Hit me with it Captain... you are making the argument that networks don't gain value with additional users?
Discussion
The gain is not exponential
I have to agree with the captain on this one.
Organically grown networks seem to make more progress due to the lack of centralized interference. Broader levels of availability are capable of being accessed to a wider population. Whereas centralized networks (Twitter, Instagram, YouTube etc.) seem to stagnate when they reach a certain growth point.
Metcalfe Law does have it's limits... it is more a rule of thumb as all users are not created equal, and OG users are far more likely to be engaged and contribute than the noobs and lurkers
Money is a messaging system... Metcalfe Law describes the number of unique possible connections in a messaging system is the square of the messaging participants. Communicating value is the point of money (that's its value proposition), so the value is proportional to the number of participants that can communicate with each other. That is the square of the participants... exponential
So I can't exchange one money for another?
?
Lol. I'm not sure if we're specifically referring to monetary systems or networks anymore, but this applies to both: a network of any kind that has wide reach gains usability and influence but not necessarily value.
The wide usability is the value... if that value becomes monetary is based on it's scarcity. English has tremendous value due to it's network effects, but zero monetary value because it lacks scarcity
