DJT's Truth account has been posting a lot today. Much of it is criticism re: Ron DeSanctimonious, etc, but about 2 hours ago, he truthed and retruthed a small flurry of "Trump for Speaker" truths.
Knowing that DJT is a master of populist 5G warfare, we can understand that he has reasons for doing this, whether or not he considers this as a real possibility, including (potentially) increasing his profile, stirring up the hornets' nest in DC, and moving a variety of narratives.
Dasting.
Trump TRUTH
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/111179710276499538
3min Clip of Bannon Asking people to consider Trump for Speaker
Trump TRUTH
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/111179709232101277
Content: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/10/wayne-root-trump-house-speaker-again-whether-he/
WAYNE ROOT: Trump for House Speaker- Again? Whether He Wants It, or Not, Here’s the Idea That Exposes All the RINOS and Changes Congress Forever!
Trump RETRUTH
https://truthsocial.com/@RepMTG/posts/111177115014378628
MTG: I’m supporting President Donald J. Trump to be the next Speaker of the House!
He has a proven four year record of putting America First and implementing the policies the American people want.
CONTENT: America's Real Voice Clip: "Is Speaker Trump a real possibility?"
Trump RETRUTH
https://truthsocial.com/@MTG/posts/111174447970743697
MTG: President Trump is THE LEADER of the Republican Party.
President @realDonaldTrump should be our Speaker!
EDIT: Disclaimer: In recent days, I've generally poopooed the idea of DJT becoming Speaker. I still think that the idea is not very realistic, but it would be foolish to rule out anything, given how many unknowns there really are.
I will say one thing: If DJT WERE to become speaker, it would detonate such a titanic hydro-bomb across the entire world, it would be time to just sit back, and watch the whole thing crumble. I think it could only happen if indeed Patriots are in control of a LOT more than I suspect. The meltdown would be delicious.
That said, either way, I think it's dasting that he has retruthed the idea. Either way, DJT all the way!
When I said "never like this" I simply meant digital art in the past were either digital copies of physical art or digitally created art. But both of which could be copied (unless they tried some form of DRM, as they do with music.) Why does it matter? Well, we were trying to define what NFT's were and somewhat disagreed, which is why I brought up semantics.
The "function" is the what you make. I do a lot with crypto. Many NFT's (e.g. Super Verse) add to your staking power, giving you a higher return. But, it is just "art" to most as most don't stake. There are many projects that do this.
Not sure of your background, but was an IT guy for years. So, when I look into NFT's and try to see what they are, the "function" is actually quite surprising. Now, you are correct in that most are just art (and imo shitty art, though I do like a few of the pixelated imagry and collect some. But again, brings up the subjective nature of "art".) I went through a list of some abilities of NFT's but you seem bent on just the negatives. I am not disagreeing with you that they exist and I'm also with you on the amount of scams. But you could make the same argument for anything involved with investments. The thing is with crypto, if you want, you become the bank, or in the case of NFT's, the "property owner and storer". Not sure how to say it, but I'm saying you "self custody".
I think you are focussing on the scams and making a generalization when again, it is too new to say. It is interesting regardless and I think when the bull run returns, you are going to see NFT's pump again. Not a real sign of value, but... we don't know. Way too soon to say. And in a sense, your argument can be directly made to crypto; no analogy necessary. LOT's of crypto projects are shit. Many are scams. But does that mean we can generalize about them as you do about NFT's?
Coming from an albeit ex IT guy with an intuition that has done me well, I disagree with what you are saying. But, I'm not steadfast in my beliefs. But at this point calling NFT's bad (or the like) reminds me of when the internet came out and it was narrowed down to email and Amazon to books. We simply don't know what is coming. Peace!
What is “staking”? I was under the impression that I had the full picture on what NFTs are but if there really is something extra that you can do with them, I’m willing to learn. Is it a rewards program of some kind? A way to show off for bragging rights? To get better deals somewhere? Something else?
To be specific, whenever I’m talking about the “scam” I’m referring only to NFTs coupled with digital art, or anything else that, unlike the token, is fungible. And how proponents try to get people to pay way more than they ever would if they were just paying to access that digital art. (I know you mentioned money laundering before, that’s not a legitimate use and actually does horrible things to art as a whole.)
Also as a side note, attaching new technology to an existing art form doesn’t make it a “new art form”. Any more than if someone were to put the Mona Lisa inside a frame that had words scrolling across with Da Vinci trivia. The art is still what it is, and the technology is still what it is. Knowing only what I do right now, art-NFTs being a “new art form” is just a clever scam marketing tactic.
You know how BTC is Proof of Work? And Ethereum is Proof of Stake? Instead of burning energy to secure the network, you can lock up tokens and run a node (Proof of Stake.)
Some of the NFT projects (e.g. Super Verse from Elliot Trades (Youtuber)), allow you to also stake (lock up) your NFT's for higher staking rewards of the crypto.
Having certain NFT's is like having a pass in certain ecosystems. My point earlier with it is too early to judge this area is honest. I don't know what to expect, only that it will probably follow the shock and awe of what crypto has done (and it is a baby too.)
Hey, there are lots of scams. I have no problem with your using the word. But I use the word from actually using and understanding the ecosystem (and having been scammed, but maybe with NFT's like 3 times out of 2000 - no exageration, lol). I really like to take part in this, call it a cost of experience.
BTW - NFT's by their nature on non fungible tokens (aka NFT). But now, there are smart contracts where the NFT (e.g. something expensive like a Bored Ape) is locked up and you can buy fractional ownership of one. (Which also give you some of the rights and air drops into their ecosystem. Yeah, most are shit at this point, but many are not.)
Re "new art form" - there has been a continuation and expansion of digital art because of the popularity of NFT's. It took it to a whole new level. Again, at this point it is semantic. My point is expect the unexpected.
Might want to buy a Trump NFT, just in case this whole Q thing is real. ;-)
The whole first paragraph just went way over my head. In concrete terms, what does any of that mean?
Also what’s an “ecosystem”? Is it a video game with premium in-game currency? Something like an exclusive social media group?
Also I’m gonna totally deny the “whole new level” of digital art thing. People have been making absolutely stunning works of digital art for years before NFTs were even an idea, I’m willing to bet you probably just haven’t been in the right circles to be exposed to large quantities of digital art until you got involved with NFTs.
It basically means you should understand the technology you are commenting about.
2nd - see point above.
…