The Pokemon Company has drawn the ire and attention of many, with a new job posting that is actively seeking employees with experience in uncharted territory for the Pokemon franchise. The hiring page shows that The Pokemon Company International wants to hire staff that has "deep knowledge and understanding of Web 3, [...] blockchain technologies, NFT, and/or metaverse. They also appear to be looking for someone who can "connect the relevance of potential partners or technologies with Pokemon's existing assets", which has fans dramatically split between unease and excitement for what this might mean for the future.

The Pokemon Company isn't the first, and definitely won't be the last, in terms of businesses trying to incorporate elements of the blockchain into the video game industry. Despite harsh criticism in the past, Square Enix is still committed to pushing the idea of NFT games. Regardless, outside of the hiring page, nothing involving NFTs has been announced from The Pokemon Company, for now.

Pokémon company posted a job opening that encompasses Blockchain, NFT’s and Web3 technologies.

Oh no, please no 😨 pic.twitter.com/p0XrH0Eat3

— Pory (@pory_leeks) March 12, 2023

 

[Foxi4]

Lol, everything you say on this thread is factually wrong. Even what you say in your latest post shows that you haven't been keeping up with the conversation. Blockchain is being embraced and actively developed--as plenty examples have already been demonstrated.

The point that fiat is backed by country isn't controversial. It's a topical fact; it's not an ancap position (lol deflection). I'm not trying to abolish anything. Newer and effective technologies will simply make archaic systems more irrelevant. Propping the failures of financial institutions as an argument against blockchain is a bit backwards.

Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan Chase, Barclays, Bank of America, Lloyds Banking Group, Royal Bank of Scotland, Wells Fargo, Deutsche Bank, Citi Group, ING, Morgan Stanley and BNY Mellon are just *some* of the world’s biggest banks that are invested in crypto and/or offer blockchain-related services. That’s off the top of my head. There’s been some disruption in the market due to the collapse of FTX and we’re going through a regulatory crypto clamp-down, but realistically, FTX’s woes were entirely self-inflicted - Sam Bankrupt Fraud mismanaged the exchange into the ground. The same can be said about SVB. That doesn’t stop the likes of Goldman Sachs from being invested in crypto to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars.

https://markets.businessinsider.com...n-technology-funding-blockdata-bitcoin-2021-8

55% of the world’s top 100 banks are invested in the blockchain either directly (through ownership of cryptocurrencies) or indirectly (through ownership of crypto-related company stock).

As a side note, fiat currency is backed by nothing. That’s not an “ancap” position, that’s just the truth. The U.S. Dollar has value because the government says it does - the gold standard was abandoned in 1971.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_money

It’s make-believe money. People can exchange goods and services for it because other people want it - it has no backing in assets.

 

[Dyhr]

Lol, everything you say on this thread is factually wrong. Even what you say in your latest post shows that you haven't been keeping up with the conversation. Blockchain is being embraced and actively developed--as plenty examples have already been demonstrated.

The point that fiat is backed by country isn't controversial. It's a topical fact; it's not an ancap position (lol deflection). I'm not trying to abolish anything. Newer and effective technologies will simply make archaic systems more irrelevant. Propping the failures of financial institutions as an argument against blockchain is a bit backwards.

Dude, you're a fucking ancap. Nothing YOU say is rooted in reality or even remotely practical.

 

[tabzer]

Dude, you're a fucking ancap. Nothing YOU say is rooted in reality or even remotely practical.

Obviously I disagree with you. Thanks for confessing your ad hominem.

Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan Chase, Barclays, Bank of America, Lloyds Banking Group, Royal Bank of Scotland, Wells Fargo, Deutsche Bank, Citi Group, ING, Morgan Stanley and BNY Mellon are just *some* of the world’s biggest banks that are invested in crypto and/or offer blockchain-related services. That’s off the top of my head. There’s been some disruption in the market due to the collapse of FTX and we’re going through a regulatory crypto clamp-down, but realistically, FTX’s woes were entirely self-inflicted - Sam Bankrupt Fraud mismanaged the exchange into the ground. The same can be said about SVB. That doesn’t stop the likes of Goldman Sachs from being invested in crypto to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars.

https://markets.businessinsider.com...n-technology-funding-blockdata-bitcoin-2021-8

55% of the world’s top 100 banks are invested in the blockchain either directly (through ownership of cryptocurrencies) or indirectly (through ownership of crypto-related company stock).

As a side note, fiat currency is backed by nothing. That’s not an “ancap” position, that’s just the truth. The U.S. Dollar has value because the government says it does - the gold standard was abandoned in 1971.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_money

It’s make-believe money. People can exchange goods and services for it because other people want it - it has no backing in assets.

It's real because we believe it's real. Seems religious.

 

[Foxi4]

It's real because we believe it's real. Seems religious.

Yes and no. The days of “use value” are long since over, we don’t value things based on how useful they are, we value them based on how desirable they are.

 

[tabzer]

Yes and no. The days of “use value” are long since over, we don’t value things based on how useful they are, we value them based on how desirable they are.

I disagree. I think gold is an example of something that has become more useful over time. The function of something like fiat is social, and if it's not religious, it is at least cultist. Supply and demand gives desire a "use value" in terms of leverage in trade.

 

[Foxi4]

I disagree. I think gold is an example of something that has become more useful over time. The function of something like fiat is social, and if it's not religious, it is at least cultist. Supply and demand gives desire a "use value" in terms of leverage in trade.

The reason why use value is a poor indicator is that it’s circumstancial and variable. A dollar is always worth a dollar, a bottle of lemonade has different value when you’re at a supermarket and a different value when you’re in the middle of a desert and on the verge of collapsing from dehydration. Your suggestion takes us back to the barter system, or, at the latest, Marxist economics (which coined the term “use value” in the first place, in reference to the utility of an asset based on tangible features that satisfy an individual’s needs).

 

[tabzer]

The reason why use value is a poor indicator is that it’s circumstancial and variable. A dollar is always worth a dollar, a bottle of lemonade has different value when you’re at a supermarket and a different value when you’re in the middle of a desert and on the verge of collapsing from dehydration. Your suggestion takes us back to the barter system, or, at the latest, Marxist economics (which coined the term “use value” in the first place, in reference to the utility of an asset based on tangible features that satisfy an individual’s needs).

Wasn't there a deal with China burning paper notes to provide electricity? Sometimes a dollar isn't worth a dollar, but only the paper it was printed on. Maybe the ink denoting it devalues its utility in such case.

 

[tranceology3]

Interesting. Figured the entire NFT/Metaverse trend died off a year and a half ago. Guess not?? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

You might want to reconsider that. Reddit recenetly launched their NFTs and they are very successful. In fact, I think Reddit will be the forefront for what kicks off social media NFTs

 

[Dyhr]

Wasn't there a deal with China burning paper notes to provide electricity? Sometimes a dollar isn't worth a dollar, but only the paper it was printed on. Maybe the ink denoting it devalues its utility in such case.

Modeling yourself after a doomed country with no planned future isn't a great idea. Just saying.
We're also talking about the country that to this day deifies the greatest genocider in history.

You might want to reconsider that. Reddit recenetly launched their NFTs and they are very successful. In fact, I think Reddit will be the forefront for what kicks off social media NFTs

They aren't successful at all lmfao. They aren't even succeeding at making people use the new interface despite punishing "old style" users with things like intentionally broken hyperlinks, etc.
Doesn't help that Reddit only ever enters the media because the admins allowed something awful to happen.

 

[tabzer]

Modeling yourself after a doomed country with no planned future isn't a great idea. Just saying.

Can you explain why you think a reference to currency becoming grossly devalued is "modeling"? If I were to be "modeling" myself after China, I would have to at least advocate for something it does, which I haven't. Do you walk backwards wherever you go? It's an interesting way to explore limitations and pitfalls.

 

[Dyhr]

Can you explain why you think a reference to currency becoming grossly devalued is "modeling"? If I were to be "modeling" myself after China, I would have to at least advocate for something it does, which I haven't. Do you walk backwards wherever you go? It's an interesting way to explore limitations and pitfalls.

Somewhere in that stroke you called a post you mentioned burning currency as "a viable option, since it has no other worth, possibly, maybe".

You talk like Dave Meltzer and Ben Shapiro had a child. It's hard to tell what you mean---burden of your words meaning anything or something is on you.

 

[tabzer]

you mentioned burning currency as "a viable option, since it has no other worth, possibly, maybe".

Mentioning an example where a country's currency isn't worth the paper it's printed on is not advocacy for that country's policy. AFAIK, American pennies are worth more as metal. Maybe even nickels, too.

You are looking to attack me because you hate nfts. Not really logical or rational. You may actually drive more interest into it by showcasing your pent up belligerence. It seems like you are actually more passionate about NFTs than I am. It's enough to make one curious of how NFTs hurt you, thus perpetuating people into their personal investigation in which they figure out that you are both melodramatic and ignorant.

Basically you are hurting your case. Find someone smarter who can make real arguments based on real facts instead of looking like a hater/loser.

It's hard to tell what you mean---burden of your words meaning anything or something is on you.

If you don't understand what I am saying, there's nothing really for you to say, other than asking what I meant by something.

 

[Dyhr]

A lot of words meaning absolutely nothing. Literally, nothing. You haven't said one goddamn thing.

 

[tabzer]

A lot of words meaning absolutely nothing. Literally, nothing. You haven't said one goddamn thing.

I'm literally saying that you make NFTs more interesting.

 

[Dyhr]

You can't add interest to what has none to begin with. A positive and a negative is still nothing.

 

[tabzer]

You can't add interest to what has none to begin with. A positive and a negative is still nothing.

So you come here for no reason? Or, do you think that you are "cancelling" out positive facts through sheer obstinance? Which is it?

Do you desire balance?

You are very curious. Maybe I could make you into an NFT. It'd be my first one.

 

[NyxNullify]

Thanks I hate it

 

[Sir Tortoise]

You are very curious. Maybe I could make you into an NFT. It'd be my first one.

Reading this like a supervillain threatening to freeze someone in carbonite or something.

 

[Dyhr]

So you come here for no reason? Or, do you think that you are "cancelling" out positive facts through sheer obstinance? Which is it?

Do you desire balance?

You are very curious. Maybe I could make you into an NFT. It'd be my first one.

Can you try this again? Perhaps in a language humans speak? English is good, since that's what this forum seems to be in most cases, except for when Chinese Spam Day happens, but you're not speaking that either.

No such thing as an "NFT". Just someone laying claim to the hyperlink of a hyperlink. I'll just pirate it for you. Ask the Libertarian P.D. to help ya out with that!

 

[FAST6191]

I have seen people dismiss NFTs as hyperlinks derisively but they usually understood there is still an underlying concept. I don't know if you fail to understand it or are being massively obtuse but either way no.

Various types of ownership are recognised by court and common custom, this would include intellectual property generally and instances of a work.

You can attempt to own it generally as per standard contract law, buy, sell, subdivide and defend rights accordingly.

Some companies will offer to make you part of a ledger/database to assist in such things, disputes and more besides as well as facilitate the above (sometimes, for games the selling of virtual games and other works of intellectual property otherwise traded in the millions for centuries now is often stymied by bigger providers much to my chagrin). Rather relies on the company or a successor continuing to offer the service, and under terms you care to work under but hey we have working examples.

Long theorised but these days a practical reality is you can eschew the company holding things and instead trust to the general public, and as the general public are rather less trustworthy than anything else you attempt to obviate that by use of cryptography and widespread distribution. This gives rise to the idea of a non fungible (that is to say can't be subdivided) token aka NFT wherein ownership of the token* (again backed by strong cryptography) in turn confers ownership of an instance of a work. You can sell said token, sublicense it, effectively destroy it depending upon the protocol (some will allow you to send to a non existent address, or one nobody has the keys for), enjoy the benefits of ownership and much more besides. Some NFT examples may include a hyperlink in the contract that is exchanged (NFT being a subset of something called a smart contract, that being where a contract is drawn up and given over to said public ledger and strong crypto backing and not all contracts involve the exchange of ownership of something) and some of those may be subject to the same failures as the company example above but it is generally considered a convenience where the ownership rights still reside with the token.

*various courts, companies and the like recognising that he what owns the serial sticker, paper certificates of ownership/sale, dongle or the like is the owner of the instance(s) of the software.