How Xavier-DEGO China, Defines NFT(Non Fungible Tokens)

How Xavier-DEGO China, Defines NFT(Non Fungible Tokens)

Education
September 15, 2022 by Diana Ambolis
720
After the brief popularity of CryptoKitties in 2017, NFT did not regain public attention until the latter half of 2020. Currently, the NFT sector is in its infancy of expansion. CryptoKitties was the first NFT to achieve worldwide popularity. The success and popularity of CryptoKitties led to the hypothesis that artwork is the optimal method
How Xavier-DEGO China, Defines NFT(Non Fungible Tokens)

After the brief popularity of CryptoKitties in 2017, NFT did not regain public attention until the latter half of 2020. Currently, the NFT sector is in its infancy of expansion. CryptoKitties was the first NFT to achieve worldwide popularity. The success and popularity of CryptoKitties led to the hypothesis that artwork is the optimal method for creating NFTs and that NFTs are intrinsically linked to art, collectables, cards, and scarcity. Consequently, the majority of future NFT initiatives will duplicate this approach. This is quite typical.

The current decline in data proves that IP and NFT are in a long-term bubble. This bubble is visible due to the combination. Europe and the United States continue to influence this model’s aesthetics. It is theoretically simple to replicate since there is a minimal barrier to entry. Due to the FOMO of several individual and institutional investors, the value of such endeavours is often enormous. So, NFT+IP may not go a long way. This is because the combination of NFT and IP is alien to humans.

On the other hand, some of the most successful NFT efforts, such as DEGO, do not rely on intellectual property but on native on-chain models. Due to this, the combination of NFT and IP in a project is not a determining factor in its success. A significant advancement will be made by merging IP and NFT with DApp. Currently, there are inadequate NFT application cases. This problem must be rectified for IP+NFT to have more success in the future.

Those who invest in a blockchain project bear the risk of the developer not distributing tokens after accepting cash and engaging in unethical behaviour. In addition to the project creator, the project’s investment agent may abscond with the funds, the middleman who has not received a quota may fraud by fraudulently claiming to have done so, or investors may buy Coin list third-party accounts that are subsequently recovered. In addition to the danger that the project developer may steal the funds, these hazards exist. Even though the blockchain was intended to address trust and transparency issues in transactions, investment in this industry is still conducted via various rudimentary transactional techniques, such as the manual transfer of tokens. Even though blockchain technology was intended to overcome these issues, they continue. In contrast, NFT may be used to aid in the resolution of these problems.

Also read: All About Facebook And Microsoft’s Interest In Metaverse

Suppose a person invests in a blockchain project, and the project’s quota is not immediately distributed. In that case, the investor may get a non-fungible token (NFT) as a voucher showing that the investment interest has been transferred directly to the investor. This happens if the investor is not immediately awarded the project’s quota. If the project’s tokens cannot be unlocked within the agreed-upon timeframe of one year, users will not be able to utilize their existing NFTs to stake claims for permits during that time. Instead, users will only be able to stake claims for tokens once the set period has elapsed. As the investor already owns the interests, they may choose to split the NFT before token distribution if they are no longer optimistic about the project’s future. This is possible because the investor already has the interests. If an investor has invested $1 million in a blockchain-based business, transferring the $1 million directly is pretty challenging. Alternately, the investor may divide the $1 million in NFTs into ten or more $100,000 NFTs to sell the investment quota on trading platforms such as Opensea or Treasure land and transfer the allocation to counterparties significantly more efficient than acquiring off-chain Coinlist accounts. For the industry, this practice generates additional liquidity through a 1.5-tier market; for the users, it reduces transaction costs and solves the problem of trust; for the project developer, it may reduce the pressure of market making, as the 1.5-tier selling pressure is eliminated off-chain; this “kills three birds with one stone” generates additional liquidity.

The fragmentation of NFTs has the ability to both increase liquidity and lower the NFTs’ threshold. Most investors do not appreciate art or NFTs; yet, they may still invest in NFTs by purchasing NFT objects; hence, the barrier to entry for NFTs has been lowered. NFT fragmentation may also result in the establishment of numerous new markets, including derivatives of NFT fragments and the financialization of NFTs, which involves the transformation of hitherto unpriceable NFTs into priceable NFTs. Additionally, NFT fragmentation may lead to the development of several new markets. In Xavier’s perspective, the significance of NFT fragmentation lies in this specific element instead of just enhancing liquidity.

NFTX, NFT20, DODO, and Unicly are among the initiatives related to NFT fragmentation. These initiatives do not generally address the three issues listed below: 1. Certain nonfinancial assets must be separated from others; 2. where exactly do the liquid assets of NFT components come from; 3. Whether or not there is a successful buyout mechanism for NFT, the transition of public control to private ownership To Xavier’s knowledge, no effort has yet offered a feasible solution to any of these three difficulties.

NFTs. Currently, 99.9% of non-fungible tokens (NFTs) are artworks; however, in the actual world, the bulk of people have little interest in paintings and collectables. In the future, however, 99.9% of NFTs will consist of data and financial commodities.

Without a solid pricing system and adequate liquidity, it is difficult to participate in financial operations such as lending and collateral. Two conditions must be satisfied for converting nonfinancial instruments into financial instruments. The first group includes domestic nonfinancial assets that satisfy the following criteria: 1. tokens must be valued and non-fungible; 2. Specificity is required for meaningful interests. Providing some examples of native NFT financial assets, such as the LP token of Uniswap V3, DEGO’s INO, which is the process of packaging the tokens that need to be unlocked from the project into an NFT option, and DEGO’s synthetic asset known as “shovel.” Since the value of these NFTs is backed by FT, it is straightforward to determine how much each one is worth. Using a pricing technique, some nonfinancial assets (NFTs) that were not previously evaluable or priceable must be rendered evaluable and priceable. Before the financialization of NFTs may be considered a feasible option, both of these prerequisites must be met. When the industry’s infrastructure and pricing mechanism reach a sufficient level of maturity, several current problems related to NFT lending and collateral will be resolved.

Almost certainly, NFT is unable to attract long-tail customers. Most earnings and incomes go to intermediaries rather than artists within the economic framework of conventional art markets (such as galleries). Without intermediaries, artists cannot exhibit their paintings and get income. NFT offers artists with reduced entrance requirements as a venue for exceptional performances. NFT allows long-tail artists to display their skills without depending on intermediaries or acquiring the trust of third-party organizations, even though the market operation is also a crucial factor. Second, the marketplace for trade SuperRare has devised a mechanism wherein artists may make a passive income from the resale of their artworks by getting 10 per cent of the artworks’ ultimate selling price when they are traded on the secondary market. A smart contract is an impractical business concept that can only exist on the blockchain. After a transaction, the smart contract automatically transfers money to its creator. Artists are thus the legal owners of the sales and copyright rights connected with their works. In 2017, the NFT was launched for the first time. However, it will not widely use until 2021. Due to the game’s recent success, NFT is now seen as a celebrity game. It is probable that the next fifty years will produce additional excellent works and that the number of visitors to the National Gallery of Art will increase.

Also read: Norbert Kovacs Answers About Fundamentals Of Augmented Reality

NFT is related to FT in that it refers to standard and non-standard real-world items and is only an infrastructure. It is unnecessary to designate NFT as a separate field. It should be a more inclusive concept. Since NFT is still in its infancy and primarily focuses on artworks and collectables, it is presently regarded as a separate field. This is the primary argument for this position. The NFT, in Xavier’s perspective, is only a straightforward and essential technical method for sustaining the DAO. Instead of focusing on NFT, we must concentrate on DAO. The most basic use of NFT+DAO is to represent a right, an obligation, or a person’s identity. In other words, the interests and data of an individual are coupled with NFTs to build a unique identity structure that serves as a technical instrument to support and help DAO.

Digital assetization and digitization are two methods for incorporating assets onto the blockchain. “digital assetization” refers to blockchain technology’s native digital assets. Bitcoin and Ethereum are both native digital currencies. In addition to functioning as a medium of exchange, their applications today include financing, wealth management, and other financial services generated from DeFi. When addressing asset digitization, the tokenization of physical assets is often mentioned. Utilizing blockchain technology, this method enables the transfer and exchange of any material goods.

Digital assetization is the process of establishing a closed, autonomous financial system on a blockchain that is capable of its internal circulation. An on-chain financial system’s maximal value will be determined by the market value of crypto assets, whose magnitude cannot be compared to traditional financial markets. In the sequence of development, the digital association comes first, followed by the digitization of assets. The digitization of support enables the incorporation of tangible assets onto the blockchain as asset tokens. This shows that shifting the traditional economy to blockchain technology may be viable.

Despite the popularity of tokenization of assets in the blockchain business, very little progress has been made in this area since the technology is still in its infancy and there is no intermediate stage. There is no credible way to estimate the value of assets at this time, and the blockchain is not linked to the outside world. In addition, Oracle solutions are not yet completely matured, and no oracle can be depended on 100 per cent for supply chain data transmission. If we relied on conventional centralized regulators for capital verification, we would face several obstacles, the most important of which would be determining who would supervise the regulators. Is there a kind of dispersed governance ensuring regulators carry out their duties correctly? Exists an effective response mechanism, or at the very least, a framework for replacing them if they fail? Therefore, Xavier presently does not see any asset tokenization approaches favourably. It makes little sense to research the tokenization of assets, whereas native on-chain assets have enormous promise.

The connection between idols and their followers is often uneven in the actual world. Usually, superstars make their own money from their fans. While confident fan leaders can gain from the management companies by running fan groups or providing information, most fans cannot partake in these profits. More fans will be able to engage in fan-celebrity commerce, strengthening their relationship. Blockchain technology will allow this to be achievable. One may thus argue for the existence of a fan economy.

Regarding social tokens, Xavier thinks that in the future, all people will represent their credit systems. Governments and central organizations will no longer be required to issue currencies, as they do under the existing monetary system. Xavier expects this to occur shortly. In the field of blockchain technology, it is feasible that prior financial sector experiences will no longer be relevant, allowing for the denationalization of currencies. This would let anybody construct their cash or bonds, often known as social tokens.

The term “metaverse” does not exist in the conventional financial market. Today, involution is prevalent in several capital circle domains, and the Metaverse, as a new domain, has the potential to promote the development of hardware, content, culture, and infrastructure, extend the capital market and generate additional investment space.

The architecture of NFT and BSC are compatible. BSC has always presented itself as a competitor to Ethereum, which Xavier believe is not an appropriate stance for the firm. BSC is not a competing chain but a test chain with lower transaction costs for Ethereum. As a test network, it may function as an extension of Ethereum, and it has attracted many of the most skilled Ethereum engineers. In addition, BSC’s vast ecosystem may give extra support for the design of the NFT project, which may include several infrastructure types such as DeFi. Concerning NFT operations, we must also consider the expansion and health of the public chain’s environment. The most valuable entities on a public blockchain are never the assets but rather the developers.

All forms of NFTs are in their earliest development phases, meaning their infrastructure, core protocol, and basic game rules have not yet been finalized. NFT is a significant problem in and of itself. NFT provides more application opportunities than FT and can introduce various real-world business models to the blockchain realm. In the real world, where the number of non-standard product transactions is much more than that of standard goods transactions, NFT offers a more extensive range of application scenarios than FT. The significance of DeFi+NFT, DID (a combination of identification, ID, and NFT), and NFT+DAO is expanding.

Internet 1.0 users are mostly passive consumers of the available online material. In the Web 2.0 era, Internet users may independently create content for the World Wide Web. User-generated content (UGC) was conceived as a consequence that internet users might produce and consume information continuously. Even yet, a few Internet giants dominate the vast bulk of information output. At this time, in the Web 3.0 era, the essential concept is to eliminate the internet’s walls and demolish those established by the internet giants. NFT is a crucial component of Web 3.0’s architecture. In the future, we will use NFT for more than only artworks; it will take the form of payment vouchers incorporating identity information. This will result in the disintermediation of content since users will no longer be subject to the centralization of the Internet oligarchy.