The first two comments on the site provide a great insight into the question.
The first commenter posts to try and explain what value is being created.
Efficient markets -> lower transaction costs -> greater access to the markets by everyone. Why is that un-noble? Isn't Art.sy doing the same thing?
All true. Then Carter responds agreeing and writes a bit about what Art.sy is doing.
Art.sy is not saving the world, but our goal is to create a fundamental change in the way art is bought, sold, and appreciated. We envision a dramatically different future where artists can pursue their passions more sustainable, and where everyone else will be more inspired by original art.
The first commenter isn't wrong about why creating liquidity has value, he just hasn't gone far enough. So there's greater access to the markets by everyone. What good does that do? There are several more steps before getting eventually to the production of things that have real value.
Art.sy does the same thing, but hasn't lost sight of the end goal. The reason for providing a more efficient and liquid market is so that more artists can create more original art.
The first commenter was me. The financial markets are horizontal in the goals they serve. Drawing connections to specific utility can be done, but doesn't have to be done. For example:
Efficient markets -> lower transaction costs -> greater access to the markets by everyone -> farmer sells a futures contract to lock in price and hedge risk -> farmer uses capital to buy equipment -> farmer grows more crops
Your definition of utility is valid, but your desire to draw direct connections between end game utility is misplaced because there are millions of connections that can be drawn. Each market participant interacts with the markets according to their own definition of what is and is not important to them. You seek to define value for every human using financial markets in the world.
The first commenter posts to try and explain what value is being created.
Efficient markets -> lower transaction costs -> greater access to the markets by everyone. Why is that un-noble? Isn't Art.sy doing the same thing?
All true. Then Carter responds agreeing and writes a bit about what Art.sy is doing.
Art.sy is not saving the world, but our goal is to create a fundamental change in the way art is bought, sold, and appreciated. We envision a dramatically different future where artists can pursue their passions more sustainable, and where everyone else will be more inspired by original art.
The first commenter isn't wrong about why creating liquidity has value, he just hasn't gone far enough. So there's greater access to the markets by everyone. What good does that do? There are several more steps before getting eventually to the production of things that have real value.
Art.sy does the same thing, but hasn't lost sight of the end goal. The reason for providing a more efficient and liquid market is so that more artists can create more original art.