ICP NFT’s haven’t failed, many projects are still on going. This is about building for the longterm where you don’t have pump and dump ruining everything. Worth noting that many NFT projects are down less than ICP itself
6 Likes
Bob, more progress “within the next week or so” is not acceptable. Toniq has had months (longer) to work on these issues but is continually chasing the next thing (i.e., making a ckBTC version of pump fun). If one developer can’t do it today, put two on it. If two can’t do it, hire ten.
I’ve always been supportive of Stoic and Entrepot (and even Bioniq, despite the fact that I didn’t like the new initiative while the old ones were still unfinished), and I showed my support by launching both of my NFT collections with you guys while Yumi was actively trying to get me to use their platform instead. But Toniq has definitely made money from the community. It’s time to make the products work.
6 Likes
Paid off by who? (serious question, if this is a serious statement and not just intended to be inflammatory)
Carto applied for a grant and was reject (more than once, I believe), while ridiculous amounts of grant money were given to projects that did zero.
It’s almost as if the Foundation doesn’t want the chain associated with NFTs and only wants to promote their groundbreaking technology. The problem is that they have to build to community and not just the tech, and collectibles like NFTs are one of the ways to build a community.
How do we make the Foundation understand this?
4 Likes
One thing you don’t want to leave out, Egido - you and I and many others have invested a lot of time into creating NFTs and communities around them. Any universal standard MUST be able to migrate ALL of the existing NFTs, or all it will do is destroy any trust the community has left.
So while I agree that it has to be more than a patch, it also has to be backward compatible (or at least provide a way to migrate existing standards with minimal issues).
The big brains at DFINITY should be able to solve this in weeks, if not days. Resources should be reallocated to get it done immediately.
5 Likes
Don’t worry, it’s happening. I’m talking to Cartographer, going to be involved in NFT standards now, and will fund whatever it takes.
I don’t want toniq/stoic/entrepot fixed, I want them replaced.
10 Likes
OISY sets the standard in responding to community feedback and they are diving into NFT support headlong. The problem is that they face an uphill battle supporting the wide array of standards. But they immediately pivoted to working on it when they saw how much the community wanted it. I feel free to tag OISY in Twitter posts that refer to what the community wants in a wallet because they are an example for dev teams in the eco (I’m including DFINITY because they could stand to care more about community feedback).
2 Likes
If you and Carto are teaming up, I will provide whatever support you need on the media side. You may remember when I did weekly NFT blogs for Dfinity Community (before they lost their funding). I can provide regular product updates and promotional articles on my Nuance blog and repost to Taggr, distrikt, and other ICP socials (besides posting on Twitter). Just keep me in the loop.
6 Likes
oh yes friend. Migration is needed. Cant risk repeating the same mistakes
1 Like
The issue that frustrates people and erodes their trust isn’t just the indexer system error. It’s the way Bob has responded and handled the situation with users.
Three months have passed, yet all we’ve received are repeated excuses—no detailed reports on the issue, no updates on the progress of fixing it, and, even worse, not even a simple warning message on the website to inform users.
This has been an absolutely terrible experience for me with Toniq Lab’s products.
3 Likes
The price never update to the latest (see below), the site sucks, who used the best resource to make a product like this, more like a joke.
The latest floor price is actually 41.
5 Likes
Some of the replies i just rather not engage because they keep pushing this narrative that wanting a minimum working product as a customer is not worth it because it is “A lost battle and NFTs are dead”. No one is saying the only reason why our NFTs arent at millions is due to “technical problems”. NFTs as a whole is an evolving and exciting space and ignoring it is a big mistake. People are still figuring out how to make them exciting, new usecases and experiences for the users. Also just to put in perspective. Ive seen many calling for the end of “memecoins” and even the end of crypto many times over and over again, so it surprises me hearing the same arguments from people working fulltime in this industry.
2 Likes
Keep going Bob! I can only imagine the pressure of what it is like to run pioneering projects. Concerns are addressed as you continue to build and wont know them unless you keep building.
Low. Time. Preference.
Give back Motoko Sentinels
5 Likes
ICRC-99 does this. And NFTs from evm chains. Trying to help some folks find some funding to productize it. Please inquire if you want to help. We’re literally 98% of the way to being able to port all existing NFTs to other canisters/chains(we can already move evm NFTs from one evm to ic to another evm which is actually more work than getting hands around IC NFTs).
3 Likes
Can we also tie in Adam (from Dragginz) and Cartographer (from DGDG)? I don’t want to lose our only functional NFT marketplace, and Adam would probably help fund.
4 Likes
It’s clear that this is a major issue, and the engagement on the post confirms that many people feel the same way. The fact that new users are still falling into this trap on Bioniq, according to new posts on their telegram, makes it even worse.
Escalating this on the DFINITY Forum was absolutely the right move. If this issue isn’t resolved quickly and transparently, it will reflect very poorly on both Bioniq and the broader ICP ecosystem.
Now that it’s gaining attention, the next step is to hold them accountable to a timeline. Let’s see how long it actually takes for them to resolve this. If they continue to delay, then it’s time to push for even greater visibility and pressure—because this isn’t just a Bioniq problem anymore, it’s a trust issue for the entire ICP NFT space.
7 Likes
I will help fund, I just don’t want people to be able to sabotage the standards like they have in the past. I want to make sure they’re designed by people who want the IC to succeed… and I want to be involved as the Dragginz NFTs are complicated.
11 Likes
sabotage the standards like they have in the past
I’m not sure which standards you’re referring to?
-
As far as I’m aware the standards currently in use (mostly EXT and some old DIP721 collections) are not from a WG standardization process, which is likely part of the problem to begin with.
Similar to the situation with DIP20 tokens like XTC that are now no longer supported by most wallets. But after ICRC-1 had adoption, this issue has mostly disappeared.
Meanwhile let’s not forget that these standards have paved the way for early adoption of the IC ecosystem for many users while no other (non-fungible) token implementations existed yet.
-
ICRC-7 and ICRC-37 have been publicly discussed in the WG over the past 2 years and NNS approved last year. All the WG meetings were public for anyone to join, I don’t remember any attempts to sabotage these standards.
Please have a look at the standards and share any concerns you have with these standards. Overall they should be similar to ICRC-1 and ICRC-2 but from a non-fungible perspective.
Adoption of the ICRC-7 standard has been slow due to two primary reasons:
-
There’s no metadata standard yet, I made an attempt with ICRC-97 but that hasn’t progressed further due to lack of feedback and discussions around it.
Any direct feedback or interest in discussing this topic would be highly appreciated!
-
There’s no production ready Rust implementation similar to the ICRC-1 ledger implementation at this moment. Fortunately @skilesare has already created a Motoko implementation.
-
Primarily due to the first point, support from wallets has been on hold, implementing ICRC-7 by itself without a metadata standard would not be useful e.g. you’d have NFTs without images.
If anyone is interested in picking back up the metadata discussion, send me a DM and I’ll see if I can organize meeting(s) with participants to get the ball rolling again.
Just to clarify, all updates and decisions within the working groups are always publicly made in the relevant GitHub issues and shared on the forum, so even if you don’t participate there’s always an opportunity to stay up to date and to share your thoughts and feedback at any point in time.
3 Likes
I’m not sure if this was directed to me or not, but if so I’ll add that any time I approach a standard the idea is to make sure it is open and permissionless. The original ogy_standard attempted to ‘fix’ the problem of centralized-decentralized marketplaces by putting the sales mechanism in the canister. The collection owner got to decide on the royalty available to a marketplace and, when sold, that fee was split between the listing marketplace and the selling marketplace. This gives the added bonus of the item being able to be listed on multiple marketplaces at the same time and compensates marketplaces for the work they do pulling in eyeballs…but hopefully neutralizes their ability to corner or drive the market with proprietary listings. If a creator sets the value to 0 then it would be unlikely to listed anywhere, if they set it too high then “investors” will be buy less because there is less margin.
I attempted to codify this in ICRC-8, but that needs a massive overhaul and simplification(another thing on my todo list).
To your point, those “standards” are open, can be used by anyone, can be forked and modified by anyone and made better, etc. There a significant amount knowledge capital of with a bunch of paid-for mistakes built in that a “new” standard could avoid by using, enhancing, or forking. So to the extent that dg or adam want to use them, they are there and can be used…it is a matter of implementation and funding at this point.
2 Likes