// Monday Morning chat with GPT-4o


We’ve been told that markets, if left alone, naturally lead to the best outcomes. Milton Friedman championed this idea, arguing that free markets optimize things for everyone. But in today’s world of TikTok, Onlyfans, and Bumble, this idea falls apart. The attention economy—designed to capture and exploit our focus—reveals the truth: markets don’t serve us. They exploit us.

And this isn’t just a flaw in how platforms operate—it’s a flaw in how markets as a whole are structured. Platforms run on incomplete information, ignore hidden costs, thrive on chaos, and are designed to keep us isolated, not connected. This reveals a deeper truth: markets are flawed by design.

Friedman’s free-market idea depends on a major assumption: that participants have all the information they need and make rational decisions. But the attention economy—where platforms serve us content based on what keeps us engaged—proves this wrong. Platforms don’t understand us; they only know what keeps us scrolling.

Instead of helping us make good choices, platforms optimize for engagement, often at the expense of our well-being. This is where Friedman’s theory collapses. In the attention economy, we’re not making informed choices—we’re reacting to content designed to manipulate our attention. And that’s not efficiency; it’s exploitation.

Just like markets assume we have all the information we need, platforms assume their algorithms can predict what we want. But the truth is, these algorithms work with incomplete knowledge. They show us what keeps us hooked, but they don’t know what we really need or value.

This isn’t just a tech problem—it’s a broader market failure. No market runs on perfect information. Whether it’s stocks, tokens or social media, decisions are always made with biased or missing data. The result? Both platforms and markets fail to fully serve the people involved.

Friedman’s theory also assumes that all costs are included in the price of a product or service. But in the attention economy, the real costs—our mental health, focus, and sense of community—are hidden. Platforms profit from our attention, but we pay the price in the form of anxiety, isolation, and distraction.

These hidden costs aren’t accidents; they’re part of the system. Just like traditional markets overlook environmental damage or labor exploitation, the attention economy ignores the psychological toll it takes on users. Platforms thrive by keeping us online longer, but the cost to society is steep.

Markets, like platforms, are supposed to be predictable. Friedman’s model assumes rational behavior, but in the attention economy, chaos reigns. Algorithms can’t predict what will go viral or how users will react. They chase engagement, but virality is unpredictable—one day it’s a meme, the next day it’s misinformation.

This mirrors the chaos in financial markets, where bubbles burst unpredictably, and trends shift overnight. Neither markets nor platforms can control the forces they’re trying to harness. Chaos, not rational decisions, drives them.

One of the most harmful flaws of the attention economy is its focus on individual engagement over the collective good. Platforms are built to keep us scrolling alone, not connecting with each other. They trap us in personalized bubbles, keeping us engaged while leaving us isolated.

This individualistic focus fragments society. Platforms claim to connect us, but in reality, they push us apart, each of us alone in our own feed. Just like markets prioritize individual profit over collective well-being, platforms prioritize engagement over building real communities.

Here’s where it gets more interesting. Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem proves that no system—whether it’s a market or a platform—can ever account for everything. It’s impossible for any system to be complete and efficient. Just like markets can’t capture all the variables that influence human behavior, algorithms will never fully understand or predict what we want.

The comforting myth that markets and platforms can be perfected is false. They will always have gaps, and they will always be incomplete.

The attention economy shows us that markets, especially in today’s digital world, are incomplete, unpredictable, and built to benefit the powerful at the expense of the many. We can no longer pretend that markets—whether they’re for goods, services, or attention—are truly efficient or fair.

The real question is: How long are we going to hold onto this illusion? Markets will always be flawed.

// Monday Morning chat with GPT-4o


We’ve been told that markets, if left alone, naturally lead to the best outcomes. Milton Friedman championed this idea, arguing that free markets optimize things for everyone. But in today’s world of TikTok, Onlyfans, and Bumble, this idea falls apart. The attention economy—designed to capture and exploit our focus—reveals the truth: markets don’t serve us. They exploit us.

And this isn’t just a flaw in how platforms operate—it’s a flaw in how markets as a whole are structured. Platforms run on incomplete information, ignore hidden costs, thrive on chaos, and are designed to keep us isolated, not connected. This reveals a deeper truth: markets are flawed by design.

Friedman’s free-market idea depends on a major assumption: that participants have all the information they need and make rational decisions. But the attention economy—where platforms serve us content based on what keeps us engaged—proves this wrong. Platforms don’t understand us; they only know what keeps us scrolling.

Instead of helping us make good choices, platforms optimize for engagement, often at the expense of our well-being. This is where Friedman’s theory collapses. In the attention economy, we’re not making informed choices—we’re reacting to content designed to manipulate our attention. And that’s not efficiency; it’s exploitation.

Just like markets assume we have all the information we need, platforms assume their algorithms can predict what we want. But the truth is, these algorithms work with incomplete knowledge. They show us what keeps us hooked, but they don’t know what we really need or value.

This isn’t just a tech problem—it’s a broader market failure. No market runs on perfect information. Whether it’s stocks, tokens or social media, decisions are always made with biased or missing data. The result? Both platforms and markets fail to fully serve the people involved.

Friedman’s theory also assumes that all costs are included in the price of a product or service. But in the attention economy, the real costs—our mental health, focus, and sense of community—are hidden. Platforms profit from our attention, but we pay the price in the form of anxiety, isolation, and distraction.

These hidden costs aren’t accidents; they’re part of the system. Just like traditional markets overlook environmental damage or labor exploitation, the attention economy ignores the psychological toll it takes on users. Platforms thrive by keeping us online longer, but the cost to society is steep.

Markets, like platforms, are supposed to be predictable. Friedman’s model assumes rational behavior, but in the attention economy, chaos reigns. Algorithms can’t predict what will go viral or how users will react. They chase engagement, but virality is unpredictable—one day it’s a meme, the next day it’s misinformation.

This mirrors the chaos in financial markets, where bubbles burst unpredictably, and trends shift overnight. Neither markets nor platforms can control the forces they’re trying to harness. Chaos, not rational decisions, drives them.

One of the most harmful flaws of the attention economy is its focus on individual engagement over the collective good. Platforms are built to keep us scrolling alone, not connecting with each other. They trap us in personalized bubbles, keeping us engaged while leaving us isolated.

This individualistic focus fragments society. Platforms claim to connect us, but in reality, they push us apart, each of us alone in our own feed. Just like markets prioritize individual profit over collective well-being, platforms prioritize engagement over building real communities.

Here’s where it gets more interesting. Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem proves that no system—whether it’s a market or a platform—can ever account for everything. It’s impossible for any system to be complete and efficient. Just like markets can’t capture all the variables that influence human behavior, algorithms will never fully understand or predict what we want.

The comforting myth that markets and platforms can be perfected is false. They will always have gaps, and they will always be incomplete.

The attention economy shows us that markets, especially in today’s digital world, are incomplete, unpredictable, and built to benefit the powerful at the expense of the many. We can no longer pretend that markets—whether they’re for goods, services, or attention—are truly efficient or fair.

The real question is: How long are we going to hold onto this illusion? Markets will always be flawed.