1. OLGA is the first known NFT as in both "non-fungible" and "token".
2. If you include multi-issuance tokens (fungible "1/Ns") like SOG and Pepe, you can add JPGOLD and JPJA to the collection of firsts. All issued by JP Janssen in June 2014 together with OLGA on XCP.
3. Quantum, like all Namecoin domains, is not a proper token. Insofar as an image link is the NFT criterion, there were thousands on Namecoin prior to Quantum. It may be the first representing legal ownership, a model modern NFTs mostly have abandoned.
I just saw your comments in the NFT Archaeologists chats, but will respond in both places. Your first point seems a bit contentious, and I definitely think a lot of it would come down to what parameters one uses to define a "token". I'm not saying that I won't amend this at some point if I'm convinced otherwise, but I think I would need to read more arguments in favor of this, and see more consensus among the community before I could make such a substantial change.
2. I'll look into this further, thank you. I encountered JPGOLD briefly shortly after publishing this, but haven't read enough into it as of yet. It may end up in a future NFT History letter when I revisit this subject in the future (probably a couple months from now).
3. Are we talking about things like “d/bitcoin” and things of that nature? If so, yes, I'd agree with you. But yes, I think Quantum most often gets the nod for solidifying their ownership over it.
Part of what makes this so much fun (and so much work) is all the debate to be had, especially when it comes down to the semantics of definitions, which can largely affect how we view "first"s.
I will definitely continue to put in any letter that these are not definitive histories, that this field has very few questions with a settled answer, and take everything with a grain of salt.
Anyways, thank you for your comments and see you in the Discord!
Correct on both counts! For the first point, I typoed 2014 as 2016 and then slotted it into the wrong position accordingly on the TL;DR timeline.
And yes, Moonga! Same developer as Spells of Genesis, and Moonga was primarily online-only, correct? I don't recall any physical product, although I remember them pursuing NFC cards in some sort of crowdfunding push at one point. That didn't pan out though, right? But yeah, definitely established and with a lot of traction.
I'll make those slight amendments later today. Thank you for the feedback!
The Scarab Experiment I was legit unaware of. How cool! So by missing, I assume you mean as the first cryptoart project? Having seen that now, I'd have to agree, and will make mention of it when I amend it later today. I'll also be sure to change Pepes to one of the first, rather than the first.
I plan on doing more of these highlights of NFT history from time to time, so I'll have to be sure to circle back around to that topic at a later date.
A few corrections.
1. OLGA is the first known NFT as in both "non-fungible" and "token".
2. If you include multi-issuance tokens (fungible "1/Ns") like SOG and Pepe, you can add JPGOLD and JPJA to the collection of firsts. All issued by JP Janssen in June 2014 together with OLGA on XCP.
3. Quantum, like all Namecoin domains, is not a proper token. Insofar as an image link is the NFT criterion, there were thousands on Namecoin prior to Quantum. It may be the first representing legal ownership, a model modern NFTs mostly have abandoned.
Thanks for writing, JPJA!
I just saw your comments in the NFT Archaeologists chats, but will respond in both places. Your first point seems a bit contentious, and I definitely think a lot of it would come down to what parameters one uses to define a "token". I'm not saying that I won't amend this at some point if I'm convinced otherwise, but I think I would need to read more arguments in favor of this, and see more consensus among the community before I could make such a substantial change.
2. I'll look into this further, thank you. I encountered JPGOLD briefly shortly after publishing this, but haven't read enough into it as of yet. It may end up in a future NFT History letter when I revisit this subject in the future (probably a couple months from now).
3. Are we talking about things like “d/bitcoin” and things of that nature? If so, yes, I'd agree with you. But yes, I think Quantum most often gets the nod for solidifying their ownership over it.
Part of what makes this so much fun (and so much work) is all the debate to be had, especially when it comes down to the semantics of definitions, which can largely affect how we view "first"s.
I will definitely continue to put in any letter that these are not definitive histories, that this field has very few questions with a settled answer, and take everything with a grain of salt.
Anyways, thank you for your comments and see you in the Discord!
Great article . There is wrong info:
1-the web version of spells of genesis was playable starting in 2014, not 2016.
2- Force of Will wasn't the first already established game brand to hit the blockchain. The first one was Moonga.
Correct on both counts! For the first point, I typoed 2014 as 2016 and then slotted it into the wrong position accordingly on the TL;DR timeline.
And yes, Moonga! Same developer as Spells of Genesis, and Moonga was primarily online-only, correct? I don't recall any physical product, although I remember them pursuing NFC cards in some sort of crowdfunding push at one point. That didn't pan out though, right? But yeah, definitely established and with a lot of traction.
I'll make those slight amendments later today. Thank you for the feedback!
Missing SCARAB, project began 2014 and was issued on counterparty 2015
The Scarab Experiment I was legit unaware of. How cool! So by missing, I assume you mean as the first cryptoart project? Having seen that now, I'd have to agree, and will make mention of it when I amend it later today. I'll also be sure to change Pepes to one of the first, rather than the first.
I plan on doing more of these highlights of NFT history from time to time, so I'll have to be sure to circle back around to that topic at a later date.
Thank you so much for your input!