Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“Play-to-Earn” and Bullshit Jobs

paulbutler.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 700 posts

Re: “Play-to-Earn” and Bullshit Jobs

#61

Post by [deleted] »

beaconstudios wrote: post #20
seibelj wrote: post #2

I disagree entirely with the thesis of "bullshit jobs". Unless it's a government job or mandated by regulations, someone is paying for a task to be done voluntarily. Therefore it isn't bullshit to the payer, even if it might seem like bullshit to the worker. I have never stumbled on a single job that wasn't government-required labor that had no purpose whatsoever, and furthermore the laborer wasn't able to quit.

So if I paid you a salary to dig a hole and fill it up again, ad infinitum, that job would have inherent value just because I'm paying you to do it? If so, welcome aboard.

[deleted]

Re: “Play-to-Earn” and Bullshit Jobs

#62

Post by jeremyjh »

duskwuff wrote: post #35
mherdeg wrote: post #18

Is this different from the phenomenon described at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_farming ? Honestly it seems like a pretty great career -- you get to spend your time indoors, probably somewhere climate controlled with electricity and restrooms. This is way better than the workhouse. Whoever is buying these things as a collector is basically donating their wealth to others, like a kind of privatized welfare. If p…

It's different inasmuch as it's even stupider. Gold farming is, at least, based on the premise that there are people who are willing to pay other people money to perform repetitive actions in a video game for them. It's still kind of dumb and it has harmful effects on in-game economies, but at least there's some semblance of money being exchanged for goods and services. "Play to earn", on the other hand, is based on…

The question is answered in TFA:

> These “economic opportunities” are essentially a wealth transfer from new players to established ones. Gameplay requires the purchase of three Axies, which currently cost in the hundreds of US dollars each. Players who buy in treat this as an investment, since it’s a necessary buy-in in order to work in the game.

It sounds more like a Ponzi scheme in a Gold farming disguise to me.

I'm very familiar with Gold farming from Eve Online, where selling game currency (ISK) was permitted via exchange of game time cards sold by the game's developer. There was always a secondary market for game time cards sold for real money and that was legal too. The reason it all worked is because playing the game was really fun, but required to grind to get ISK. People with more money than time would prefer to buy themselves new spaceships to get blown up in than grind for them.

It really sounds though like Axie Infinity is not a fun game and no one treats it as one. So it is something new.

> it’s hard to find any reviews on Axie Infinity as a game rather than as an income stream or speculative investment

Re: “Play-to-Earn” and Bullshit Jobs

#63

Post by ragona »

renewiltord wrote: post #45
HWR_14 wrote: post #14

How is this not a Ponzi scheme?

So a Ponzi scheme works like this: * You take money from investors * You then claim that you are making money from some legitimate business * You return money to earlier investors by just feeding them the money later investors put in So who are the early investors here, what's the legitimate business, and how are we taking money from later investors to give to early investors? EDIT: Guys, it's not a zero-sum game. Yo…

Early investors: people who “invested” hundreds of dollars to play. Legitimate business: “we’re a game studio.” Later investors: newer players who see the earlier ones making money.

Re: “Play-to-Earn” and Bullshit Jobs

#65

Post by [deleted] »

duskwuff wrote: post #35
mherdeg wrote: post #18

Is this different from the phenomenon described at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_farming ? Honestly it seems like a pretty great career -- you get to spend your time indoors, probably somewhere climate controlled with electricity and restrooms. This is way better than the workhouse. Whoever is buying these things as a collector is basically donating their wealth to others, like a kind of privatized welfare. If p…

It's different inasmuch as it's even stupider. Gold farming is, at least, based on the premise that there are people who are willing to pay other people money to perform repetitive actions in a video game for them. It's still kind of dumb and it has harmful effects on in-game economies, but at least there's some semblance of money being exchanged for goods and services. "Play to earn", on the other hand, is based on…

[deleted]

Re: “Play-to-Earn” and Bullshit Jobs

#66

Post by jeremyjh »

HWR_14 wrote: post #14

How is this not a Ponzi scheme?

I agree. To me its a Ponzi scheme in a gold farming disguise. Gold farming only works when the game is fun enough that people will buy gold to play with in it. In this game, everyone playing it is buying in for hundreds of dollars and most likely that is the only source of the payments that are going out.

Re: “Play-to-Earn” and Bullshit Jobs

#67

Post by [deleted] »

renewiltord wrote: post #45
HWR_14 wrote: post #14

How is this not a Ponzi scheme?

So a Ponzi scheme works like this: * You take money from investors * You then claim that you are making money from some legitimate business * You return money to earlier investors by just feeding them the money later investors put in So who are the early investors here, what's the legitimate business, and how are we taking money from later investors to give to early investors? EDIT: Guys, it's not a zero-sum game. Yo…

[deleted]

Re: “Play-to-Earn” and Bullshit Jobs

#68

Post by jeremyjh »

renewiltord wrote: post #45
HWR_14 wrote: post #14

How is this not a Ponzi scheme?

So a Ponzi scheme works like this: * You take money from investors * You then claim that you are making money from some legitimate business * You return money to earlier investors by just feeding them the money later investors put in So who are the early investors here, what's the legitimate business, and how are we taking money from later investors to give to early investors? EDIT: Guys, it's not a zero-sum game. Yo…

Read TFA. Your questions are all answered in it.

Re: “Play-to-Earn” and Bullshit Jobs

#69

Post by ViViDboarder »

advisedwang wrote: post #29
mherdeg wrote: post #18

Is this different from the phenomenon described at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_farming ? Honestly it seems like a pretty great career -- you get to spend your time indoors, probably somewhere climate controlled with electricity and restrooms. This is way better than the workhouse. Whoever is buying these things as a collector is basically donating their wealth to others, like a kind of privatized welfare. If p…

Except that we end up spending a vast amount of human effort doing work that fundamentally doesn't need to be done. There's no actual economic output to paying people to break rocks.

Exactly. One could make an argument that the work some users put in, once sold, result in value to the buyer, but that value isn’t generated by the worker. The developers created the scheme and could deliver the value directly at no cost to all players, poor and wealthy, but instead chose to create meaningless work by making grinding opportunities.

Re: “Play-to-Earn” and Bullshit Jobs

#70

Post by MattGaiser »

beaconstudios wrote: post #20
seibelj wrote: post #2

I disagree entirely with the thesis of "bullshit jobs". Unless it's a government job or mandated by regulations, someone is paying for a task to be done voluntarily. Therefore it isn't bullshit to the payer, even if it might seem like bullshit to the worker. I have never stumbled on a single job that wasn't government-required labor that had no purpose whatsoever, and furthermore the laborer wasn't able to quit.

So if I paid you a salary to dig a hole and fill it up again, ad infinitum, that job would have inherent value just because I'm paying you to do it? If so, welcome aboard.

My problem with the bullshit jobs thesis is the "inherent value." There are plenty of jobs that have little societal value, but provide plenty of value to the person employing the person.

For example, plenty of jurisdictions give large tax breaks to farms, so it is reasonably common for developers holding land to turn their land into a "farm." One fellow I heard of put 6 cows on a plot of development land and paid someone to drop hay off for the cows as the land had next to no grass, as it was under development.

No real value is being generated from the cows. The output of 6 poorly fed and housed beef cows is well under the money paid to the cow carer and for the hay and for the damage caused by the cows to the neighbourhood when they escaped.

But the developer saved 80K a year in various property tax after all expenses were considered.

Post reply on HN