3 ms·

People buy expensive art because its popular. They also do nothing but stare at it every once in a while. Is that intrinsic value? Because if that is, then s

People buy expensive art because its popular. They also do nothing but stare at it every once in a while. Is that intrinsic value? Because if that is, then so is crypto.

adam_arthur 5y ago
People buy expensive art because it's an exclusive item, and they value the bragging rights it confers to them (generally). It's different from NFTs, which are just pointers to an item rather than the actual item itself. But I agree with you that crypto bears some similarity to art/gold/collectibles. However crypto can be spawned out of thin air and these other things can't. Why would the world settle on using a Blockchain where a few whales hold huge percentages of the coins? People will just invent a new one and standardize on that. If decentralized apps become the new norm. This would devalue existing blockchains and their tokens greatly. The only ones motivated to stay on a Blockchain with enormous inequality are the few early adopters. The public would create a standard and adopt that in longer run if Blockchain backed decentralized apps are truly the future.
2pEXgD0fZ5cF 5y ago
> People buy expensive art because its popular. Let's say I can magically create thousands of copies of the mona lisa, perfect 100% copies of the original at the Louvre with no method known to man now or in the future to distinguish them. Now imagine that I shuffle those 100% perfect copies with the original and distribute them all across the world in galleries, auction houses, museums, some universities etc. (basically any facilities with a chance to have access to people with the ability to notice that this might be the original painting). Assuming that the experts trying to find the original now that it is gone from the Louvre are honest and don't lie: Do you believe the Mona Lisa would still retain its value assessment?
ShamelessC 5y ago
The argument you're presenting is an inherently political one but you're talking about it as though these ideas are new and haven't been debated already. Yes, we're aware that capitalism has a lot of things that look a lot like crypto. Do you know what? Those are the worst parts of capitalism. You're describing artificial scarcity. You're seeing large sums of money go to things you don't personally value and that probably don't deserve as much as more noble efforts. Is it fair? Fuck no. Does that somehow merit _more_ of it? Absolutely not. Arguing against these inherently political notions with regard to crypto is _exhausting_. You are basically implying that other people who don't get on board are hypocrites when the fact is that reality is so much more nuanced than these low-effort reactionary whataboutisms and many people see that as clear as day.

People buy expensive art because its popular. They also do nothing but stare at it every once in a while. Is that intrinsic value? Because if that is, then so is crypto.

adam_arthur 5y ago

People buy expensive art because it's an exclusive item, and they value the bragging rights it confers to them (generally). It's different from NFTs, which are just pointers to an item rather than the actual item itself. But I agree with you that crypto bears some similarity to art/gold/collectibles. However crypto can be spawned out of thin air and these other things can't. Why would the world settle on using a Blockchain where a few whales hold huge percentages of the coins? People will just invent a new one and standardize on that. If decentralized apps become the new norm. This would devalue existing blockchains and their tokens greatly. The only ones motivated to stay on a Blockchain with enormous inequality are the few early adopters. The public would create a standard and adopt that in longer run if Blockchain backed decentralized apps are truly the future.

2pEXgD0fZ5cF 5y ago

> People buy expensive art because its popular. Let's say I can magically create thousands of copies of the mona lisa, perfect 100% copies of the original at the Louvre with no method known to man now or in the future to distinguish them. Now imagine that I shuffle those 100% perfect copies with the original and distribute them all across the world in galleries, auction houses, museums, some universities etc. (basically any facilities with a chance to have access to people with the ability to notice that this might be the original painting). Assuming that the experts trying to find the original now that it is gone from the Louvre are honest and don't lie: Do you believe the Mona Lisa would still retain its value assessment?

ShamelessC 5y ago

The argument you're presenting is an inherently political one but you're talking about it as though these ideas are new and haven't been debated already. Yes, we're aware that capitalism has a lot of things that look a lot like crypto. Do you know what? Those are the worst parts of capitalism. You're describing artificial scarcity. You're seeing large sums of money go to things you don't personally value and that probably don't deserve as much as more noble efforts. Is it fair? Fuck no. Does that somehow merit _more_ of it? Absolutely not. Arguing against these inherently political notions with regard to crypto is _exhausting_. You are basically implying that other people who don't get on board are hypocrites when the fact is that reality is so much more nuanced than these low-effort reactionary whataboutisms and many people see that as clear as day.