NASA would define life as "A self-sustaining series of chemical reactions capable of extracting energy from its environment and capable of Darwinian evolution.<p>Self-sustaining?<p>Nope.<p>Chemical reactions?<p>Definitely not.<p>Capable of extracting energy from its environment?<p>Unless you count people plugging in GPUs as the Blockchain's doing, no.<p>Darwinian evolution?<p>Hell no.<p>Overall conclusion: No.
Some replies are responding to the title as if the author <i>literally</i> meant "living organisms".<p>Instead, I think it's clear that the author is speaking of an <i>interesting metaphor</i>.<p>It's similar to how we might talk about all the various Javscript libraries and framework flavor-of-the-month as a sort of "Darwinism" and "natural selection". E.g. it's a marketplace of coding ideas and the ones with staying power demonstrate "survival of the fittest".<p>Or to write about all the worldwide computers executing high frequency trades on the stock exchanges as an emergent "super-organism".