I read somewhere that after it took off, people started making copycat sites -- which inevitably sold about 6 pixels each. I sometimes wonder if those copycat site people were surprised that their sites didn't do as well, when their pixels were just as good.
Considering that one of the common critiques of Bitcoin is "Why should it have value when anyone can make one?" It seems quite a lot of people don't grasp that when people have a choice of interaction mechanism, there is value in going where the people already are.
I guess the counterpoint to that, for both Crypto and Pixel sites, is that the cost of making one is low enough that someone could do it not expecting it to do well and is just taking a punt on the non-zero chance it will do well.
For the rest of us, we are probably better off ignoring the many insignificant instances. They are, for the most part truly insignificant. You may stumble across one once in a while, but really you would have to go looking specifically for them to be annoyed by how many there are.
