> Crypto so far is largely a vast space with little intrinsic value.
So was pokemon. By my definition that's a crap game even without crypto. But millions of people have fun playing it and its a big part of their lives, so who am I to judge?
The intrinsic value of pokemon is the enjoyment you get out of playing. Thus people are willing to pay money to play it.
"Investments" in crypto tend to have value because you can sell it to somebody else for more, not because the intrinsic value increases over time. E.g. like a cashflowing business increasing their cashflow, or raising rents on a rental property.
This is self referential, people aren't paying more because it provides higher intrinsic value, but due to speculation.
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.
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?
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.
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.
Even in the context of the original game release in 1996?
> But millions of people have fun playing it and its a big part of their lives
Yes and all they have to do for that is buy one of the many Pokemon games between 1996 and 2021 and start playing and enjoying the game for whatever it is they get out of it, be it story, gameplay, collecting or PvP.
Now where is the connection to cryptocurrencies and NFTs? Could you be specific?
> Even in the context of the original game release in 1996?
The point of that comment was to say "crap" is an entirely subjective opinion. Myself telling you that yes it was crap even in 1996 is not going to change the validity of the sentence I just said.
The connection which you aren't able to see which to me is extremely obvious, is that people who play with crypto "start playing and enjoying the game for whatever it is they get out of it, be it story, gameplay, collecting or PvP."
Oh I got that, make no mistake. It's just that while that might be true for you or gp, I find the comparison dishonest.
Cryptobros aren't in it as a hobby or because they "just enjoy the tech like other people enjoy pokemon", they want to make money with a speculative asset and spread false promises to rope in as many people as possible to drive up the price.
If that is not the case, well let it crash. After all: You can still enjoy it without the gambling aspect or even popularity, can't you?
So was pokemon. By my definition that's a crap game even without crypto. But millions of people have fun playing it and its a big part of their lives, so who am I to judge?