It’s a nice thought, but I don’t think it’d actually help that much. Certainly not enough so that I want anything to do with NFTs as a script producer or as a consumer.
1 Like
I don’t think NFTs would mean anything for a .funscript, much like they really don’t in reality mean anything for a .png or a .jpeg. That being said being able to link a token to a portion of the decentralized web and sell it is no joke, basically a deed to virtual real estate.
Just needs to find it’s market, but no porn and scripts probably aren’t that : )
I would not engage with any organisation that combines NFT technology with their scripts. Please don’t do it as I very much enjoy my SLR subscription, cancelling it would be a great shame.
An NFT is just a treasure map and gives no ownership to what would be considered the treasure. The idiots spending tens of thousands of more on pixel art don’t even own the art. All they own is a URL in the blockchain that points to a piece of art with no guarantee that it will always do so. There are already NFTs where the host of the linked file didn’t renew their domain causing the URL to go to nothing. Worse yet, the new domain owner can put anything in the path of links on the blockchain including malware, hate speech, or other illegal content.
Even if you do somehow find value in a URL in the blockchain, the blockchain is public. Everyone has access to the URL you purchased the same as you. There is already a torrent out there of every NFT on the blockchain. If you have 17 TB of space, you can download the whole NFT market and possess everything that has supposed value. It’s all a big scam on what has value and it will only last as long as the ignorant keep feeding it. The bubble will burst when educations and understanding eventually wins out.
Looks like the survey was very much conclusive 
and 100% wrong.
NFT’s have many use-cases and utility, already being adopted by the music industry. From what I read here, people only know of one usecase, the one that has no real value imo. So I don’t blame them for thinking they are useless. But I don’t want to make the doc public I sent you recently.
People can’t copy your script if they never even get the script in their hands in the first place. Which you can do with NFT’s. Hell, scripters don’t even need to share the actual script with SLR and still have it work with SLR. You would need to record the movement output of the toy to get an approximation of a copy. Like recording a cinema screen with a handheld cam.
You can even make elections tamper proof with NFT’s and have each vote recorded accurately. (I said CAN, still depends on how it’s actually designed.)
1 Like
100% wrong… 
Come on, that’s not helping your argument
You would need to record the movement output of the toy to get an approximation of a copy. Like recording a cinema screen with a handheld cam.
The copy would be the exact same as the script, where would the loss be ? Your comparison is misleading.
I’m just being honest. It’s not like I haven’t looked into this already with some people who already are involved with VRporn, toys, coding… (outside of SLR, sry Double 
As an exploratory idea.) And this was one of the concerns raised.
So you would then also agree that making scripts with how things are right now is pointless and has no value?
i’m sharing all my scripts free of charge anyway so i don’t really care about that. The value i get is my hope to that people will get a good time using my scripts.
Trying to battle piracy by making this hard for the pirate or creating a ownership of a digital good is a lost cause.
Legal platform need to make access to the goods a lot more convenient to customers than piracy (and that’s actually the case right now) and make it worth something for the creator.
NFT and Scripts will only be an hindrance for users ready to spend money. Pirate won’t care.
2 Likes
Piracy would just be a small part of the functionality. But why not include it while you’re at it.
I apreciate you give away your scripts for free, but I was trying to make a point. Everything is being pirated, but Netflix and other media platforms (incl VR porn) are still making a lot of money. It’s actually even easier to pirate video.
I actually even believe piracy is doing more good than harm. People come into contact with stuff they otherwise wouldn’t, then end up paying for a service. You’re actually really paying for a service now rather than the content. It’s more important to have the NFT’s only work within your ecosystem in function of competition rather than piracy. This ecosystem thing goes pretty deep, too much to go into and like I already mentioned earlier, it’s not an idea I want to make public 
It’s a little irrevelant here, I think the main factor that repel people from pirating Netflix or VRporn is the filesize. You can store thousands of scripts and your hard drive won’t even notice, but try that with 1000 videos that have 10-20GB each and you get my point.
1 Like
Please don’t…
blockchain meh - NFT no- peer2peer sharing platform for scripts with a index and search function could be made to a huge QoL
1 Like
I get your point about storage costs There’s just a lot more to NFT’s than what it is currently used for. It just needs a lot more development to leverage the other use-cases. The site, app(s), protocols, encryption, … all have to be redesigned from the ground up.
Here’s an example of a pretty straight forward, but interesting NFT usage: Reserve private time with camgirls at a certain date/time. I understand you would have a bunch of questions and potential issues already, but that doesn’t mean it can’t be done. An escrow-like system protects both the camgirl and user from not fulfilling the agreement. You can make the NFT’s non-transferable to combat scalpers.
By extension, camgirls can brand their tokens, charge different rates for different days. ie reserving a private on valentine’s would go for more in all likelihood than any other day. This has nothing to do with the scripts, but scripts are just one asset of the larger picture (ecosystem).
Maybe I should add a script usecase too: Users can sell their purchased script (NFT) back to some one else. HOLD YOUR HORSES!! I’m not talking about making profit from it, or loss of revenue for the scripter! The resell value can be fixed to the same price as if buying it from the site. You can program the NFT to have the same revenue still go to the scripters. The user would not get the full amount back, but that’s not the intention anyway.
1 Like
TBH I don’t see what NFT brings to the table except locking consumers and site owners into a specific ecosystem given what has been described here so far. What’s been mentioned can be solved in other ways with more flexibility and still allow for 3rd party software and open source projects to work independently. Sure NFT could solve some, but is it really better than other solutions?
3 Likes
Let’s assume that you sell script as NFT for $10 and the revenue for reselling the script is $5 that goes to the scripter. The person that bought NFT uses the script then resell it for $10 minus revenue. So the person that bought the script actually paid $5, the scripter got $15. Every person that resell the scripts at the same value then adds $5 to the scripter and actually pays $5 for a script EXCEPT the last person in the chain that pays the full $10 price for a script until it resells it. Because of that fact the scripter is always up $10, the last person is at the loss of $10. In the end it’s just not worth it imo in my opinion. Ofc you can fix the revenue at different cost, but in the end someone is at a loss, either scripter or buyers. And yes, people can sell it for bigger amounts, but it doesn’t change the fact the the last person in the train always is at the loss until the new buyer appears.
Now, people who bought the NFTs have to find the person that will buy it from them and I can imagine that at some point some sort of marketplace will be required. People who owns marketplace would be stupid to not try to benefit from it by trying to implement a fee from each sale. And on top of that you create crazy negative environmental impact to sustain the operations.
While your intentions might be good, I just think that consumers will always be hurt in the process.
4 Likes
That will never happen. If they could get away with it, the studios would prevent you from selling a physical copy of the movie. They want to get paid over and over for the same thing as much as possible. The last thing they’ll do is facilitate a way for someone to pay once for the right to watch a movie and be able to sell that right to someone else, putting no additional money in the studio’s hands.
The only actual uses for NFT’s are likely to be what they are now - utterly useless, and effectively a Ponzi scheme.
2 Likes
That’s not a compliment.
5 Likes
Chiming in just to say that watching the community react like this is warming my cold mechanical buttplug heart. Y’all are great.
NFTs are worthless for this. I just had some asshole show up on my discord asking about this exact thing, my community shouted them down before I got there to clean up, thank fuck.
Unfortunately, I think at least some services trying this are gonna happen (more likely: already happening) whether we like it or not, but getting scripts and using them with toys is already a tall order, and I don’t see how adding even more complexity gets anyone anything (versus, say, images, where it’s just a picture). Hopefully they’ll fail fast and lose their creators money in the process.
6 Likes