this post was submitted on 19 May 2025
767 points (97.4% liked)

memes

14883 readers
4946 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] slazer2au@lemmy.world 103 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I would question how an Instagram account causes nft to be stolen...... But we are on meme so let's leave it at that.

[–] vaguerant@fedia.io 114 points 3 days ago (4 children)

They compromised the official Instagram account then phished its followers for their NFTs.

The attacker seized control of the BAYC Instagram account and sent a phishing post that many followers were fooled into clicking on, connecting their crypto wallets to the hacker’s “smart contract” – a mechanism for implementing a crypto transaction. That enabled the attacker to steal the assets held in the wallets, seizing control of four Bored Apes, as well as a host of other NFTs with an estimated total value of $3m.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/apr/26/bored-ape-yacht-club-nft-hack-theft-art-simian-oblivion

[–] lime@feddit.nu 82 points 3 days ago (1 children)

well in that case it's fine. the blockchain is tamper-proof after all, so it must have been legitimate transfers.

[–] Passerby6497@lemmy.world 67 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Of course, because if it’s a legitimate theft, the block chain has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.

[–] slazer2au@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago

Ah, fair enough.

[–] jdeath@lemm.ee 10 points 3 days ago

so nothing changed about the fungibility at all

[–] Damage@feddit.it 5 points 3 days ago

I mean if you want steal it makes sense to target idiots

[–] andros_rex@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

One of the funniest ways that these people get hacked is that you can give someone an NFT. Like it’ll show up in the wallet, no way to get rid of it. So you make a fake BoredApe or whatever other stupid JPEG, with a “smart contract” that essentially boils down to “steal everything” if the person ever interacts with it. Iirc some of the bigger name people have a bunch of these fake, toxic NFTs that they can’t interact with in any way, just hanging out in their wallet.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] 0x0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 66 points 3 days ago (4 children)

I'm not convinced the author of this meme knows what "fungible" means

[–] bjoern_tantau@swg-empire.de 44 points 3 days ago

Of course it means that you can funge them.

[–] Arigion@feddit.org 11 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Me neither. Please explain. Something with mushrooms, surely.

[–] peoplebeproblems@midwest.social 17 points 3 days ago (6 children)

Something that is fungible is not unique.

An NFT is essentially a number tied to another number in a block chain that establishes ownership.

It provides a history of who owns it to. It's very useful when validating contracts and preventing fraud. Somehow it got turned into little graphics exchanged for money and I still don't understand how that happened.

So, for instance, since the owners of the NFTs know that the wallet is compromised, the recipients of the NFTs after this point in the block chain are recipients of stolen goods. So anyone tracing the validity of an NFT knows that these are now all worthless.

[–] frostysauce@lemmy.world 15 points 3 days ago (21 children)

I mean, they were worthless before...

[–] Th3D3k0y@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago (1 children)

What do you mean, I shook my magic 8-ball and it clearly said I was correct in valuing my stick figure at 50b USD. I was completely bankrupted when my kid ripped my paper in half

[–] anomnom@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 days ago

50 billionth of a USD sounds about right.

load more comments (20 replies)
[–] kameecoding@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago

It provides a history of who owns it to. It's very useful when validating contracts and preventing fraud.

So useful in fact that no company in existence that I know of uses it.

Don't know of a single bank, fortune 500 or any financial institution that uses it.

Wonder why.

So, for instance, since the owners of the NFTs know that the wallet is compromised, the recipients of the NFTs after this point in the block chain are recipients of stolen goods. So anyone tracing the validity of an NFT knows that these are now all worthless.

Yeah, I dont think you can go from worthless to worthless.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] kattfisk@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Being "fungible" means that something is functionally equivalent with something else.

For example even though every dollar bill is unique (they have unique serial numbers), they are all fungible. If you deposit $100 in the bank, then withdraw $100 later, you are not getting the same bills, maybe not even the same denominations, but you don't care because it doesn't matter.

In the digital world copies are cheap and perfect. There is literally no way to tell a copy of an image from "the original". So in the digital world all copies of something are fungible, and originals don't meaningfully exist.

NFTs try to introduce artificial scarcity to the digital space by creating a distinction between "the original" of something and the copies, by introducing a sort of chain of custody tracking system.

[–] kuberoot@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 3 days ago

NFTs try to introduce artificial scarcity

Just want to add to that, NFTs aren't inherently about artificial scarcity, they could also be used to track ownership of rights or real life items without a central authority that everybody needs to trust.

Of course, cryptobros immediately went to pushing them as an investment scheme, and the actual implementations are slow, inefficient, and downright expensive to use. I don't think anybody has managed to make NFTs actually useful, but I imagine the original creators weren't looking to create... Whatever this is.

If something is fungible, it is essentially swappable with anything that is identical to it. Let’s say you and I both have our own dollar bills. We trade bills. We both still have $1, because the value of the bill isn’t related to the individual note, but rather the fact that you have a note. I don’t care which bill I have, because it is fungible. Sure they have serial numbers, but I’m not tracking those in regular usage. Functionally, the cash is fungible; If I loaned you $50 for a week, I’m not expecting to get back the exact same $50 bill that I handed to you last week.

Cash is just one example of a fungible item, but it could really be anything that is traded in lots or bulk. Maybe you buy a 50 pound bag of sand. You’re not buying each individual grain of sand, and tracking them all individually. Those grains of sand are fungible, because you only care that you got 50 pounds of them total. Hell, even the bags of sand could be fungible, as long as they’re all identical enough that you don’t care which bag is yours. It could be pounds of rice, or gallons of water, cans of soda in a vending machine, etc… All that matters is that the quality is similar enough between two items that you wouldn’t notice a difference between two, and you don’t care which specific item is yours. That’s what makes them fungible.

A non-fungible item is something that you do care about individually. A deck of playing cards may be fungible to a casino that buys 5000 of them per year… They don’t care which specific deck is in use at a poker table, because they’re all functionally the same. But each individual card is non-fungible to the poker players who care a lot about which specific cards they were dealt. A car dealership may have 20 identical cars parked in a lot just like yours, but one of them specifically is yours.

In the digital world, basically everything is fungible. Copies are easy to make, and are functionally identical to each other. If I make a gif and someone else reposts it, their repost isn’t functionally different than mine. NFTs were an attempt to create a sort of ownership ledger for digital items. A way of saying “you can copy this, but this one specifically is mine.” Technically, an NFT could point to anything, because all it is doing is attaching a unique identifier to the digital item, then entering it into the blockchain (essentially a ledger) so it can be tracked. If it exchanges hands, the blockchain will reflect that. But importantly, making a copy won’t enter a new copy into the blockchain, because you can’t copy the unique identifier.

It has a few potential practical uses. For instance, maybe digital IDs could be secured, as it would allow people to verify that their digital ID is the original and not a copy. Essentially, they’d show that they own the NFT for their ID, the blockchain would confirm that, and their ID would be verified.

But instead, techbros immediately turned it into a pump-and-dump and/or pyramid scheme.

[–] shplane@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago

Probably, but the way it’s written does add to the funnys

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] aubertlone@lemmy.world 38 points 3 days ago (3 children)

I just remember looking into NFTS when they were gaining hype. There are a few real world use cases for them.

However ultimately the NFT ended up leading back to a URL of the picture. I may be oversimplifying it a little bit but that's basically how it worked.

So the web hoster could just revoke the URL or set it to something else. So you don't really own anything. I will have to look at the specifics of this "hack". But this was always gonna be an issue.

[–] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 15 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

It didn't have to a URL to an image. It could have been a serial number showing ownership of a thing, etc.

But block chain isn't really necessary for a registry, and in the end the money was in scamming people by selling them urls to images.

[–] Evotech@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

You can make images small enough to be hosted within the blockchain and there’s a fair amount of nfts like that. But that’s limited to pixel art stuff

[–] Katana314@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago

I feel like, with some work, NFTs could be used for decentralized ownership of digital content licenses? But, I sincerely doubt any such companies would care to set that up.

While I know most people would just prefer everything go DRM-free, I’ll admit I became interested in the practice when I learned town libraries can stock AAA console video games, but would have a hard time stocking indie/AA games that have only had digital releases - even if the game’s creator is a hipster that loves libraries, the only simple approach there is to give away infinite free copies of the game.

[–] kattfisk@lemmy.dbzer0.com 32 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] gigachad@sh.itjust.works 49 points 3 days ago (2 children)
[–] Venus_Ziegenfalle@feddit.org 18 points 3 days ago

Not to be confused with millions worth of Dollar

[–] kozy138@lemm.ee 8 points 3 days ago

So like a dollar

[–] ExtantHuman@lemm.ee 36 points 3 days ago (1 children)

This isn't remotely what fungible means...

[–] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 64 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Yeah, well, we can't all be expert mycologists.

[–] rbos@lemmy.ca 24 points 3 days ago (5 children)

You're thinking of fungal. Fungible is when something shatters easily, like fungible ammunition.

[–] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 14 points 3 days ago (1 children)

You're thinking of fragile.

Fungible is a brand of prepacked lunches, typically containing crackers, bologna, and cheese.

[–] camelbeard@lemmy.world 12 points 3 days ago

No you're thinking of luchables, fungible is when you catch a Gible and he's loads of fun. Keep looking in the grassy areas.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 25 points 3 days ago

I bet the theft is actually about insurance fraud, since that's probably the only way to get anyone to pay that amount for them.

"You maniacs! You funged it up! Ah, funge you! God funge you all to hell!"

[–] bitwolf@sh.itjust.works 14 points 3 days ago (1 children)

How in the world does the insta page cause them to lose the tokens?

Probably using the same password.

Oof ouch right in the token

[–] LesserAbe@lemmy.world 16 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I love both the Simpsons and mocking NFTs, however that's not what fungible means

[–] misterdoctor@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago

This guy funges

[–] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 9 points 3 days ago

“Help me, Dr. Zaius!”

[–] RealM__@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago

Pretty funny story, but it is 3 years old at this point.

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago (2 children)

My interpretation of the NFT/Crypto Future argument is “They’re perfect! It’s just that humans have to stop behaving like humans!”

[–] kattfisk@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 3 days ago

It's petty funny to see them rediscover why we have all these financial regulations

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] LillyPip@lemmy.ca 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Oh wow, that’s still a thing?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›