An interesting read. Technology will either revert mankind to feudalism, or simply deliver us into a Gene Roddenberry-envisioned future. Somehow I'm banking on the former happening, apathy being strong and all. Perhaps I should read a book on the subject (other than James P. Hogan fiction where economies becomes obsolete).
The articla is about getting as much money as possible from consumers, which still means being a good business(man).
To me it´s all mafia and nobody gives a shit. People are allready used to being squized out of their every last cent.
What all of us here at Racketboy can do is make loads of money so that this stuff will slide off our shoulders and we don´t have to care about it that much.
IF you don´t have loads of cash, spend it wisely!
Artificial scarcity is simply ludicrous and will not last long. People don't recognize it as being just, so they don't respect it. Nor should they, when the marginal cost of a copy is 0 the laws of economics dictate that the price must be 0 too. You can't legislate around the laws of economics. People will just have to learn to charge for what is actually scarce.
Unsurprisingly, the author hits on the answer in his own first paragraph and misses it entirely. Anyone who wants to can go get more porn than they'll ever be able to watch for absolutely nothing. Yet people still make porn, and people still pay for porn. Why?
We are prepared to live in the plain and die in the plain!
Once we build robots who can do everything we can do, there won't be any jobs for humans. Then what?
I don't know, but it's not like it's going to happen overnight. We'll gradually tackle those issues as they happen. They're starting to happen right now. Our jobs are being handed over to people who'll do them for less. In a way, the Chinese are the robots.
Hatta wrote:Artificial scarcity is simply ludicrous and will not last long.
*looks at the price of diamonds over the years and the ridiculous prices people pay for jewelry and how much depreciation they have the second people walk out the door*
I'm wondering if anything has actually changed though.
The worth of something has always been up to the consumer or the person selling it. It's our desire for things that gives them worth.
Europeans found it easy to obtain gold from natives since it had absolutely no worth to them, yet the things the europeans didn't care about had worth to natives.
Is a movie ticket worth what you pay for it? The value of an item has never been solely based on its physical worth.
