Just like photography has become much easier to create in the last 100 years, liquid NFTs will surely bring down price points of tokenized digital content but will also open expansive new markets.
1/The next major problem set in #DeFi is #NFTLiquidity.
It has become very clear that, like fungibles, nonfungibles are their own financial asset class.
One path to see this is to envision the future of NFTs as “liquid
Just like photography has become much easier to create in the last 100 years, liquid NFTs will surely bring down price points of tokenized digital content but will also open expansive new markets.
👉🏻 In particular, because of tokenization, *the NFT liquidity problem reduces to the NFT price discovery problem.*
This is a core mechanism that today is underutilized in the market, and one that — we will soon see — applies to all illiquid assets.
And the fundamental problem with each of these mechanisms is capital efficiency: in each mechanism, participants need to spend *at least* $N to value something at $N.
But one super cool approach uses peer prediction oracles created by @nick_emmons and @UpshotHQ. https://t.co/HleEMPpgcq
It\u2019s no secret that pricing NFTs is really difficult, so we built an NFT appraisal product powered by peer prediction.https://t.co/uWFZq4aeGs
— Upshot (@UpshotHQ) December 23, 2020
Prices can then be reported on-chain through @UpshotHQ’s mechanism.
More from Internet
***THREAD***
I’ve been on the phone with colleagues about the hack all morning. None of us can figure out why #CISA chose this particular response to the breach. Couple of things struck us as curious.
The agencies targeted are not responding how you might expect...
I’ve been on the phone with colleagues about the hack all morning. None of us can figure out why #CISA chose this particular response to the breach. Couple of things struck us as curious.
The agencies targeted are not responding how you might expect...
JUST RELEASED: Emergency Directive 21-01 calls on all federal civilian agencies to review their networks for indicators of compromise and disconnect or power down SolarWinds Orion products immediately. Read more: https://t.co/VFZ81W2Ow7
— Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (@CISAgov) December 14, 2020
You May Also Like
First update to https://t.co/lDdqjtKTZL since the challenge ended – Medium links!! Go add your Medium profile now 👀📝 (thanks @diannamallen for the suggestion 😁)
Just added Telegram links to https://t.co/lDdqjtKTZL too! Now you can provide a nice easy way for people to message you :)
Less than 1 hour since I started adding stuff to https://t.co/lDdqjtKTZL again, and profile pages are now responsive!!! 🥳 Check it out -> https://t.co/fVkEL4fu0L
Accounts page is now also responsive!! 📱✨
💪 I managed to make the whole site responsive in about an hour. On my roadmap I had it down as 4-5 hours!!! 🤘🤠🤘

Just added Telegram links to https://t.co/lDdqjtKTZL too! Now you can provide a nice easy way for people to message you :)

Less than 1 hour since I started adding stuff to https://t.co/lDdqjtKTZL again, and profile pages are now responsive!!! 🥳 Check it out -> https://t.co/fVkEL4fu0L

Accounts page is now also responsive!! 📱✨

💪 I managed to make the whole site responsive in about an hour. On my roadmap I had it down as 4-5 hours!!! 🤘🤠🤘
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.

Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)

There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.

At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?