1 minute readTouchless became a thing around this time a year ago, along with the highly contagious novel coronavirus.
Here’s the connection to the site of 27-year-old Shane Dulgeroff, who’s launched what he claims to be a “world’s first” gambit tying a crypto NFT to a real-world piece of real estate. Touchless is one of those tortured-English functions of pandemic value propositions we could get our brains around, but “trustless?” We’re not so sure that trustlessness is quite ready for primetime as a benefit potential homebuyers are going to clamor for, but hey, who knows? A skeptic Medium blogger B.J. Dweck seems altogether unready to accept either the true trustlessness of NFTs, or the intrinsic human value of trustlessness, except if it can be, ahem, trusted. The problem is that an NFT scenario — or any “collectible” scenario, for that matter — is not a peer-to-peer, “no-single-participant-is-‘more-equal’-than-any-other”-system. In an NFT scenario, it is impossible to eliminate the need for an external, trusted party — nor would one want eliminate such a third party. The NFT ecosystem relies on the designation of trusted third parties because the buyer of an NFT requires a party she trusts — most likely a reputable party with a widely recognized track record for honesty within society — to authenticate the certificate, as with any other, traditional collectible. Still, real property’s and intellectual property’s lines, like everything else, are blurring exponentially fast. Trust me, this may be a first, but we haven’t seen the last of trustless home selling.Join the conversation
