team for them) can actually earn more than an entry level wage. They can make upwards of like $10-$15 a day, or used to be able to anyway. This might not sound like much to you but its a decent economic opportunity for a third worlder.

So axie infinity is sort of like pokemon. You get these axies, and u form a team of three, and then they can battle it out in the arena. And the winner of the match gets some crypto (SLP). So in order to have a team, you need to buy AXIE NFTs. (axies). Right now a team of floor axies would go for maybe $100 but these are bottom of the barrel and won't get you very far. You could get a solid team for maybe $300. Then you find someone in the Philippines to play for you, and they are battling all day to try to make some money. They get 70% u get 30%. So if U are making like $5 / day it only takes 2 months to get 100% ROI. Of course the value of your axies might fluctuate and as I said has been dropping substantially lately.

They are also introducing new things like land and items.

ppg, why do you think ICE tokens will hold value given that their sole purpose is to be given out as rewards for playing a game

how long does it take you to finish the daily challenge?

do you enjoy doing it or is it more like a task?

I don't have an opinion on whether ICE will hold its value or not. The daily challenges I would say can take anywhere from 2-4 hours. I would definitely say that anyone who is grinding micros would be much better off getting an ice delegation if they can. It is relatively tedious, I wouldn't do it if there was no money attached. But definitely beats digging ditches.

Thanks for the insight! I'd watched a youtube video on this, but it wasn't clear what the games were, so that's great to know.

Because you own a share of the business and of its future profits.

How much would the shares be worth if there was no underlying asset and just the possibility to sell them to someone else in the future?

On these walls are three assets. How would one go about estimating how much each are worth?

This guy just photoshopped his NFT's into an art gallery, this thread is so funny/bizarre

Tl;Dr of this thread seems to be that most people have the misconception that NFTs are just a picture and that owning an NFT means you own a picture.

There is also the thing that they can represent ownership of land, except if it's in the form of an NFT, people who currently have rival claims to title to said land will simply chill out and accept it.

Clearly they're not worth anything, but if you can persuade someone that they will be saleable for more at some point in the future to someone else who thinks they will be saleable for even more in the further future and so on, then you definitely might be able to get some kind of greater fool dynamic going.

Dumb person A buys useless crap for X dollars in the hopes that they can find dumber person B to buy useless crap from them for Y dollars. Dumber person B then needs to hope that they can find dumbest person C in order to sell them useless crap for Z dollars. While all this is going on, useless crap is always actually worth $0. So yeah, I guess there is money to be made, but, you know... Does that about cover it?

Are NFTs as monumentally bad for the environment/energy overconsumption as mining for crypto is?

"The big question over NFTs is power consumption. For example, the “Space Cat” NFT, which is a GIF of a cat going to the Moon, has a carbon footprint that matches that of two months of electricity usage in a European home." https://nerdable.com/nft-environmental-impact/

Perhaps this quote is misleading in some way, I'm far from an expert on NFTs, but, you know, it doesn't seem great! Would definitely not be the first time rich *******s further padded their wallets at the expense of the planet Earth.

"In the report, NFTs are compared to standard printed art and gas cars. On average, a piece of printed art results in around 2.5 kg of extra CO2 emissions. This is about the same as a gas-powered car creates every five miles. Meanwhile, the CO2 emissions from minting and auctioning off an NFT can be up to 100 times higher.

However, according to the report, it is the mining process that is the big offender. An estimation puts one NFT’s lifetime CO2 emissions are the same as a car traveling more than 500 miles.

Mining costs have gotten so bad that estimates put the power required to mine one bitcoin is equivalent to the electricity used by the average U.S. home in 50 days."

This is from a pro-crypto/NFT site: https://beincrypto.com/nfts-and-the-...0Join%20Now%21

This one offers a few possible solutions to mitigate the environmental impact, although I suspect that the first second any of these possible solutions take money from the pockets of these speculators, it gets shut down in a hurry.

Skimmed through the thread and didn't see word one about any environmental impact. I get that gamblers aren't the most ecologically conscious people around, or long-term thinkers, but goddamn.

NO

https://degencoinflip.com/

launched as NFT for equity ownership. All operated inside the Solana NFT ecosystem.

does ~30million month in gaming revenue. over 1million of free cash flow per month. started by two guys 12 weeks ago with no money. Growing about 15% per month.


https://twitter.com/CubistNFT

Launched 3 weeks ago by a dude with a PHD in Game Theory and a wall street banker type. NFT is access to service. All built and operatied within the Solana Ecosystem. Uses machine based AI leaning tool scanning various twitter, Magic Eden and discord data feeds couple with community curated analysis for NFT portfolio mgmt



Dice Casino . a real money 3D PVP dice game built in Unity. Started 90 days ago by a team of 7 . NFTs used as avatars in game. NFTs also used to sell as equity to partially fund development. All built and operated in the Solana Ecosystem



I could go on and on. Literally could type more things like above for hours/days. Each doing different things. Each using NFTs in different ways.

What dumb stuff did you innovate last month? really dumb people above doing really dumb things. Does that about cover it?




oh here is some more dumb money. 5mill worth from Graylock VC firm.
https://www.solana.news/post/portals-announces-5m-seed-raise-led-by-greylockvc

environmental impact of BTC mining and Ethereum tranx are a real thing. The alternative L1 chains like Solana, Tezos, Near and others do not share that problem.

im pretty much max'ing on solana right now so its the only one I know much about. Also because its where the mass market for NFTs have been established.

So maybe not right to throw all crypto/nfts under the same enviro bad bus

https://solana.com/news/solana-found...n-neutral-2021

Sure, if you come before dumb person A and started it all, there's money to be made; but you didn't start any of those, now did you? So where do you fit in? Are you dumb person A, dumber person B, or dumbest person C?

This is wrong, it is actually one bitcoin transaction. Quite easy to realize considering 1 bc is currently valued at 40k USD.

Buying property in a metaverse has got to be one of the more bizarre investments to come out of the NFT hype. This project being shared is a minimum of $7k for the cheapest property, in a game that hasn't even been released yet. So no one actually knows if it's going to be fun, popular or even work properly. The creators don't even have to worry about releasing something full of bugs, because they have already made huge profits by selling these NFT's prior to release.

In my opinion people hyping up metaverses have a really low understanding of technology, and these companies are preying on that. Most of this stuff has been around for decades, and there are already loads of well established companies in the industry.

The main players in these virtual worlds offer the service for free with micro transactions, which is why they have been able to hold a stable population for years.

If the cost of entry to a metaverse is thousands, the majority of people using it will be other investors, which will be a pretty bleak social experience, and not long lasting.

Also if you're interested in looking into these crypto world scams, I'd recommend checking out the youtuber KiraTV. Some highlights are Metaclub Society, Earth 2, Cryptoland and Pixelmon.

You've just described the $10billion antiques industry (and just about any niche other people like that you think is bs)

A lot of anti-NFT arguments seem valid (climate change; bubble; exploitation; scams et al), and I say this as someone who thinks copyrighting in general is a huge waste of time. But I've yet to read a good critique that actually understands where the value of cryptocurrencies comes from in the first place. Which is, if I had to pick one, censorship resistance.

Blockchains are trust networks x100. Right now is still very early in a development sense, so it has a huge carbon footprint problem, as many industries do. This is mostly caused by the aging tech of proof of work and as stated above alternatives are growing rapidly, seem to work just as well, and make the environment argument look neutral compared to all the other daft things we do with energy (eg. 1 Solana transaction = energy of two google searches). You can also see it evolving to the stage of using pure renewables. As everything has to.

And people forget the main reason Bitcoin is so damaging to the environment right now is precisely because of its success. It is not inherently resource hungry compared to its usefulness, it's just becoming insanely profitable to mine as people realise it has legitimate value. You might say, yes that's a huge design flaw! And in some ways, it is. But remember this is still open source tech and is/ will evolve or something more practical will take its place. This is effectively what's happening with alts.

I find NFTs interesting and stupid like most people. But also seems like 90% of people's objections are based on something that will likely be a red herring in the scheme of things.

This is the perfect post that I had been looking for to Phoenyx's comment.

Yes, CO2 emissions are exceptionally high on some platforms. The CO2 emissions of the first runs at any new technology are generally high. This is why I am super bullish on Solana and Tezos as they fix most of the 'problems' with BTC and ETH.

Yet again, what people are forgetting, (and this is not exclusive to people who don't buy NFT's either) is that NFT's are not intended to be traded like stocks, or Crypto. They are intended to provide value to the owner.

That is literally EXACTLY the same as a startup that seeks large amounts of funding via Angel Investors. Or someone who wants to get their initial funding via Kickstarter or any other Crowdsourcing website.

Yet again, we find ourselves in a position where we are doubting something's validity because it uses a platform, or technology that we aren't familiar with.

If you read the article, it says they secured the 5m from Angel investors, so you are completely wrong there

The people putting up the 5m have barely any risk, because even if this metaverse fails, they will get paid by the marks spending $7k on property NFT's