>>323882i ran your retardation through chatgpt for a bit of refinement
>If attention functions as a currency in the monetized internet, then it is being exchanged within a monetary system whose nominal unit—money—is inherently inflationary. But attention itself is not obviously inflationary in the same way. A person has a finite amount of time and, therefore, a finite lifetime supply of attention.easier to understand
>This creates a tension: the internet continually produces more things competing for attention, while each individual’s total supply of attention remains strictly bounded. In that sense, attention may actually become deflationary at the level of an individual life. i wholeheartedly disagree with this
as attention is more aggressively sought after, given people's finite capacity for it, more people will turn away/inward and stop paying attention to anything except what they've decided to psychologically silo as important.
>As time passes, the amount of attention a person has remaining decreases, potentially making each remaining unit more valuable.again, completely disagree with this retarded premise concocted by the Gippity
Youth and beauty are instrumental in driving attention. Old people, especially single men after the age of 35, are economically irrelevant.
I would only argue a persons attention is deflationary the more valuable that person is economically, whether its wealth, connections, fame, status, ie something to offer you in increasingly exponential amounts.