By Drumkoon.nft

@VitalikButerin is pitching a kind of evolutionary idea to NFTs whereby these new NFTs will be tied to a specific wallet address and can’t be transferred to another wallet address.

These new NFT iterations will be called SBTs.

However, a closer inspection and due diligence of this concept reveals that SBTs maybe anti decentralization, which is a fundamental pillar of Web3.

Another concern is wallet hacking. If someone hacks your wallet (and this happened to me) your wallet essentially is no longer your soul wallet.

So it rather makes sense to instead tie #SBTs to decentralized NFTdomains which require second factor authentication to be transferred.

One can always change a wallet address if they feel like it just like one is free to change a bank to another bank. One does not need to be tied to a specific bank in order to transact certain assets.

Wallets should always be easily replacable for whatever reason. Digital assets in general need to be easily transferable through smart contracts.

The argument for SBTs is that these can be used to send someone a college degree which in theory and practice must not be transferred.

But IRL I could let a friend or family take custody of my college degree since it has my credentials. In the Web3 realm it should be possible to transfer my SBTs or NFTs for safe keeping by trusted sources.

So what matters with SBTs is that credentials are tied to a specific individual but the token itself should be free to move around using transfers if so needed.

Therefore a soul wallet is an oxymoron and anti decentralization and anti freedom of choice to move digital assets or tokens.

Rather tie your SBTs to NFT domains and host them on decentralized sites tied to those Nft domains.

This is my humble submission.

Yours truly Drumkoon.nft