Quote from: AltCity on July 13, 2017, 04:39:32 PM

Quote from: AltCity on July 13, 2017, 02:02:54 PM

For public infrastructure and I am comparing Veritaseum to the National Highway system, these expected rules are what allow businesses to operate upon them, individual drivers to make their livelihood by commuting and, pleasure seekers to take weekend sight-seeing drives.

The value of vehicles utilizing public infrastructure is NOT tied to the extant of that infrastructure. It can increase as the infrastructure expands, and the key contributor of value of the vehicles is how they utilize the rules of the road. There may be weight limits for bridges, and height limits for tunnels.

The utility of a vehicle will have to match the infrastructure. Innovation of vehicles and those who implement them is where the value determination is found. Closing a road for repairs does not instantly devalue all vehicles. Conversely opening a new road does not instantly increase the value of all vehicles. So the marginal value in expansion of the infrastructure is to be found in how vehicles utilize the rules of the road, and the innovation in vehicle design. Building a new road that I never travel on does not bring me benefit, it is an option. Whereas passing a law that allows all vehicles to travel at 90 MPH could be of immediate benefit to me, anywhere. It is the laws that all players utilize that allows the creation of vehicles that benefit those who own them.

Do you realize your argument is 100% in support of my argument?
Ultimately the vehicles will evolve within this public infrastructure, and not beyond it.

Do you realize your argument is similar in another way that ERC20 tokens' total market cap is capped by eth's market cap?

Edit:
If any vehicle wants to evolve independent of any public infrastructure, it needs to be made independent of such infrastructure.