Mike Selling Music on Zora

[Soeffingnaive92]

6 hours ago, Justin said:

 

True, but also Mike didn't set the price to be what it is. I think he started it at $0. Fans bidding is why the price is insane lol

Yeah I understood the mechanism, if someone is interested in bidding on this and is a crazy collector, well super fine, nothing against it 

[PizzaPino]

19 hours ago, Coizu said:

I have a strong opinion about all these blockchain things but I initially didn't really want to be too negative about it, but since most people have a very critical view on this I thought I will share my rant about it anyway.

 

First of all, this is a typical example of blockchain tech in general. Some people think all that blockchain and crypto stuff is the most genius thing that happens to human kind within the last thousand years or so, while the rest of the world just doesn't care at all. Instead of taking a step back and questioning if all of these things are necessary and if they actually solve a problem that really exists, people invested into crypto and blockchain tech try to push it even further with services and more tech that build upon blockchains. But what never gets solved is the problem of people understanding it and actually using blockchain tech. And for me the whole reason why this is not happening is: there is no need for it. All the problems blockchain startups try to solve were never any problems to begin with.

Zora is a prime example in my opinion. No one understands it. And once people get a rough idea, they still don't see the point. If you want to auction something unique, just use Ebay and have a centralised system that tells you who the current owner is. Why is another level of complexity necessary here? How does crypto help? I think the only reason crypto is necessary here is because otherwise no one would care about the idea of owning a digital item. The whole point is to find an application for crypto, no matter how much sense it makes.

 

So why are people out there bidding 10k or more for a thing no one understands and no one actually cares about? My explanation is that there are a quite some people who invested a lot of their money into crypto currencies (and some of them made quite some money with it) and they really believe in the tech and its future growth. So those people are inclined to spend more money on crypto related services. Imagine you invest 90% of your money into crypto and you see it growing and growing. You start to really believe in it and you start to invest more and more into it and you also start to spend more in the whole ecosystem to "get the ball rolling".

I would make a bet that whoever wins the auction is a bigger fan of Ethereum than of Mike.

 

Decentralized systems are ALWAYS better because there is no way to fake something and you can always see where it came from. It's fully traceable. When it comes to centralized systems the problem is that there's always a chance for them to fake and hide something. I work in the automotive industry and most of us are also moving towards blockchain and decentralized systems. The downside is so much more costs and a lot of R&D to be done.

 

I hope that we will live in a future where everything is decentralized and the people don't even have to 'get it'. All they need to know is that what they are getting/buying/using is fully legit and traceable. All blockchain/decentralization is just a protocol in the background.  I mean the majority is using the internet and they don't understand the protocols behind it.

 

I fully agree with what you said about the now 30k bid. But also that rich kids have always gotten the collectibles they wanted.

 

So about Mike going this way of creating just 1 single NFT (for now). It's really a collectible guys. Collectibles have always been more expensive but now for the first time digital things can be real collectibles because there's no way to just really fake it. He could very well still release the 100th stream digitally for just 1$ but still the one one Zora is the first release and the buyer can decide how much it's worth for him. Also I'm pretty sure he will release it to the masses because he stressed that "there will only be 1 FIRST release of something". And finally with this technology you are able to proof that this is the first release and not coming from the 2nd batch on iTunes even though the file is 100% identical. Simply because you can trace that it wandered from Mike's digital wallet address to your digital wallet address.

Now you could of course, if Mike releases this digitally for everyone else, just get that, and rip the animation and create your own .mov file. Do you have the same now? Yes and no. You might think the buyer is the stupid person because you've got exactly the same now. But the buyer thinks you are the stupid person because he has the original, everybody can verify on the blockchain that it went from Mike's digital wallet adress to his digital wallet address. But does it really matter? For you probably not, but for collectors it does matter. You will never be able to sell your .mov file for any money if interested people can't follow it on the blockchain.

So Mike now just put more NFTs up on Zora. A text with his name, and a drawing. You can potentially just screenshot the drawing and put it as your profile pic, you can open a text editor and write "Mike Shinoda". But does it have the same collectible value? No. But is it worth any money? That's up to yourself. I also never cared about collecting coins or stamps, but still I do understand that others can see unique value with a price tag on them. Tbh I'm very interested in the "Mike Shinoda" text NFT.

 

This is a new thinking where digital things can be collectibles and it's very interesting to think if digital goods can be collectibles. This is all a very new concept and has still to be proven if this concept will find it's way into a niche or even into society.

 

To maybe break it down to our current world which is not too abstract: Think of a physical Mona Lisa which is connected to a token on the blockchain. You can only sell it with the token, which means the token will be transferred from one digital wallet to another digital wallet. If you can't, then  the Mona Lisa is a fake because there can only be one single Mona Lisa token on the whole blockchain that you can trace to its beginnings. And even if you duplicate the Mona Lisa and try to sell it with the token, will the original have any worth because you can't proof it? Will the new Mona Lisa still have the full value even though it's duplicated? Is all that matters then  just the token on the blockchain? These are hypothetical questions that I can't answer yet but it's very interesting to think about such a future.

Edited February 8, 2021 by PizzaPino

[Coizu]

2 hours ago, PizzaPino said:

 

Decentralized systems are ALWAYS better because there is no way to fake something and you can always see where it came from. It's fully traceable. When it comes to centralized systems the problem is that there's always a chance for them to fake and hide something. I work in the automotive industry and most of us are also moving towards blockchain and decentralized systems. The downside is so much more costs and a lot of R&D to be done.

We are getting pretty off topic here I guess, but anyway 😄  In general I agree that decentralisation is better. That doesn't mean that everything should be decentralised though. But that's what's happening in the blockchain world. People want to throw it at every single thing. 

You mentioned the automotive industry and I heard the same thing you said billions of times (I live in pretty much the most automotive heavy area in Germany, so a lot of the people I talked to about blockchain are also from that industry) but what I fail to see is how are there practical implementations. People say that you can track everything in your supply chain for example, but how do you know that people feed the correct data into the blockchain? You need to trust the other parties anyway so why introduce a convoluted system?

 

2 hours ago, PizzaPino said:

I hope that we will live in a future where everything is decentralized and the people don't even have to 'get it'.

Maybe that would be great, but I don't see the blockchain community striving for that. It feels like everything is just there to present the awesomeness of blockchains and how it is the most important aspect. The actual applications always feel second class to me.

 

2 hours ago, PizzaPino said:

I mean the majority is using the internet and they don't understand the protocols behind it.

Here lies the key difference in my opinion: the internet developed naturally and applications for it came up once people got used to the concept and the idea, whereas with blockchain people forcefully try to create applications of the tech before people got used to the whole concept.

 

Anyway, I think we are going pretty off topic here and this topic probably shouldn't develop into a general discussion about blockchain tech 😄 Happy to continue this discussion in private messages or somewhere else though.

[Soeffingnaive92]

This is getting really professional. I’m basically reading your comments and learning things I’ve never knew. Cool stuff 

[PizzaPino]

1 hour ago, Coizu said:

We are getting pretty off topic here I guess, but anyway 😄  In general I agree that decentralisation is better. That doesn't mean that everything should be decentralised though. But that's what's happening in the blockchain world. People want to throw it at every single thing. 

You mentioned the automotive industry and I heard the same thing you said billions of times (I live in pretty much the most automotive heavy area in Germany, so a lot of the people I talked to about blockchain are also from that industry) but what I fail to see is how are there practical implementations. People say that you can track everything in your supply chain for example, but how do you know that people feed the correct data into the blockchain? You need to trust the other parties anyway so why introduce a convoluted system?

just a few last off topic remarks haha. I agree that not everything has to be decentralized. Also I agree that as long as the feed isn't correct or true even blockchain won't help. BUT we are removing places and mechanisms where you can manipulate the data. The less the better right? And if someone feeds incorrect data into it you will always know where it came from.

 

1 hour ago, Coizu said:

Maybe that would be great, but I don't see the blockchain community striving for that. It feels like everything is just there to present the awesomeness of blockchains and how it is the most important aspect. The actual applications always feel second class to me.

 

Here lies the key difference in my opinion: the internet developed naturally and applications for it came up once people got used to the concept and the idea, whereas with blockchain people forcefully try to create applications of the tech before people got used to the whole concept.

I also agree with you here. It's all still in a very explorative bubble and I'm pretty sure in 15 years 99% of all these projects will be no more. Only the few ones that are more comprehensible and help society will still be there.

 

1 hour ago, PurpleFlinstoneVitamins92 said:

This is getting really professional. I’m basically reading your comments and learning things I’ve never knew. Cool stuff 

 

Yeah even though bitcoin was created 10 years ago, this all is still a very new way of thinking. The concept of decentralization existed even for longer and it still hasn't found its way into society. Only cryptocurrencies as an investment tool became a bit more mainstream. But decentralization is further away, also because governments are more in favor of centralized than decentralized concepts of course. It could also just be that we will still live in a centralized future because humanity decided that it's better to have centralized instances with the possibility that things can be faked and duplicated but it's just easier and humans like simple things. Who knows.

I'm pretty sure Mike himself doesn't understand all of it (yet) since he explained it badly imo. But this also shows what kind of an experimental thing this is and maybe we shouldn't put too many emotions behind it. He's just testing things out.

Edited February 8, 2021 by PizzaPino

[Coizu]

Really disappointed by how Mike just handled the situation on the stream. He said that the stream viewers, who are his most loyal fans in general, are not the target audience.

First of all without the fans like the ones tuning in every day, his NFT wouldn't be worth as much as it apparently is. Dismissing all of those people just like that seems off putting to me. He also said that he will continue doing things like that, because not doing it would make no sense. So he's actively planning on releasing things that are not targeted towards his actual fanbase but rather to rich people in the cryptosphere.

I respect Mike and he can do whatever he wants but his reaction was totally tone deaf in my opinion. Trying out new tech and innovations is a cool thing and I totally encourage him and the band to keep on doing so but if you start targeting the "1%" of your fanbase without considering the rest, it's hard to not go into the direction of "cashgrab".

[LPLStaff]

The thing about Mike creating 1 NFT, making a digital item a collectable is just so hard for people to grasp. Because it's digital.

 

Something that is truly surprising is that he never mentioned the thing on Zora wasn't a sample of the full song. He literally only sold 30~ seconds with the GIF/video attached to it.... not the full "One Hundredth Stream" song. That's almost unbelievable because 1) it was never mentioned anywhere he wasn't selling a full song, and 2) literally everyone thought the entire song was for sale. So the winner, for $30,000 only got the 30-40 second clip... whatever it was. But maybe the winner actually knew that when they were bidding. 

 

Now Mike is showing how wild this can really be because he's now selling some art files but also it looks like he's testing it by just selling his name typed in Times New Roman font. Seems a bit crazy - where is the value in his typed name? The fact that he pressed the buttons on his own keyboard? Will someone even bid on that? If they do then that’s an easy way for him to get some income lol 

 

11 hours ago, Coizu said:

Really disappointed by how Mike just handled the situation on the stream. He said that the stream viewers, who are his most loyal fans in general, are not the target audience.

First of all without the fans like the ones tuning in every day, his NFT wouldn't be worth as much as it apparently is. Dismissing all of those people just like that seems off putting to me. He also said that he will continue doing things like that, because not doing it would make no sense. So he's actively planning on releasing things that are not targeted towards his actual fanbase but rather to rich people in the cryptosphere.

I respect Mike and he can do whatever he wants but his reaction was totally tone deaf in my opinion. Trying out new tech and innovations is a cool thing and I totally encourage him and the band to keep on doing so but if you start targeting the "1%" of your fanbase without considering the rest, it's hard to not go into the direction of "cashgrab".

 

It was an odd comment. He caused the fanbase to have its biggest discussions since HT20 on Twitter when he randomly posted this Zora thing the other day without much information at all for anyone. You'd logically expect that after he had to defend/explain it on Twitter with all of the replies he made + he ended up donating all of the money that he'd spend a good 30-45 minutes discussing it on a stream. A lot of people probably tuned in today to hear about it. $30,000 is no small deal or feat, it made cryptocurrency headlines judging by the Google News emails we get daily about Linkin Park. 

 

So what is the deal here, he isn't intending any of this for his core fanbase, but he wants to just make money from cryptocurrency community people? Who even are those people? They must have some knowledge of Mike. But you see the most hardcore fans on Twitch, Twitter, other social media, but the fansites too and you haven't heard of 1 single person that has bid on any of Mike's stuff yet. What a wild thing lol

[Justin]

If he sold a 30-40 second clip of a Twitch jam for $30,000 and is now selling his typed out name, it seems like he's not doing this as a way to give the top 1% of the fanbase exclusive items but it's rather his way of saying "If these guys want to give me tens of thousands of dollars for pretty much nothing, I'll take it. Why not?" Which is kind of weird but it's not like he's putting up LP demos or unreleased music for sale.

 

This still isn't a Once Upon A Time In Shaolin situation. Yet.

[hahninator]

3 hours ago, Justin said:

If he sold a 30-40 second clip of a Twitch jam for $30,000 and is now selling his typed out name, it seems like he's not doing this as a way to give the top 1% of the fanbase exclusive items but it's rather his way of saying "If these guys want to give me tens of thousands of dollars for pretty much nothing, I'll take it. Why not?" Which is kind of weird but it's not like he's putting up LP demos or unreleased music for sale.

 

This still isn't a Once Upon A Time In Shaolin situation. Yet.

Great point. There’s truly no harm at all in doing it. It’s just a new concept to people but very foreign to them at the same time. If people want to pay it...go right ahead lol

[Stranger]

22 minutes ago, hahninator said:

Great point. There’s truly no harm at all in doing it. It’s just a new concept to people but very foreign to them at the same time. If people want to pay it...go right ahead lol

 

Mike always experiments with technology and stuff. i'm totally agree with him but some "hardcore" & "loyal" fans make this thing such a big deal, seems like totally illegal for Mike. it's all about who's willing or not to pay for it. he never said it's a MUST for fans to do so. 

[PizzaPino]

I actually knew the NFT would only be 30 secs long and I’m also interested in the Mike Shinoda text file NFT. but I’m a heavy tech person and have been in this blockchain space for years. 
 

I disagree that Mike is doing it for the money. He never knew how much this all would be worth and I’m pretty sure he would’ve continued if it only sold for 5 bucks because he wants to test the space. He’s an artist and a nerd. 
I also think he is donating the 30k to the fund because he’s feeling that the first NFT isn’t worth 30k. 

[Cesar656]

Well, i mean, its clear that that file is not targeted towards the hardcore base. Which hardcore fan would want that? If he put out a demo or something i could understand, but crying on the internet because he gave a snipet of a song for 30k? Come on.

Dude is smart, he is milking Zora while it lasts, and honestly, i think we would all do the same.

5k for your name typed in a certain way? Id rather do that than my own job

[Bambitt]

wow, you guys are really reading into everything too much and making big deal out of such little things.. but I get it. when there are no LP related and relevant news, we gotta talk about something, right? 

[Coizu]

Looking back at my comment it might not have been worded in the best way. If people want to buy it and he wants to sell things there, sure thing, go ahead and do it. Nothing wrong with that. I just thought it's a little bit off to tell his fans that they are not the audience and how he handled the reaction of the fans in general.

 

Not a huge fan of the discussion culture of some of the comments here in the forums though. As soon as you criticise something in any capacity it is crying? It's an interesting topic and worth having a discussion but if that's the direction we are heading I don't think it is worth doing that here.

 

7 hours ago, PizzaPino said:

I’m also interested in the Mike Shinoda text file NFT.

If you would acquire it would you rather regard it as an investment that might be worth more in the future or would you buy it because it has a certain value to yourself? Honest question since I want to understand more about it.

[JZLP-Benningstrong]

I dont follow Mike streams and I dont listen to his instrumentals I heard Dropped Frames V1 and i didnt like it

call me stupid but the person who paid that much money for something that is not actually exclusive man what was he thinking...

 

It's too much music, I dont feel excited to listen to his instrumentals anymore.

Sometimes less is more.

 

[eyesburning]

5 minutes ago, JZ-AmendsStripped29 said:

I dont follow Mike streams and I dont listen to his instrumentals I heard Dropped Frames V1 and i didnt like it

call me stupid but the person who paid that much money for something that is not actually exclusive man what was he thinking...

 

It's too much music, I dont feel excited to listen to his instrumentals anymore.

Sometimes less is more.

 

 

As mentioned in here before, it's quite likely that the person who buys this for 30k+ isn't even a Mike/LP fan but rather someone from the crypto community with money lying around to invest in anything crypto-related. I think it doesn't even matter what exactly he is selling to them as long as they can sell it in the future for profit.

[PizzaPino]

3 hours ago, Coizu said:

If you would acquire it would you rather regard it as an investment that might be worth more in the future or would you buy it because it has a certain value to yourself? Honest question since I want to understand more about it.

 

Primarily because I see it as a unique collectible and a very unique art form. I would also be the only holder of his name which is weird and still pretty cool in my eyes. I also see the appeal of an investment of it in 50 years when he’s dead because it is an NFT of just his name, so simple yet so powerful because it’s his identity. But that’s really second. When I though of buying it, I didn’t think of reselling it. I’d just want to see it on my digital stash. 

It would be even cooler if all LP released their name as an NFT and you could collect them and I'd imagine that would skyrocket the price of them.

As stupid as it sounds this could be the future of art and our kids will see us as boomers ("back in my days art was something that you could touch"). Maybe not just stupid text files but real digital drawings or whatever. Youtuber Logan Paul is about to sell around 5 trading card NFTs of himself soon (due to the pokemon trading card craze) and the people/kids do see the appeal of it.

Of course it might also be the dumbest purchase ever if in 3 years nobody sees a worth in digital art or digital collectibles. But that’s a risk on my side. 

Edited February 9, 2021 by PizzaPino

[jopevc]

I know that what I´m about to ask is VERY off-topic but I dont know else were to ask, I'm sorry. Does Mike still does Q&A´s in his livestreams?

Edited February 10, 2021 by jopevc

[LPLStaff]

12 hours ago, jopevc said:

I know that what I´m about to ask is VERY off-topic but I dont know else were to ask, I'm sorry. Does Mike still does Q&A´s in his livestreams?

 

About one Q&A session per month or two now.

[jopevc]

2 hours ago, LPLStaff said:

 

About one Q&A session per month or two now.

Okay, thanks!

[NJPLP]

On 2/7/2021 at 3:20 PM, Coizu said:

 

The highest bidder has half a million USD laying around in various Ethereum tokens so I guess it's a rich person who doesn't really care that much about $21,000.

https://etherscan.io/tokenholdings?a=0xf69ea6646cf682262e84cd7c67133eac59cef07b

 

On 2/7/2021 at 5:57 PM, JZ-AmendsStripped29 said:

 

that guy should pay Ostrish for the HT documentary

I agree. He should buy that Hybrid Theory Lockout performance off Marc Ostrick.

[JZLP-Benningstrong]

I said Ostrish 😂

[martinez]

So all the time was about the snippet only, not the full song, right?

[Coizu]

10 minutes ago, martinez said:

So all the time was about the snippet only, not the full song, right?

On Zora you always see the full media that belongs to the NFT on the auction sale site. There is nothing else to it. 

[LPLStaff]

Mike should have explained that from the start. It was logical to assume it was like iTunes and it was just a preview of the full song. Yes, he only sold 37 seconds.