I hear so many people on hear yelling about "utility" all the time. "Just wait until utility kicks in!" they say.
Well, let me tell you a little story about utility.
Time for a thread 🧵👇
Utility is often hailed as the ultimate measure of value, something that makes life easier, more efficient, or more enjoyable. We hear it constantly: "Buy what serves you." "Invest in what helps you." The problem, however, is that utility doesn’t always correlate with price. /1
In fact, sometimes the most practical items lose their worth faster than the ones that do very little.
Take, for example, two watches I bought a decade ago: a Rolex and an Apple iWatch. /2
One is a statement piece, a luxury that promises status, history, & craftsmanship. The other is a gadget, a modern marvel designed to track your health, manage your calendar, & keep you connected. Both served distinct purposes, but one had much more utility than the other. /3
The Rolex, a symbol of refinement, was a beautifully crafted watch. It told time, of course, but it didn’t offer much more than that. No fitness tracker, no health monitoring, no notifications or reminders. In fact, it had no functionality beyond its primary role: keeping time./4
Yet, it was priced accordingly. It was expensive not because it was useful in the modern sense, but because of its brand, its heritage, its scarcity, and the craftsmanship behind it. The price wasn’t about how much it could do, it was about what it represented. /5
The Apple iWatch, on the other hand, was a marvel of utility. When it was released, it brought features that people didn’t even know they needed but couldn’t imagine living without once they experienced them. It tracked your steps, heart rate, and calories. /6
It monitored your sleep patterns and gave you reminders to stand up. It integrated with your phone to keep you connected without ever needing to pull it out of your pocket. And it did all of this in a sleek, efficient design that made life smoother and more organized. /7
But despite all its features, the iWatch had one glaring flaw: its price was still high. When it came out, it was an expensive piece of technology, though nowhere near the price of the Rolex. The iWatch was an investment in convenience & health, and in many ways, it delivered. /8
For a time, it was a revolutionary tool. Yet, over the course of ten years, its value plummeted. Why? Because it was too useful. Newer models replaced it quickly. The technology evolved at such a rapid pace that the iWatch, once the height of innovation, soon became obsolete. \9
Wear and tear, software updates, and newer versions meant that the original device lost its place in the market. Despite the fact that it had improved my life in countless ways, it was now worth only a fraction of what I paid for it. \10
The Rolex, however, had only increased in value. Even though it wasn’t any more useful now than it had been when I bought it, its price had doubled. Why? Because it was rare. Because it was a luxury. Because, while it didn’t do anything, it was something that people wanted. /11
And this is where the story teaches its lesson: Utility does not equal price. The Rolex, with its timeless elegance but limited functionality, has appreciated in value purely because of its scarcity and status. /12
The iWatch, with its powerful, features, has lost its value because technology moves quickly, & a newer, better version is always on the horizon. Its worth was tied to its utility, but utility doesn’t make things hold their value in the same way rarity & exclusivity do. /13
It’s a curious paradox. Something that makes life easier, something that improves health, productivity, and communication, loses its value over time. And something that does little beyond looking good only rises in worth as time passes, simply because fewer people have it. /14
In the end, the Rolex’s price tag wasn’t tied to what it could do. It was tied to its allure, its history, and its scarcity. The iWatch, no matter how useful, could never claim that same status, even with all its utility. /15
And that’s the key: just because something is more useful doesn’t mean it’s more valuable, especially when it comes to technology. The lesson then is simple: True value is not always about utility. Sometimes, it’s about what’s rare, what’s desired, & what’s built to last. \16 END
If you enjoyed the thread and learned a valuable lesson, share with others who beat the "utility" drum.
You will never believe what I found! - HARDCORE evidence Ripple was behind the Bitcoin China FUD &funding research to support it
All in an attempt to prove XRP "Decentralization"
I have all the receipts &links below as supporting evidence. All documented facts ✅
A thread 🧵👇
July 16th, 2018 – Ripple internal emails show they are “flushing out key points to how Bitcoin is centrally controlled by China". They are looking for someone in Ripple to go "on the record” calling out bitcoin.
July 17th, 2018 – More Ripple emails show they will share what has already been written about China and Bitcoin but are looking to “brainstorm possible new outlets and angles for the story”.