(no title)
soledades | 3 years ago
So I think some kind of sociological argument makes more sense (I don't know what that would be though).
soledades | 3 years ago
So I think some kind of sociological argument makes more sense (I don't know what that would be though).
Zircom|3 years ago
oblio|3 years ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number
> Proponents assert that numbers larger than this generally require more restrictive rules, laws, and enforced norms to maintain a stable, cohesive group. It has been proposed to lie between 100 and 250, with a commonly used value of 150.
tpxl|3 years ago
Is it? If you have N participants in a market and a bunch of investment opportunities that are on average net negative, the person with the most money will take the most opportunities resulting in their relative worth increasing the most. The endgame for this is one person with all the money. Works for N=2 and Nâinfinity.
It doesn't happen in (some? most?) small communities because of specific things that aren't present in big communities.