teddit

helping build farcaster | surfing @ venice, ca | eating @ gjusta / gjelina | “lucky me, lucky mud”

I agree with this take — but I think it's a false equivalence to say that coining content == *creating for content traders*

secondary markets have existed for all assets, forever. this is true with paintings, NFTs, and yes, coins. and creators/artists have created for a mix of themselves, their collectors, and yes, people who have bought and sold their pieces. there has always been an inherent tension between who one creates for.

coining content is very stigmatized because it has been historically something that *has* been transactional. but people said the same thing about open edition mints. and they said the same thing about uploading videos on tiktok and instagram. 

the thesis is that coining can serve as a better distribution channel *and* a better monetization channel for creators. it can do this because it can flow more freely and more people can participate. 

i think it's reasonable to disagree on whether you think that happens — but let's have that conversation, not be anchored to stigma.

DADA.art has talked about secondary markets and the truth about the value disparity between artists and traders. Whether its coins or typical NFTs the outcomes favor the trader in the long run and that continues to surface as it has done from the trad art spaces to our current tokenized ones.

DADA.art has talked about secondary markets and the truth about the value disparity between artists and traders. Whether its coins or typical NFTs the outcomes favor the trader in the long run and that continues to surface as it has done from the trad art spaces to our current tokenized ones.

https://powerdada.medium.com/the-inconvenient-truth-about-secondary-markets-part-ii-6c148a917a08