Hacker News Reader

I don't think the value of an asset is derived purely from scarcity, or the effort required to make it. What if the asset itself has no use?

If I spend 1000 hours making a really bad doesn't, it'll have a value of zero, even though it's unique and a lot of work was put into it.

I haven't created value, I've destroyed it, I.e. All that time and nothing to show for it.

View on HN

I'm not asserting that scarcity or effort alone create value, but without those two components you won't have value.

So not everything that is limited is valuable, however everything that is valuable is limited.

Just imagine if someone figured out how to engineer gold out of thin air, the value of gold would drop instantly.

> I'm not asserting that scarcity or effort alone create value, but without those two components you won't have value.

That's literally exactly what you asserted:

> The opposite of this is where Bitcoin derived it's value. First there is a fixed number of Bitcoin, so you can't simply make more past a point. Secondly, the effort required to mine Bitcoin increases over time.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com