All the blockchain holds is that a certain address (0x12345678) owns a certain token ID (42) minted from a certain contract (0xDEADBEEF). That's all. It proves provenance. What the metadata contains, where it's hosted, etc. is irrelevant.
So while it's true that OS hosts the JPEG of your NFT, for example (it actually caches it), the point is about proving ownership of a specific token identifier, not just a pretty picture.
Which one did the creator use? That's the one that has legitimacy and value.
Legitimacy is basically a coordination game, where you get the best payoff by making the same choice as everyone else. To really dig into this, read this piece by Vitalik:
> Which one did the creator use? That's the one that has legitimacy and value.
This is exactly the crux. How do I prove who is the original creator? Vitalik's concept of legitimacy is based on EVERYONE participating. Which is simply not the case right now. To use his example:
> Elon selling Elon's tweet is the real thing, and Jeff doing the same is not. Once again, millions of dollars of value are being controlled and allocated, not by individuals or cryptographic keys, but by social conceptions of legitimacy.
> But they could also be a missed opportunity: there is little social value in helping Elon Musk earn yet another $1 million by selling his tweet when, as far as we can tell, the money is just going to himself (and, to his credit, he eventually decided not to sell). If NFTs simply become a casino that largely benefits already-wealthy celebrities, that would be a far less interesting outcome.
Of course. But what if all of the edgelords that love Elon (and happen to also have much of the control of share of wallets for ETH) decide he should make the $1M? Vitalik's view would be "well that's what the public decided". However it assumes that EVERYONE is an active participant with full knowledge of the situation.
And finally he admits himself:
> There are definitely more ideas, but this is an area that certainly deserves more active coordination and thought.
> But this goes far beyond just Ethereum itself. NFTs are one example of a large pool of capital that depends on concepts of legitimacy. The NFT industry could be a significant boon to artists, charities and other public goods providers far beyond our own virtual corner of the world, but this outcome is not predetermined; it depends on active coordination and support.
He's actually just regurgitating the ideas of a direct democracy vs a representative democracy. If the public is not fully engaged and fully informed, then this whole theory essentially breaks down.
> This is exactly the crux. How do I prove who is the original creator?
Consensus. We all agree that 0x123457890 is the "Bored Ape" contract, so everything spawned from it is a "real" Bored Ape. It's kind of how we all agree who the real "Picasso" is. This isn't really controversial or hard to grasp, and imo Vitalik's article just muddies the waters.
> This isn't really controversial or hard to grasp
It is. Who precisely is "We"? I personally never said 0x123457890 was the OG Bored Ape. What if I band together millions of people and determine that 99x12345678 which I own is actually the OG Bored Ape. How can you stop me? Isn't that what OpenSea is effectively doing...providing a centralized trust system to say "well of course everyone knows OpenSea is the source of truth because everyone knows it and the consensus is on the blockchain"
> What if I band together millions of people and determine that 99x12345678 which I own is actually the OG Bored Ape. How can you stop me?
I mean, that's exactly how decentralization works. I can't stop you by design. Simply put (and for better or worse), it's tyranny of the masses. If you can do that (get everyone to treat another contract as the real Bored Ape contract), then you've effectively "forked" -- this has happened a couple of times in BTC and ETH.
So while it's true that OS hosts the JPEG of your NFT, for example (it actually caches it), the point is about proving ownership of a specific token identifier, not just a pretty picture.