Comment by taurath
1 day ago
If people are making art to get rich and failing, it doesn’t kill artists, who’d be making art anyway, it kills the people trying to earn money from their art. Do we need Quad-A blockbuster Ubisoft/Bethesda/Sony/MS/Nintendo releases for their artistic merit, or their publishers/IP owners needs to make money off of it? Ditto the big4 movie studios. Those don’t really seem to matter very much. The whole idea of tastemakers, who they are and whether they should be trusted (indie v/s big studio, grass roots or intentionally cultivated) seems like it ebbs and flows. Right now I’d hate to be one of the bigs, because everything that made them a big is not working out anymore.
People are wanting to make a living by making art, not to get rich.
I highly recommend reading the book I mentioned as you don’t seem to have a particularly nuanced understanding of the actual struggles at play.
Perhaps an analogy you’ll understand is what happens to the value of a developer’s labour when that labour is in many ways replicated by AI and big AI companies actively work to undermine what makes your labour different by aggressively marketing that anyone can so what you so with their tools.
Isn't this just a result of technological progress? Technology has displaced entire fields of labor for... well, ever.
I'm not unsympathetic to the problems this introduces to those workers, but I'm really not sure how it could be prevented; we can of course mitigate the issues by providing more social support to those affected by such progress.
In the case of artistic expression becoming more accessible to more people, I have a hard time looking at it as anything but a net positive for society.
> In the case of artistic expression becoming more accessible to more people
The problem is that folks seem to be confused between artistic expression and actually good art. Let alone companies like Spotify cynically creating “art” so that they can take even more of the pie away from the actual artists.
1 reply →