can you consume knowledge?
can you consume art?
can you posses those?
why is there a need of the person who possess such assets to "exhibit" them?
There seems to be "no value" or "diminishing value" in the act of acquiring such assets, and increasing value in the act of sharing

with others.
What about the act of creating such assets? Create art. Create knowledge. We have in fact commoditized the process, yet we are aware that the actual act of creation "is genius" "is awe inspiring". It can be "hard work" yet cannot be "paid by the hour".

If you'd ask the creator (they wouldn't hear your question because they are in the zone, and wouldn't be able to explain it afterwards) they certainly say it "isn't work"
Evolutionary economics inspired by evolutionary biology assumes the difference is that

economic models need to "account for knowledge". why wouldn't they "account for art"? It's clear what they mean is not "money makes the world go round" but "the products of human mind." Kuhn, Perez, any many others called this factor "innovation".

Human mind also produces loads of garbage, and pure evil. Even sound minds produce mind games to manipulate masses. There are ill minds, too. The Buddha once described the mind as a wild horse. We have no model of the mind other than what we thought of it:
http://www.humanconnectomeproject.org/ 

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mind-indian-buddhism/ So, no, I don't think Evolutionary Economics will have answers, although it catches well the "obvious in hindsight" problems of traditional economics: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/159144486.pdf Why do I think "Cryptoeconomics" is

worth my time then (I left double major Econ+CompSci, for the latter and was sure I will never stare at a simple curve ever again, yet here I am staring at bonding curves) ? Because we create a game in the machine that is the token economy. We let humans play it and

gather data. What can go wrong? Well, at least it's transparent and we can do nothing but learn (or not learn and be stuck in the same old movie like ICO frenzy and DeFi fever - but it is more transparent now and the house of cards fall faster and and engraved on the blockchain

for generations of students to learn and teach from. So what can go good? For the first time in economics history, the cryptoeconomists devised a machine and are encoding economic models. Homo Oeconomicus might have been a fallacy, the Machina Oeconomicus is not

It might help us even to better understand the human mind and it's creations (including the frenzy and fever). Mind the mindless tech talk here - everything can go wrong and we might produce that equivalent of the atom bomb with blockchains... data is dangerous

Engineering ethics is more valuable than the engineering itself then, yet democratizing the knowledge to engineer is even better - because then it is not only up to the engineer, but to every "user" to raise the flag.

But back to the inital questions: Humans are capable

(no it is even what makes us human) of producing goods and services, assets, that are priceless. With the Machina Oeconomicus we have a very real option to do value accounting and modeling of values at a human level, for the first time in history. Thanks to @PowerDada for

challenging my understanding and being one of the most inspirational "crypto projects" out there. They are inspirational because they see cryptoecnomics as a tool and are unwavering in what they value.

"Simple, clear purpose and principles give rise to complex and

intelligent behavior." This isn't an answer to the starting questions, yet a good enough compass.

Art, Knowledge, and Suffering being the ultimate and maybe single goods and services that will remain non-automateable "human produce" for a long time after machines and algorithms automated most of inhumane jobs.

...and Suffering as always is optional. Choose not to produce it