SourceForge takes over SF accounts; releases gold-laced installers of questioned monetary value



  • @RaceProUK said:

    No, just the ones that said gold is useful for various things.

    I guess it wouldn't be as useful if it wasn't so rare?


  • SockDev

    @Gaska said:

    I guess it wouldn't be as useful if it wasn't so rare?

    it'd probably be more useful really. and cheaper.

    regardless of why it's desired the low supply ensures a high price. increase the supply (or figure out how to lower the demand) ad the price will drop.


  • SockDev

    @Gaska said:

    I guess it wouldn't be as useful if it wasn't so rare?

    Now you're adding 2 to 2 and getting Keith Lemon.

    Look, this is a very simple concept, and the basis of all modern economics.

    • Gold is rare.
    • Gold is useful.
    • People will pay for rare things.
    • People will pay for useful things.
    • The rarer something is, the more people will pay.
    • The more useful something is, the more people will pay.

    Combining the above fully explains why gold costs as much as it does.

    Edit: And as @loopback0 has pointed out, I've missed that is it expensive to produce.



  • @RaceProUK said:

    fully explains

    You missed it being expensive to produce.

    $1000-$1200 per ounce. Aluminium is ~$1600 per tonne.



  • @RaceProUK said:

    Gold is rare.
    Gold is useful.

    Can't disagree.

    @RaceProUK said:

    People will pay for rare things.

    And it's rational because...?

    @RaceProUK said:

    People will pay for useful things.

    That's irrelevant to our argument, which is about rarity, not usefulness.

    @RaceProUK said:

    The rarer something is, the more people will pay.

    Again - how is it rational?

    @RaceProUK said:

    The more useful something is, the more people will pay.

    Again - irrelevant.

    @RaceProUK said:

    Combining the above fully explains why gold costs as much as it does.

    But doesn't explain how would usefulness of gold drop if it was more common.

    @RaceProUK said:

    Edit: And as @loopback0 has pointed out, I've missed that is it expensive to produce.

    Does it make it more rare? More desirable? It certainly doesn't make it more expensive - it just sets the lower bound of price.


  • SockDev

    @Gaska said:

    But doesn't explain how would usefulness of gold drop if it was more common.

    OK, whatever you're smoking, get rid of it; clearly, it's messing with your ability to argue effectively.

    And this?
    @Gaska said:

    @RaceProUK said:
    People will pay for rare things.

    And it's rational because...?

    It's called supply-and-demand. It forms the basis of the global economy.



  • @RaceProUK said:

    OK, whatever you're smoking, get rid of it; clearly, it's messing with your ability to argue effectively.

    What? It's YOU who hasn't answered the question you were replying to!

    @RaceProUK said:

    It's called supply-and-demand. It forms the basis of the global economy.

    Demand is equivalent of desirability. Your argument is sound only if desirability is rational, which you haven't proved yet.


  • SockDev

    @Gaska said:

    Your argument is sound only if desirability is rationa

    why must the desire be rational?

    the point is people want thing X. the rationality of the desire for thing X does not matter in economics.


  • SockDev

    @Gaska said:

    Your argument is sound only if desirability is rational, which you haven't proved yet.

    I'm sorry, I didn't realise I had to explain how wanting to use the right material for the right job is desireable.





  • @accalia said:

    why must the desire be rational?

    Because the argument is about if the statement "it's expensive because it's rare" is rational.

    @accalia said:

    the point is people want thing X. the rationality of the desire for thing X does not matter in economics.

    I know how economics work. The thing is, it's not always rational.

    @RaceProUK said:

    I'm sorry, I didn't realise I had to explain how wanting to use the right material for the right job is desireable.

    Yeah, because people only ever want gold if they want to make trinkets out of them...



  • This all seems 🐄.

    If the cost of producing gold is about $1100 per ounce, and the cost of buying it is about $1200 per ounce, there's not a lot of room for any reason for gold being expensive other than production cost.


  • SockDev

    @Gaska said:

    @RaceProUK said:
    I'm sorry, I didn't realise I had to explain how wanting to use the right material for the right job is desireable.

    Yeah, because people only ever want gold if they want to make trinkets out of them...

    OK, now I have no fucking clue what you're trying to argue anymore; you're trying to counter my point by sarcastically saying exactly the same thing I'm saying.



  • @loopback0 said:

    If the cost of producing gold is about $1100 per ounce, and the cost of buying it is about $1200 per ounce, there's not a lot of room for any reason for gold being expensive other than production cost.

    It was $1800 at one point.

    @RaceProUK said:

    OK, now I have no fucking clue what you're trying to argue anymore; you're trying to counter my point by sarcastically saying exactly the same thing I'm saying.

    If I say the same thing you say, but in sarcastic way, doesn't it mean that I'm actually saying the opposite?


  • SockDev

    @Gaska said:

    If I say the same thing you say, but in sarcastic way, doesn't it mean that I'm actually saying the opposite?

    Whatever. The point is you seem completely unable to grasp the very simple premise that something rare costs more. And if you cannot accept that, then there is no help for you.



  • @Gaska said:

    If I say the same thing you say, but in sarcastic way, doesn't it mean that I'm actually saying the opposite?

    It's a thesis without arguments. Just like this post



  • @RaceProUK said:

    Whatever. The point is you seem completely unable to grasp the very simple premise that something rare costs more. And if you cannot accept that, then there is no help for you.

    I know very well that rare things cost more. You, on the other hand, seem unable to grasp the idea that rarity increasing the price is irrational.



  • Well, we've got the supply side of supply and demand pretty well worked out here, I think what Gaska's asking is why there's so much demand, considering how expensive it is. Rather than hypothesizing wildly and giving a bunch of vague claims about its ‘shiny’-ness you're probably better off looking at a breakdown of what all the gold in the world is currently used for. Also, a useful comparison point might be to look at just how much of a markup silver jewelry gets, relative to gold, just to illustrate how much people really value such things.


  • SockDev

    @Gaska said:

    You, on the other hand, seem unable to grasp the idea that rarity increasing the price is irrational.

    No-one is this stupid without it being deliberate.

    I'm done here. All you seem to be interested in is fucking with me, and I'm sick of it.



  • In other words, you were unable to prove it's rational, so you ragequitted. Whatever.



  • @Buddy said:

    Also, a useful comparison point might be to look at just how much of a markup silver jewelry gets, relative to gold, just to illustrate how much people really value such things.

    The question isn't how much people value gold - the question is why.


  • SockDev

    Since you're unable to grasp simple logic, yes. Whatever makes you feel better.



  • TIL simple logic involves intense hand waving, citing irrelevant facts and argumenta ad hominem.



  • Well I'm not willing to actually look up any facts for this, but in my experience, it mostly seems related to tradition. I.E. highly irrational.



  • My point exactly.


  • SockDev

    TIL there are people who will dismiss logic when it suits them



  • Which of my posts exactly dismiss logic? Or is it just disagreeing with you that you call dismissing? Also, are we talking about actual logic, or the common understanding of what logic is?



  • You forgot to mention that one of Gold's other selling points is that it's malleable.

    In other words, it's easy to make into things... like coins.


  • SockDev

    I'm talking about the part where you added 2 to 2 and got Keith Lemon.


  • SockDev

    @powerlord said:

    You forgot to mention that one of Gold's other selling points is that it's malleable.

    Covered upthread:
    @RaceProUK said:
    True, but gold's malleability makes it a lot easier to work with.



  • @Gaska said:

    Okay. I know it's really, really, really, REALLYYYYY rare. And that's it - you still haven't shown how rarity influences desirability in any rational way.

    So where is your justification? Did I skip some hidden posts or something?

    @RaceProUK said:

    No, just the ones that said gold is useful for various things.

    @Gaska said:

    I guess it wouldn't be as useful if it wasn't so rare?

    @RaceProUK said:

    Now you're adding 2 to 2 and getting Keith Lemon.

    I said I found no justification for your thesis that "paying more for rare things is rational". I asked if I skipped some hidden post. You said that I didn't, but that I skipped the one where you said that gold is useful for various thing. I read it as "paying more for a rare thing is rational because the thing is useful". Was I wrong to read it like that?


  • SockDev

    @Gaska said:

    "paying more for a rare thing is rational because the thing is useful"

    Is what I was trying to say all along 😉



  • Now, let's take the usefulness factor out of question. Is it still rational to pay more for a rare thing?


  • SockDev

    Insofar as it can be used as a form of investment, yes



  • So, for the sake of argument, let's assume gold isn't useful in anything practical - as we did in the posts above.

    Would I be right to say it's useful for investment because its price is high and relatively stable?


  • SockDev

    That does seem to be why it's useful as an investment medium, yes



  • So, the rarity factor is irrelevant too, as long as the price is high and relatively stable, right?


  • SockDev

    The rarity does boost the value though



  • I don't say it doesn't. But why it boosts value? Remember we're talking about a hypothetical gold that isn't useful in making anything.


  • SockDev

    Again, supply and demand, but this time as an investment resource instead of a raw material



  • @Gaska said:

    Goblets etc. could be made with any material.

    Gold was desirable in pre-industrial societies for several reasons. It is soft enough to be worked into useful and/or decorative items with simple tools. Whatever your or your society's standards of beauty are, gold can easily be fashioned into articles that meet those standards.

    It is found in fairly pure form in nature; it could be used in societies that had not yet learned to smelt ore.

    It does not corrode. Other metals used by primitive societies corrode eventually. Even silver, which has also been considered precious throughout human history, tarnishes, diminishing its beauty (whatever that is to you). This is what led me to pick your specific comment to reply to.

    Goblets and other articles can be made with many materials, but not any. Some materials are not suitable because they are too difficult to work. Others are toxic; lead is also easily worked, but making a goblet out of it is not a good idea.

    Because of these features, gold has been considered valuable by nearly every society on earth, and this leads to another reason for its value — the one you claim is irrational. Because it is considered valuable by everyone, it has been, and continues to be, used as a medium of exchange. Because it has been considered valuable throughout history, it is likely to continue being considered valuable. This gives one confidence that if one exchanges something of value — whether something tangible, or something intangible like labor — for gold, others will be willing to exchange the gold you now have for something else of value that you may want now or in the future.

    In fact, that gold has value to others is (one of) the thing(s) that gives it value, and this is not irrational. It was the utilitarian (and aesthetic) properties that gave gold value originally; those properties continue to give it value, but its value in modern society comes primarily from the fact that other people also place high value on it.

    Compare it to fiat currency. Those pieces of paper you have in your wallet have (essentially) zero intrinsic value. Yet you accept that a piece of paper that says €100 on it is actually worth €100. Why does it have that much value? Because a government says so, and because other people are willing to place that much value on it. If the value of gold is irrational, that is even more so; at least gold has properties that give it some intrinsic value.



  • @RaceProUK said:

    Again, supply and demand, but this time as an investment resource instead of a raw material

    So, a rare thing is more valuable because it has low supply-to-demand ratio. Supply is supply, not much digging into that. But without demand, this law would imply very low price. So rare things must have very high demand. Why is it?



  • @Gaska said:

    I'm still waiting for a rational explanation why rarity of something is worth paying extra.
    Supply and demand. Gold has intrinsic properties that make it very desirable. Coupled with its desirability, its rarity makes it expensive.
    @Gaska said:
    comparable in quality and usefulness with something more common

    There isn't anything more common than gold that is comparable in quality and usefulness. Silver comes closest, but its propensity to tarnish makes it less desirable,



  • @Gaska said:

    You just proved something doesn't have to be rare to be extremely desirable.

    Of course not. Undesirable and common: worthless. Undesirable and rare: worthless. Somewhat desirable and rare: moderately priced. Desirable and common: moderately priced. Desirable and rare: expensive.

    This isn't even Economics 101; it's more like Economics 001.


  • SockDev

    @Gaska said:

    So rare things must have very high demand.

    Where did this come from?



  • @Gaska said:

    you still haven't shown how rarity influences desirability in any rational way.

    No, but the influence of the rarity of something desirable is easily demonstrated.

    Rarity does, or can, also influence the desirability of something, although I would readily concede that "snob appeal" is irrational.



  • @HardwareGeek said:

    Gold was desirable in pre-industrial societies for several reasons. [wall of text follows]

    That's a very great write-up. Thanks! Though, pre-smelting era was before 3000 B.C. (before age of bronze). It's impressing how it didn't become obsolete in the following five thousand years, with so many competing materials.

    @HardwareGeek said:

    There isn't anything more common than gold that is comparable in quality and usefulness.

    I wasn't talking about gold specifically, but about anything that would prove rarity=value.

    @HardwareGeek said:

    No, but the influence of the rarity of something desirable is easily demonstrated.

    There's no question of it. But the argument is about rarity by itself.



  • @Gaska said:

    That's irrelevant to our argument, which is about rarity, not usefulness.

    No, it's not irrelevant. It's usefulness (whether for industry, aesthetic, exchange or investment) gives it desirability. Desirability + rarity = cost.



  • @RaceProUK said:

    @Gaska said:
    So rare things must have very high demand.

    Where did this come from?

    Supply and demand. Price is proportional to demand and inversely proportional to supply. Without demand, low supply doesn't make the price skyrocket. So by this point, by a series of logical conclusions, we've proven that "rare things are expensive" is equivalent to "rare things are desirable". Don't you agree?



  • @HardwareGeek said:

    No, it's not irrelevant. It's usefulness (whether for industry, aesthetic, exchange or investment) gives it desirability. Desirability + rarity = cost.

    Several posts above, we've made an assumption that gold is useless - to exclude the factor of usefulness influencing the price.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.