@chriscocreated
Clankers may be a new mode of cultural expression - perhaps even a new kind of art. Most are disposable, a few become durable. They often carry meaning, but not always value. They only really seem to “exist” at scale and through attention, and like so much in crypto, they follow a power law.
“If a Clanker doesn’t trade, does it make a sound?” Without trade, what is it?
They are born in speculation, but only survive through meaning. Without meaning, they fade.
So what does this imply for artists?
Most of crypto follows power laws, and there is always an oversupply of artists - people trying to put meaning into the world and hoping to be compensated for it. Is this simply the “physics” of artists?
There is often an idealised intention to “support artists,” which usually means enabling everyone working with authenticity to earn a meaningful income from their work. But if these power-law dynamics really are fundamental, then we probably can’t build a single crypto vehicle that supports everyone equally. We can only build systems that disproportionately lift the work that is most beautiful, most interesting, or most meaningful.
If that’s true, then the real work may not be about forcing equal outcomes, but about helping people orient themselves within these dynamics - so more energy flows into genuine creative expression, and less into chasing signals, trends, or short-term hacks.
[reflections from /wearetheart community call]