> How one can be considered gambling and the other not?
Positive- versus zero- or even negative-sum games.
Positive- versus zero- or even negative-sum games.
Crypto does have value. Not all of it, but again we could make the same comparison with ridiculously overinflated stocks like PTON or CVNA.
This is irrelevant to the game dynamic. (Trading stock in the short term is usually gambling, by the way, because trading per se is a zero-sum game.)
> we could make the same comparison with ridiculously overinflated stocks like PTON or CVNA
One, I can buy a Peloton. People pay for Pelotons. Positive sum. Two, if you go all in on Peloton stock, yes, you're gambling.
> One, I can buy a Peloton. People pay for Pelotons. Positive sum.
Yes and once Peloton runs out of people to sell overpriced bikes and treadmills to, the valuation will (hopefully) return to reality. Uber continues to lose money on every ride.
If you’re going down the “people pay for it” route, we could say that people also pay for NFTs of monkey pictures.
I think NFTs are silly, but they are positive value systems. Like art.