![]() That's one interpretation of fiat currencies, that they're valuable because States create and support them as means of paying taxes and providing services but there's more to them-it's very well known that people on opposite sides of wars can, and do, trade with each other in those same currencies even if it's against the law and condemned by everyone, the notes have value because people agree that they do, and without any more reason than that.Ĭash has a use that tends to escape the use of power, as Kaufman's recent book suggests, it's because it's a metaphor, not a thing at all. So this is where it gets very interesting and where you get paradox after paradox. Governmental currencies, which have value because guys with guns and bombs say it has value Posted by Fiasco da Gama at 6:55 PM on Novem What's going on here with NFTs, and other ideas that claim to substitute for money or currency or for value itself, is a deeper disagreement about what value is, about criticising the human metaphor of cash-as-a-store and money-as-medium, as though treating money as a programmable object could endow it with even more magical properties than it ordinarily has which is far weirder, and from my point of view, wronger. ![]() I don't think it's right to describe what's going on here as a new form of tulip mania, because ordinary bubbles-the tulips, or South Sea shares, or 19thC railways, or dot coms-are errors of judging value, when lots of people think a thing is much more valuable than it has any right to be. I have been fascinated for a long time about how fundamentally confusing it is to think about any of this stuff, because it's so obvious everyone who disagrees, disagrees about what the basics of reality are.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |