3 ms·
Yes, because many believe art to be a higher calling than some stupid new gadget or cloud service. While I don't really want patrons or VCs ruling the scene, a
by tomc1985 11y ago
Yes, because many believe art to be a higher calling than some stupid new gadget or cloud service.
While I don't really want patrons or VCs ruling the scene, and would much rather let the artists reign, artists generally don't have jobs (VCs took 'em) and so they don't have much money, so they can only do so much to support themselves. Enter the patron.
- drewstiff 11y agoCool why don't you go ahead and do that instead of expecting someone else to do it? It's easy to say "someone else should pay for this without expecting anything in return but the glory of art". People would rather make more money from their money than not. If you feel that strongly, go and break the cycle. If your personal wealth is not enough to make a difference* by doing so then I don't see how you can go giving out your "solution" which is just getting someone else to pay and them not have any say in how their money is being spent. *Disclaimer: mine is not either