0️⃣0️⃣:0️⃣0️⃣:0️⃣0️⃣:0️⃣0️⃣

🎧 At last! YouTube Music has started recommending much better music to listen to!

🚀 Fasten your seatbelts - this is not the last flight mission!

💎 A huge leap towards a real web3/on-chain thing on Telegram!

🤑 Send crypto from any TON wallet to anybody on any channel/chat/group using smart contracts!

https://news.1rj.ru/str/MyTonWalletEn/281

🏷 https://x.com/FefeDemeny/status/1952344485142343867

🤔 I think it must become a new UX/UI standard for all mini-apps within Telegram (especially on-chain based ones).

While working on the current project this UX approach came to my head naturally, because I've asked myself - will a user understand what just happened in the app when he clicked this or that button though the on-chain transaction still takes a few additional seconds to be fully processed?

https://news.1rj.ru/str/thedailyton/1017

✋️ NFT 2.0

A revolution? No, rather an evolution

Reminder - NFT numbers used for violating Telegram terms were already getting flagged as "restricted".

IP rights

Similar approach will be applied to NFTs minted using specifically NFT 2.0 standard - to handle IP right violations (avoidance to pay royalty fees).

IP owners' long-term vision and greediness

If a collection owners don't care about investing in project's future (creating an utility) - they can deploy the "old standard" NFT collection, even with 0% royalty fee configured within a smart contract. At the same time there's an expectation of the community that big brands won't be too greedy regarding royalty fee size. A correct balance must be achieved, otherwise it will be "pump & dump" or "no pump at all".

Users' greediness

If you're NFT flipper and don't care about NFT project's future, think about this: imagine you're a businessman selling physical Super Mario toys for kids, but you're getting those toys cheaper from a secondary market by avoiding royalty fees for Super Mario's IP owner - after some time IP owner stops investing into games development because of low income and you're left with a huge pile of worthless plastic.

User experience

Though there's a lot of confusion within the community - the user experience almost won't change. The ecosystem members (marketplaces, wallets, viewers, etc.) will sort out most of the integration issues. If you're the one who likes "extreme sports" like using marketplaces or bots avoiding royalty fees - that's your problem (same like in a real world scenario - buying iPhone from a stranger on a street).

Not just for big brands

Though this new standard was probably oriented to solve some legal and other problems for big IP owners, small projects (and even new ones) might also benefit from the NFT 2.0, especially having a low budget during the launch of NFT collection - they just need to create a great idea of NFT utility from a perspective of user.

Non-standard operations

Even if your NFTs are using the NFT 2.0 standard, there might be cases where a calculated royalty fee might be zero. NFTs staking, lending, renting and other non-standard revenue-generating operations — yes, it's still not very clear how to properly calculate a royalty fee for those operations, we should expect a bit more clearance on this whether it's a fee-free operation or not.

P.S. Telegram NFTs have royalty fees (including gifts), though they're being "avoided" most of the time.

ℹ️ https://docs.ton.org/v3/documentation/dapps/assets/nft-2.0

Some music is so impactful that it inspired @monk to implement UX features for a broader range of users... 🤦‍♂️

💎 I'm confident that Telegram can achieve an even deeper integration of TON!

p.s. The video below contains some music 🎧

💎 Max Crown and Andrew Rogozov at TOKEN2049 talking about NFT 2.0

Source: https://x.com/MartinFromTon/status/1973251810908578191 (@InvitedByMarTON)

Edit by: @NFTDevOps

🕺 ...my feelings when a full-scale @mint launch is inevitable:

https://youtube.com/shorts/hgIyF7NQt2k

▶️ @durov should get on general chats too, not just live streams