[bryanbuckley]

> What does digital scarcity even mean ?

In a world of trusted computing, it might mean some amazing HD+++ digital image being one-of-a-kind (and having some attestation/proof of origin, authorship, etc), even if there are lower res/quality versions out there for cheaper/free. It also might mean other granularities to accessing the data like functional permissions (e.g. for this version of the encrypted, wrapped data, the computer is only allowed to apply function X (265a1b..), or function Y (f00fe7..) is blacklisted, or the computer is allowed to view once or infinitely, etc). That might sound like shit to many, but certainly not to all.

[bubblethink]

That is still artificially scarce. It is not scarce in the sense a painting is scarce because the artist only made one. And even the artist cannot make an exact copy even if he/she wishes to. Anything digital is indistinguishable from its copies, at least as far as enjoying it is concerned. There may be some limited value of bragging rights in getting the first edition, or a signed edition, of something digital, which you can verify using elaborate signature schemes, but that's where the novelty ends.

[bryanbuckley]

I guess it's just semantics then, tomato tomato. One could theoretically make a digital painting with a DRM-enabled stack and could be left with only one (more likely to see DRM-enabled stacks coming to video/picture cameras, though). It's up for debate whether meat-space scarcity is more ... "authentic"? (higher effort to duplicate?) thanks to physics than something digital (e.g. DRM systems that might be more easily broken).