10 ms·

I feel like the tech bubble is really just an outgrowth of an economic boom; big money rolls in, and needs a place to go. Everyone is happy to invest in dog shi

I feel like the tech bubble is really just an outgrowth of an economic boom; big money rolls in, and needs a place to go. Everyone is happy to invest in dog shit as long as they can buy dog shit at $190/kilo and sell at 10 bucks more. They have to put the money somewhere. Tech companies are just a somewhere, but dog shit would be perfectly adequate, and arguably less overhead... I just realized NFT's have even less overhead than dog shit.

contravariant 5y ago
Of course trading in something which has no value other than being sold is just a pyramid game in disguise. In particular dog-shit has more intrinsic value than NFTs.
- cwkoss 5y ago
  Similarly, a non-zero portion of facebook or google or amazon's current market cap is worth less than dog-shit. Hard to say how big that proportion is.
  - weatherlite 5y ago
    You are saying stocks have no value? That is on you to make the case because humanity disagrees...
    - cwkoss 5y ago
      I'm saying a double digit chunk of these companies' expenses and IP production is yielding no economic value: either through lack of product market fit or getting cancelled before they launch. These companies are dripping with untrimmed fat and lack of focus on serving customers via building dumb projects that never get used.
- nightski 5y ago
  Pretty much any collectible could be called a pyramid scheme. It doesn't really matter in the long run. Humans like these things because they attach value to them as irrational as it might be. No one is melting down their Rolex for base metals. Lol. Yet they can be an extremely sound investment.
  - Cthulhu_ 5y ago
    It could be, but only if people buy them as an investment. Who here invested in pokemon cards 20 years ago?
    - lostcolony 5y ago
      Even if someone did, I'd be super curious as to the actual return. The highest priced card sold at auction for a "you could just find it in a random pack of Pokemon cards" I could find was around $20k; all the higher priced ones were either due to printing errors (so -extremely- limited runs that you were unlikely to actually get ahold of just buying cards), or were special runs for special events (so also not something you could just buy). Given that, the decades now that Pokemon cards have been sold, the implications buy in would have (i.e., if you went all in on Pokemon cards as soon as they hit the market, you presumably are going all in on every big IP CCG as a potential investment path, or just as liable to pick losers as winners. Those Star Trek CCG cards haven't exactly held their worth), I'm pretty sure you're not coming out ahead even if you did.
  - FerociousTimes 5y ago
    What sentimental value does one derive from owing NFT junk? Please note that I use the word owing very liberally here
    - Karunamon 5y ago
      The closest analog I could come up with something like a baseball card with an authenticated signature of the player. Yes you could copy the baseball card, and even the signature, but I have the original, and it's been authenticated by by a third party expert. In this case, the card is an image file and the third party is math (the smart contract that issued the token). Sentimental value is based on sentiment, so you probably shouldn't try to apply objective logic to something that is subjective to every person and expect useful results.
- throwawaycities 5y ago
  > In particular dog-shit has more intrinsic value than NFTs. That’s a kind of weird thing to say. NFTs are uniquely identifiable, self-executing code, that conveys legal ownership to the holder of the NFT. NFTs can and often do represent ownership of an asset, sometimes the asset. That in and of itself gives NFTs tremendous amount of intrinsic value as a tool that represents title of ownership and can facilitate trust-less transfer of title/ownership. I think you are right NFTs in their current use case are most often, but not entirely, used to represent ownership of classes of assets that are meant to be transferred/sold, but intrinsically NFTs still value as a tool that can represent ownership of a give asset. In other words one might say dog-shit has more intrinsic value than a written contract, except that contracts can and often do create enforceable terms (though not always) thus giving contracts intrinsic value, as evidenced by contracts being one of the most successful tools in all of human history as part of the historic record as far back as the written record goes.
  - JackFr 5y ago
    > NFTs are uniquely identifiable, self-executing code, that conveys legal ownership to the holder of the NFT. > NFTs can and often do represent ownership of an asset, sometimes the asset. > That in and of itself gives NFTs tremendous amount of intrinsic value as a tool that represents title of ownership and can facilitate trust-less transfer of title/ownership. That is a lot of word salad. Does an NFT confer ownership to any real, personal or intellectual property as understood by any currently existing legal authority? My understanding is that the answer to that question is "No", invariably presented as "No, but..." Is my understanding wrong?
    - volkk 5y ago
      > Does an NFT confer ownership to any real, personal or intellectual property as understood by any currently existing legal authority? I can use my imagination and predict a future where some form of the tech can be. But on a different note, traditional art doesn't need to be understood by any existing legal authority and people collect art. Although a lot of high value art is also used for money laundering. I just don't see a huge difference between the two in the creative category and at least NFTs have some interesting tech to them.
gigaflop 5y ago
Dog shit can potentially be used for fertilizer, which is more benefit than most NFTs provide.
- NoOneNew 5y ago
  Hey, the market for dog shit is growing since there's a looming fertilizer shortage due to the Russian invasion. Growth market... add in a scheme for tax breaks through city clean up initiatives, you may just have an opportunity.
  - selectodude 5y ago
    Dog feces is acidic and shitty fertilizer because dogs are primarily carnivorous :(
    - NoOneNew 5y ago
      You're supposed to compost any shit before using it as fertilizer. Appling poop directly to a plant is never really a good idea unless you water it down a lot.
      - janj 5y ago
        Not always the case https://www.canr.msu.edu/news/bunny_honey_using_rabbit_manure_as_a_fertilizer https://www.canr.msu.edu/news/bunny_honey_using_rabbit_manur...
    - jsmcgd 5y ago
      Interesting. The grass around the cat shit in my garden always seems to grow much better than the surrounding grass. I'm assuming the cats also eat a carnivorous diet.
      - NoOneNew 5y ago
        It all depends on the plant. Some plants, including grasses, take direct shit great. Others, not so much. It has less to do with the type of shit and more with the type of plant. Most shit is composted before use.
crate_barre 5y ago
Except that thesis is just wrong when your mother uses Facebook, Google, Amazon, Apple, Uber, and the kids pay for Netflix (oh shit, your mother too), and their bosses buy SaaS apps for the team. Yeah, it’s not a place to “park” money. That idea at this point sounds like conspiracy theory stuff.
- robertlagrant 5y ago
  I don't follow why it's "just" wrong. And what does "at this point" mean - at what point?
  - crate_barre 5y ago
    - jacobmischka 5y ago
      Chill.
    - robertlagrant 5y ago
      I still don't, I'm afraid. I don't know which "point" you mean, having listed several, and I don't know what "take the trial into semantics" means. I'm not sure why you rant at someone trying to understand you, and why you'd choose such vague, rhetoric-heavy wordings if you would like people to comprehend you.
snarf21 5y ago
I think we also need to consider the effect of keeping interest rates artificially low and near zero for 15 years has had on this "boom".
- weatherlite 5y ago
  It goes even further than that, rates are low for about 40 years now. Yes they are super low now at around 0% , but when/if they go back up to 4-5% that is still historically low.
- imtringued 5y ago
  You should consider the opposite. Keeping interest rates artificially high by borrowing ever more money. I don't know where people get this idea that reducing demand for borrowing and increasing savings is supposed to raise the interest rate. Borrowing more money increases the demand for capital and thereby the interest rate. If the government didn't have to borrow a dollar for every dollar that was taken out of circulation the interest rate would be negative and people would be discouraged from saving more than others want to be in debt.
paulpauper 5y ago
tech is the economy. its not an outgrowth, the biggest companies in the US are all tech, unlike 20 years ago.
- reaperducer 5y ago
  the biggest companies in the US are all tech Only if you only know how to count to five. 6: Berkshire Hathaway 9: UnitedHealth 10: Johnson and Johnson 11: Visa 12: Walmart 13: JPMorgan Chase 14: Procter and Gamble 15: ExxonMobil
danaris 5y ago
> I feel like the tech bubble is really just an outgrowth of an economic boom; big money rolls in, and needs a place to go This is true, but missing an important aspect: This is what happens when you have an economic boom that primarily goes to the already-wealthy. When there's an economic boom that goes proportionally (or more) to the middle-class and below, there's no need to figure out where the money should go. It goes to fixing up the house, to paying down debts, to paying rent, to buying new clothes. The only time money "needs a place to go" is when it's coming in to people who already have more than they know what to do with.
- imtringued 5y ago
  But capitalism is all about wealth concentration. Giving more to those who don't need it is the entire point because that excess capital can be used to run an economic siege. Just wait until your enemy runs out of capital. Decentralizing wealth and giving employment opportunities to those who actually need them is more of a Rootbug/Freiwirtschaft thing.
kadomony 5y ago
Sure would be nice if we parked all the new money in beneficial social programs instead of billionaires’ accounts just aiming for their new high score.

contravariant 5y ago

Of course trading in something which has no value other than being sold is just a pyramid game in disguise. In particular dog-shit has more intrinsic value than NFTs.

cwkoss 5y ago
Similarly, a non-zero portion of facebook or google or amazon's current market cap is worth less than dog-shit. Hard to say how big that proportion is.
- weatherlite 5y ago
  You are saying stocks have no value? That is on you to make the case because humanity disagrees...
  - cwkoss 5y ago
    I'm saying a double digit chunk of these companies' expenses and IP production is yielding no economic value: either through lack of product market fit or getting cancelled before they launch. These companies are dripping with untrimmed fat and lack of focus on serving customers via building dumb projects that never get used.
nightski 5y ago
Pretty much any collectible could be called a pyramid scheme. It doesn't really matter in the long run. Humans like these things because they attach value to them as irrational as it might be. No one is melting down their Rolex for base metals. Lol. Yet they can be an extremely sound investment.
- Cthulhu_ 5y ago
  It could be, but only if people buy them as an investment. Who here invested in pokemon cards 20 years ago?
  - lostcolony 5y ago
    Even if someone did, I'd be super curious as to the actual return. The highest priced card sold at auction for a "you could just find it in a random pack of Pokemon cards" I could find was around $20k; all the higher priced ones were either due to printing errors (so -extremely- limited runs that you were unlikely to actually get ahold of just buying cards), or were special runs for special events (so also not something you could just buy). Given that, the decades now that Pokemon cards have been sold, the implications buy in would have (i.e., if you went all in on Pokemon cards as soon as they hit the market, you presumably are going all in on every big IP CCG as a potential investment path, or just as liable to pick losers as winners. Those Star Trek CCG cards haven't exactly held their worth), I'm pretty sure you're not coming out ahead even if you did.
- FerociousTimes 5y ago
  What sentimental value does one derive from owing NFT junk? Please note that I use the word owing very liberally here
  - Karunamon 5y ago
    The closest analog I could come up with something like a baseball card with an authenticated signature of the player. Yes you could copy the baseball card, and even the signature, but I have the original, and it's been authenticated by by a third party expert. In this case, the card is an image file and the third party is math (the smart contract that issued the token). Sentimental value is based on sentiment, so you probably shouldn't try to apply objective logic to something that is subjective to every person and expect useful results.
throwawaycities 5y ago
> In particular dog-shit has more intrinsic value than NFTs. That’s a kind of weird thing to say. NFTs are uniquely identifiable, self-executing code, that conveys legal ownership to the holder of the NFT. NFTs can and often do represent ownership of an asset, sometimes the asset. That in and of itself gives NFTs tremendous amount of intrinsic value as a tool that represents title of ownership and can facilitate trust-less transfer of title/ownership. I think you are right NFTs in their current use case are most often, but not entirely, used to represent ownership of classes of assets that are meant to be transferred/sold, but intrinsically NFTs still value as a tool that can represent ownership of a give asset. In other words one might say dog-shit has more intrinsic value than a written contract, except that contracts can and often do create enforceable terms (though not always) thus giving contracts intrinsic value, as evidenced by contracts being one of the most successful tools in all of human history as part of the historic record as far back as the written record goes.
- JackFr 5y ago
  > NFTs are uniquely identifiable, self-executing code, that conveys legal ownership to the holder of the NFT. > NFTs can and often do represent ownership of an asset, sometimes the asset. > That in and of itself gives NFTs tremendous amount of intrinsic value as a tool that represents title of ownership and can facilitate trust-less transfer of title/ownership. That is a lot of word salad. Does an NFT confer ownership to any real, personal or intellectual property as understood by any currently existing legal authority? My understanding is that the answer to that question is "No", invariably presented as "No, but..." Is my understanding wrong?
  - volkk 5y ago
    > Does an NFT confer ownership to any real, personal or intellectual property as understood by any currently existing legal authority? I can use my imagination and predict a future where some form of the tech can be. But on a different note, traditional art doesn't need to be understood by any existing legal authority and people collect art. Although a lot of high value art is also used for money laundering. I just don't see a huge difference between the two in the creative category and at least NFTs have some interesting tech to them.

gigaflop 5y ago

Dog shit can potentially be used for fertilizer, which is more benefit than most NFTs provide.

NoOneNew 5y ago
Hey, the market for dog shit is growing since there's a looming fertilizer shortage due to the Russian invasion. Growth market... add in a scheme for tax breaks through city clean up initiatives, you may just have an opportunity.
- selectodude 5y ago
  Dog feces is acidic and shitty fertilizer because dogs are primarily carnivorous :(
  - NoOneNew 5y ago
    You're supposed to compost any shit before using it as fertilizer. Appling poop directly to a plant is never really a good idea unless you water it down a lot.
    - janj 5y ago
      Not always the case https://www.canr.msu.edu/news/bunny_honey_using_rabbit_manure_as_a_fertilizer https://www.canr.msu.edu/news/bunny_honey_using_rabbit_manur...
  - jsmcgd 5y ago
    Interesting. The grass around the cat shit in my garden always seems to grow much better than the surrounding grass. I'm assuming the cats also eat a carnivorous diet.
    - NoOneNew 5y ago
      It all depends on the plant. Some plants, including grasses, take direct shit great. Others, not so much. It has less to do with the type of shit and more with the type of plant. Most shit is composted before use.

crate_barre 5y ago

Except that thesis is just wrong when your mother uses Facebook, Google, Amazon, Apple, Uber, and the kids pay for Netflix (oh shit, your mother too), and their bosses buy SaaS apps for the team. Yeah, it’s not a place to “park” money. That idea at this point sounds like conspiracy theory stuff.

robertlagrant 5y ago
I don't follow why it's "just" wrong. And what does "at this point" mean - at what point?
- crate_barre 5y ago
  - jacobmischka 5y ago
    Chill.
  - robertlagrant 5y ago
    I still don't, I'm afraid. I don't know which "point" you mean, having listed several, and I don't know what "take the trial into semantics" means. I'm not sure why you rant at someone trying to understand you, and why you'd choose such vague, rhetoric-heavy wordings if you would like people to comprehend you.

snarf21 5y ago

I think we also need to consider the effect of keeping interest rates artificially low and near zero for 15 years has had on this "boom".

weatherlite 5y ago
It goes even further than that, rates are low for about 40 years now. Yes they are super low now at around 0% , but when/if they go back up to 4-5% that is still historically low.
imtringued 5y ago
You should consider the opposite. Keeping interest rates artificially high by borrowing ever more money. I don't know where people get this idea that reducing demand for borrowing and increasing savings is supposed to raise the interest rate. Borrowing more money increases the demand for capital and thereby the interest rate. If the government didn't have to borrow a dollar for every dollar that was taken out of circulation the interest rate would be negative and people would be discouraged from saving more than others want to be in debt.

paulpauper 5y ago

tech is the economy. its not an outgrowth, the biggest companies in the US are all tech, unlike 20 years ago.

reaperducer 5y ago
the biggest companies in the US are all tech Only if you only know how to count to five. 6: Berkshire Hathaway 9: UnitedHealth 10: Johnson and Johnson 11: Visa 12: Walmart 13: JPMorgan Chase 14: Procter and Gamble 15: ExxonMobil

danaris 5y ago

> I feel like the tech bubble is really just an outgrowth of an economic boom; big money rolls in, and needs a place to go This is true, but missing an important aspect: This is what happens when you have an economic boom that primarily goes to the already-wealthy. When there's an economic boom that goes proportionally (or more) to the middle-class and below, there's no need to figure out where the money should go. It goes to fixing up the house, to paying down debts, to paying rent, to buying new clothes. The only time money "needs a place to go" is when it's coming in to people who already have more than they know what to do with.

imtringued 5y ago
But capitalism is all about wealth concentration. Giving more to those who don't need it is the entire point because that excess capital can be used to run an economic siege. Just wait until your enemy runs out of capital. Decentralizing wealth and giving employment opportunities to those who actually need them is more of a Rootbug/Freiwirtschaft thing.

kadomony 5y ago

Sure would be nice if we parked all the new money in beneficial social programs instead of billionaires’ accounts just aiming for their new high score.