I'm fairly sure that a lot more will follow the concept of consensus on what is correct before they get the idea of decentralized trust. There is already so little trust in the quality of information that social interchange is guaranteed the way outrage will sort this out. The Internet as arbiter of truth will happen before it is the arbiter of what's really in your wallet.
I'm fairly sure of that. It is why I believe actual objects as NFT; the rare collectible; will be the “token” or “coin” first broadly recognized in a digital exchange concept. A scarcity of something that materially exists is the mental image that makes the digital recognizable as representing value, not a string of numbers. The principles of gestalt are fairly unambiguous on that.
Consider this as you choose to follow this art where actual scarcity is fabricated and codified based on consensus on the structure of the knot. The image shown here is my initial step, as the creator of this concept, into the realm of decision making in measuring systemic reality as a sequential growth pattern. What is described here is two five crossing knots combined together with two four crossing knots in a different arrangement from what has preceded with a separate code when the sixteen module square was introduced.
This pattern fits a nine module square that compacts the same four knots as previously needed a sixteen modular square on which the numbers 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206 and 207 are found. Can this variation that gives meaning to the value of modules 242, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248 and 249 in the Cryptoknot protocol fit in the system?
The question this poses is the point of leaving the function of the system in the genesis phase open to all possibilities that will require consensus later on. Whether tokenized numbers can never be associated with any other entity but one single immutable form of five and four crossing knots, combined, or if other forms this combination may take, that actually make a topologically different entity, determine what is known as a set of numbers whose origins form one title block of an infinitely growing blockchain that associates it with the cryptoknot concept, is what these examples leave open to discussion, and change, in the organizational phase.
My decisions at this early stage relate strictly to the measure of a creation as a “genesis sequence”, and the generation of the numbers and their quantity is open to discussion; the potential of forks and parallel chains in the overall plan of Cryptoknot serialization included.
Conceptually, these questions have already been worked out in the way the Woodstock '94 collectible went through its trials twenty five years ago. The goal here is to create a situation that attracts those that possess the actual valuables of that experiment and six years of distributive placement that followed, to this concept of the knot as a virtually oriented NFT. The idea is to use the idea of belonging to a common group of collectors to create a competitive level of curiosity. This is primed as a base to see the benefits of understanding what the difference between the digital world and the factual world offers.
The knot campaign is introduced in the previous posts here, has a White Paper as the website http://www.greatknot.com, and the Woodstock '94 side of it is taking form on the more commonly accessible Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/michaelsullivan.smith.
Read next
From @cryptoknot