On Fri, 27 Aug 1999, Technotranscendence wrote:
>
> Information might still be traded.
>
Yes, and people do pay for the quality and timeliness of their information. But, unless the information is controlled by a proprietary information agreement, it rapidly flows downhill. Astronomers -> Journals/Press releases -> public. It doesn't take long, the only problem is having it interpreted correctly.
> And nanotech, itself, will not abolish scarcity.
To assert this you have to qualify it.
Nantechnology as currently envisioned *will* ABOLISH scarcity related to the *survival* of all exiting individuals on the planet (and most likely all future existing individuals). Only if the individuals get sucked into believing that they should "control everything" (or mostly everything) will they be in a condition of scarcity. The will not be in scarcity with regard to their survival, they will be in scarcity with regard to the fantasies their imagination has created for them.
> It will merely switch around the level and types of scarcity.
It isn't nanotechnology that switches around the level of scarcity, it is the minds of people letting their imaginations run wild that does.
> Currently, air is hardly considered a scarce commodity,
> yet there is still a market in lots other things AND air
> quality is marketable item.
I suspect many people living in cities would consider clean air a scarce item. Because of that it is marketable. Many of the textropians (or down-unders) (if they live outside major cities) would hardly view air as marketable. Marketability is context dependent.
Robert