> " I soon discovered that all the books leaned on the same central argument: value is an inherent consequence of scarcity. My rebuttal to that was simple: it’s an exception, not a rule. My kids’ doodles are scarce, but in a gallery, they wouldn’t fetch much. "
There isn't really a market for kids doodles, and with the barrier to entry being really low the supply is many orders of magnitude higher than the demand. So the central argument stays.
No its not. Scarcity in economics refers to when the demand for a resource is greater than the supply of that resource. The kids doodles aren't scarce because there is little demand for them. On the other hand there is demand for NFT's (whether you think there should be or not). The comparison doesn't make any sense and just makes the author look dumb.
The author wasn't responding to economists who were using the word in that sense, he was responding to bitcoin evangelists who often claim that the value in bitcoin comes from its limitted issue (without reference to demand).
I have certainly heard bitcoin evangelists make such claims, so i really dont think it is a strawman argument.
If you want to take the metaphor further, there is really no barrier to entry for starting a cryptocurrency and supply of cryptocurrencies in general far outstrip demand. So it is very similar to a kids doodle.
> Late last year, at the peak of the non-fungible token (NFT) craze, I purchased about a dozen highest-rated NFT books on Amazon. I did this because I wanted to publish a balanced critique of NFTs; I figured the most honest approach would to get familiar with the best-articulated arguments put forward by the proponents of this tech.
Its quite clear from the first few lines of the article that the author did not intend to debunk some silly claims but to respond to the best ones. Using a definition of scarcity that does not reference demand to write off NFT's entirely shows that the author has no idea what hes talking about.
> If you want to take the metaphor further, there is really no barrier to entry for starting a cryptocurrency and supply of cryptocurrencies in general far outstrip demand. So it is very similar to a kids doodle.
Yes, but people don't want just any cryptocurrency. They want Bitcoin, ethereum, etc whos demand is greater then the supply. So no its actually similar to a kids doodle.
Its called the Kessler syndrome. Small fast moving debris crashing into larger fast moving debris destroying it creating even more smaller fast moving debris that keeps crashing into more debris etc etc etc.
I really appreciate that some masto/fedi clients have the option to indicate bot accounts. Tusky adds a little robot icon to the profile pic of bot accounts, which helps when deciding whether/how to interact.
I can conform this, because I want through the same process.
It was all fun and games until May last year and all my posts were automatically shadowbanned. Fired of a message to the mods and got no reply, hung out on their Discord but by al measures it didn't seem a fitting place. Since I received no notification about the shadowbans nor any warnings about ban evations I ended up creating a new account and continued to interact with these communities again.
I am a daily and happy user of Mastodon. I honestly see no reason to use Twitter, nor one of their products at this time. Calling it now: too little, too late.
We run a DC/OS+Traefik stack here and can only praise it. Shame it doesn't get the same amount of love the other projects enjoy, but so far its rock-solid and we are more than happy with it. :)
I liked the sentence: "There are a few other arguments that you’ll need to add to those commands but if you follow the docs you’ll have no problems at all."
I don't think it made it into the non-gaming press last time, which it seems to have done now. Even getting the gaming press to cover it was an uphill struggle for TB if I remember correctly.
There isn't really a market for kids doodles, and with the barrier to entry being really low the supply is many orders of magnitude higher than the demand. So the central argument stays.
Not a great start of the article this.