3 ms·

It seems like you are in full agreement with me that the way we value NFTs is exactly equivalent to the valuing of Tulips during the bubble of 1637. > Had the

by zepto 5y ago

It seems like you are in full agreement with me that the way we value NFTs is exactly equivalent to the valuing of Tulips during the bubble of 1637. > Had the tulips kept their scarcity, They did. > and had social interest remained at such high levels, couldn't it have kept its value? You mean if the tulip bubble had never burst would we still be paying 10 years of a skilled persons salary for one? Sure. It’s worth noting that the courts ultimately held the debts owed for Tulip futures to be ‘gambling debts’…

danuker 5y ago
> You mean if the tulip bubble had never burst? Sure. Exactly. There is no guarantee the NFT bubble will burst! People might keep enjoying these, and investing a significant portion of their lives.
- zepto 5y ago
  Yes, just like with the Tulip Bubble! It might never have burst, and then we would never have needed NFTs because we’d still be trading tulips.
  - danuker 5y ago
    But I believe everything should be valued this way, including: - stocks and real estate: people use "objective" metrics like discounting cash flow. But the time preference for discounting cash is subjective. - precious metals and commodities: there are "objective" stock-to-flow metrics, but they all assume people will still desire precious metals, commodities, and the resulting products. This desire is subjective.
    - zepto 5y ago
      Everything is valued this way. All purchases are based on what people think the thing is worth. Discounted cash flows, etc, are all ways people use to come to their ‘subjective’ conclusions. It ends up being circular though - yes, human judgement is ultimately part of the equation, but that judgment end up being based on a prediction of future value, and often we can use understanding of markets or the intrinsic value of commodities to industrial processes to assess this. Many people are arguing that the value of NFTs is in fact not based on an intrinsic value to future processes, and is purely a subjective bubble. Arguing that all valuations have a component of human judgement and that people may just continue to like NFTs is not a counterargument. A counterargument would be to explain how that will continue to be valuable independent of the subjective component. Generally people seem to dodge this, and instead just say ‘everything is subjective’, i.e. the postmodern view.
      - danuker 5y ago
        And therefore... nothing has intrinsic value?
        zepto 5y ago
        Only you and other NFT advocates seem to be drawing that conclusion.
        danuker 5y ago
        I am not an NFT advocate.[1] But I do own Bitcoin, and I subscribe to the subjective theory of value.[2] > It ends up being circular though - yes, human judgement is ultimately part of the equation Well, I am glad you admit humans are who ultimately set prices on markets. > but that judgment end up being based on a prediction of future value, and often we can use understanding of markets or the intrinsic value of commodities to industrial processes to assess this. I interpret this as a more informed subjective value, but this discussion did not quite convince me there exists an intrinsic value. The fact that you need X kg of flour to create Y kg of bread might be useful in knowing when the market prices for flour and bread are "consistent" - you call this "intrinsic value of commodities to industrial processes" - but I am of the opinion that demand prevails: the relative demand for bread and flour is what sets their relative price, and it can vary for reasons completely different from the industrial processes considered for an "intrinsic value". Nevertheless, I thank you for going in circles with me, I feel like I have learned something, and I hope I expressed my own ideas clearly enough. I will not follow this discussion for long; but if you feel like continuing, my e-mail is on my website which is on my profile. [3] [1] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29663787 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29663787 [2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value [3] - https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=danuker https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=danuker
        zepto 5y ago
        > and it can vary for reasons completely different from the industrial processes considered for an "intrinsic value". Nobody disputes that bubbles and sentiment exist. What is in dispute is the idea that they are the only things that determines value. It’s ok that you are not convinced. Once you go down the postmodern rabbithole of believing that everthing is subjective, there is no way out through dialog.

by zepto 5y ago

danuker 5y ago

> You mean if the tulip bubble had never burst? Sure. Exactly. There is no guarantee the NFT bubble will burst! People might keep enjoying these, and investing a significant portion of their lives.

zepto 5y ago
Yes, just like with the Tulip Bubble! It might never have burst, and then we would never have needed NFTs because we’d still be trading tulips.
- danuker 5y ago
  But I believe everything should be valued this way, including: - stocks and real estate: people use "objective" metrics like discounting cash flow. But the time preference for discounting cash is subjective. - precious metals and commodities: there are "objective" stock-to-flow metrics, but they all assume people will still desire precious metals, commodities, and the resulting products. This desire is subjective.
  - zepto 5y ago
    Everything is valued this way. All purchases are based on what people think the thing is worth. Discounted cash flows, etc, are all ways people use to come to their ‘subjective’ conclusions. It ends up being circular though - yes, human judgement is ultimately part of the equation, but that judgment end up being based on a prediction of future value, and often we can use understanding of markets or the intrinsic value of commodities to industrial processes to assess this. Many people are arguing that the value of NFTs is in fact not based on an intrinsic value to future processes, and is purely a subjective bubble. Arguing that all valuations have a component of human judgement and that people may just continue to like NFTs is not a counterargument. A counterargument would be to explain how that will continue to be valuable independent of the subjective component. Generally people seem to dodge this, and instead just say ‘everything is subjective’, i.e. the postmodern view.
    - danuker 5y ago
      And therefore... nothing has intrinsic value?
      - zepto 5y ago
        Only you and other NFT advocates seem to be drawing that conclusion.
        danuker 5y ago
        I am not an NFT advocate.[1] But I do own Bitcoin, and I subscribe to the subjective theory of value.[2] > It ends up being circular though - yes, human judgement is ultimately part of the equation Well, I am glad you admit humans are who ultimately set prices on markets. > but that judgment end up being based on a prediction of future value, and often we can use understanding of markets or the intrinsic value of commodities to industrial processes to assess this. I interpret this as a more informed subjective value, but this discussion did not quite convince me there exists an intrinsic value. The fact that you need X kg of flour to create Y kg of bread might be useful in knowing when the market prices for flour and bread are "consistent" - you call this "intrinsic value of commodities to industrial processes" - but I am of the opinion that demand prevails: the relative demand for bread and flour is what sets their relative price, and it can vary for reasons completely different from the industrial processes considered for an "intrinsic value". Nevertheless, I thank you for going in circles with me, I feel like I have learned something, and I hope I expressed my own ideas clearly enough. I will not follow this discussion for long; but if you feel like continuing, my e-mail is on my website which is on my profile. [3] [1] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29663787 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29663787 [2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value [3] - https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=danuker https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=danuker
        zepto 5y ago
        > and it can vary for reasons completely different from the industrial processes considered for an "intrinsic value". Nobody disputes that bubbles and sentiment exist. What is in dispute is the idea that they are the only things that determines value. It’s ok that you are not convinced. Once you go down the postmodern rabbithole of believing that everthing is subjective, there is no way out through dialog.