Is that JPEG worth 70 million dollars? Value creation and perceptions of nonfungible tokens in a bubble economy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Non-fungible tokens (NFTs) have sparked questions about value. In our attempt to shed light on the value of NFTs, especially during their dramatic rise in the early 2020s, we develop a theoretical analysis of the extrinsic factors shaping NFT value based on a perfect storm of individual, social, marketing, and environmental factors. After detailing the effects of each of these factors in shaping NFT valuation, we develop a new understanding of value in a frenzy of celebrity influence, social media, decentralized authority, unregulated markets, marketing hype, and media magnification. We also articulate the intrinsic factors that still affect value as well. We argue that in the NFT bubble economy and its aftermath, extrinsic, social, and situational factors came to dominate valuation. We offer advice on how to make sense of value in the post NFT bubble and outline a research agenda that considers the role of cryptocurrency and metaverse.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it