I still find NFTs interesting. I would simply prefer the interesting part to survive the conversation about what somebody hopes to sell one for later.
A collectible can be enjoyable in its own right. A membership token might support access or recognition. The product question is what the person can actually do, and whether the technology makes that experience better.
Ethereum’s Dencun upgrade went live on March 13, 2024. Its introduction of blob data is intended to reduce the data costs relevant to layer-two rollups. That is a meaningful infrastructure change, though actual transaction fees still depend on the network and circumstances.
Lower friction makes small interactions more worth exploring. It doesn’t make every idea worth building. Cheaper plumbing is welcome, but we still need a reason for the fountain in the reception area.
Consensys’s commemorative Ethereum, Evolved collection provides one example of NFTs used to mark participation in a technology community.2 That is different from proving that a tokenized membership is the right choice for a local business.
When would a token add something?
Suppose a fictional recreation club wants members to display a collectible associated with an event. A conventional account record could do that. If members also want to hold the collectible in their own wallets or use it across independently operated experiences that recognize it, a token might provide something more specific.
The extra requirement matters. A membership that works only inside one company’s application may gain little from moving a record onto a blockchain. It may gain several new support questions.
This is the kind of problem our custom development team enjoys.
Questions worth answering first
Before choosing, I’d want clear answers to these:
- What useful right, access or collectible does the token represent?
- Who recognizes it, and what happens if the original service closes?
- Can it be transferred, and should that transfer move any membership rights?
- How does someone recover access when they lose control of a wallet?
Those are product questions first. They lead to technical, operational and sometimes legal decisions that need their own proper work.
What owning the token really means
Owning a token doesn’t automatically convey copyright, guarantee an external benefit or keep an image available forever. The terms and the supporting systems determine much of what people experience.
That distinction can disappear in an enthusiastic demonstration. Here is your membership sounds reassuringly complete. Here is a token whose associated benefits rely on several systems we still operate is more accurate, if slightly harder to fit on a launch banner.
Think about the first five minutes
There is also the first-use experience. Someone joining a local club may be happy to create an account and choose an avatar. Asking them to manage a wallet, network and transaction fee can be a substantial extra step.
We should be able to explain why that step is worth it. The customer came to join a club, not qualify for ground control.
Pairs well with Where crypto’s quieter infrastructure could earn a place in business.
Try both versions side by side
Dencun is useful context for exploring what lower-cost rollup activity could support. It doesn’t remove the need for secure contracts, clear rights, dependable access checks and a recovery process people can understand.
I’d happily prototype the conventional version and the token-backed version against the same task. Compare what each makes possible and what each asks of the participant.
If the token creates a real capability people value, there may be something worth pursuing. If it mainly turns a simple badge into an explanation of why someone needs a different network, the database is allowed to win.
The technology can stay interesting. Let’s give the person holding the token something equally interesting to do.