It is interesting to think about what is fun for the individual (or group) especially in relation to gambling and games. Some games are fun because of the emotional spikes in relation to the money/$ev the games represent. But some games such as BINGO offer a more social use and even more some games are very repetitive and serve to only somehow cure our boredom. What is it about these games that seemingly have not much usefulness, yet we collectively spend so much time playing them. Anthony Pickles observes this a lot and offers different possible perspectives.
In the nineteenth century, Bingo was widely used in Germany for educational purposes to teach children spelling, animal names, and multiplication tables.
On the other hand we have tasks that are not “fun” for us or forms of entertainment but we get paid to do hopefully in relation to the overall contribution our efforts make to the efficiency and effectiveness society. Often these things are not fun and the sacrifice of time is harnessed as a transferable utility sometimes exchanged for fun/entertainment.
Skipping a lot of fundamental explanations and math it seems there is a conjecture or observation to be made that the optimal society would have the highest amount of fun mixed with efficient output. In other words getting paid to do what one is most passionate about (or at least enjoys the most), and for a task that is useful for society. Two assumptions are that most people are passionate about something that COULD be useful for society and that paying someone for such a pursuit does in fact bring a certain efficiency to our society. But in other works these assumptions have been shown to be quite reasonable.
Much of today’s emerging systems and technologies are designed to support this. Bitcoin is a working example with some history and ethereum is an evolving example that might help people understand this new paradigm and new system of creation and growth.