I looked at your buried comment and that last source is pretty cringe. I’m not saying I’m against the idea that trading isn’t exclusive to humans, but that last article is bad. A male spider doesn’t present food to a female spider to achieve “better sex”, it does so to successfully reproduce. The female spider is practicing sexual selection, they aren’t “trading”. I would argue we can’t understand their intent because they don’t have the cognitive capacity to have intent, and that’s what makes us different, and what fuels a trade.

The last example involving cleaner fish is a description of a mutualistic relationship. I think your assessments are somewhat contradictory as you’re applying the ways humans “deal with the laws of thermodynamics” (markets) to other animals when they simply don’t. Trading is fundamental to human survival because we live much more complex lives than other animals, by way of environment, shelter, food intake, or socially speaking; but do we need markets in order to trade? In order to survive?

Edit: I decided to comment bc you’re not really getting downvoted despite your unchecked opinions. It’s fine to have an opinion but to make sweeping comments about the similarities between transactional relationships in humans to ecological relationships with other living organisms is poetic at best. I don’t think anyone, no matter how educated, could make these accusations.