---
# System prepended metadata

title: NFT Chain review by donnoh.eth

---

# NFT Chain review by donnoh.eth

## Abstract

> While we like digital art and collectibles, we think NFTs should evolve into more sophisticated Digital Objects that can be composed into more complex objects

Already existing tech that the paper proposes as new (just some examples, not at all complete):
- Decomposition into smaller pieces: [Fractional](https://fractional.art/).
- Implement interfaces: [OpenZeppelin NFT interfaces with different features + implementations](https://github.com/OpenZeppelin/openzeppelin-contracts/tree/master/contracts/token/ERC721).
- Borrow/Loan: [NFTfi](https://nftfi.com/), [Papr](https://www.papr.wtf/).
- Be transferred or be non transferrable: [EIP721](https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-721) e [EIP5192](https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-5192) (i'm currently working on the latter).
- Be linked to physical objects: [House sold via a NFT](https://unusualwhales.com/news/the-first-on-chain-house-sells-as-nft-for-175k), [seenhaus](https://seen.haus/).
- Data stored off-chain or on-chain: IPFS for off-chain and on-chain like my platform [Zang](https://zang.gallery).

## 1.3 What is NFT Chain

Being NFT only precludes a lot potential functionalities like lending for cryptocurrencies or interoperability with on-chain games or other applications.

> Scammers can’t do much because the transfer functions are safe and standard

Without justification it doesn't mean anything.

About "superpowers":
- **Composability**: NFTs are already composable, why would implementing the functionality natively (instead of having arbitrary programs on top of a VM) be better? 
- **Security by design**: I disagree that limiting functionality of NFTs for safety is worth it. Security can be increased by having smarter wallets that analyze contracts and present the dangers of the interaction with the users.
- **Defi ready**: "most used marketplaces are centralized" is just false.
- **Rentability**: nothing new.
- **Scalability**: why not just building a rollup or on a rollup? Since they are the most promising scaling solution, deciding not to build there should be heavily justified.
- **Multichain**: if you go to another chain you lose the property of your chain, so what's the point?

## 2 Technical Details

I personally believe choosing Polkadot is very suboptimal but this is within the range of personal opinions; parachains are barely used compared to the other considered alternatives but i hope that time will prove me wrong!

## 3 Tokenomics

Launching a new token and basing the security on the network on that is extremely naive and not secure at all. Build a rollup!

Stake delegation is very criticized ([example](https://vitalik.ca/general/2018/03/28/plutocracy.html)).

## General considerations

Hardcoding functionalities prevents sperimentation and innovation. It just feels an attempt to ride the hype and launch a "utility" token to earn quick money. There is no comparison between existent solution and why someone would choose this chain on top of more established ones. 


