3 ms·
The landscape is shifting yes, and it's harder to make money. But consider that the last 150 years of mass literacy and spare time to consume vast quantities o
by dasil003 10y ago
The landscape is shifting yes, and it's harder to make money. But consider that the last 150 years of mass literacy and spare time to consume vast quantities of media is already a historical anomaly. If you look at the sheer quantity of culture produced and consumed, it's hard to see it as anything but a golden age. The fact that it's harder to make money in these conditions makes perfect economic sense.
But on the positive side, I think this gives us a helpful sign post on the way to UBI/post-scarcity society. Consider that one of the biggest political impediments to UBI is not just the puritan work ethic as applied to others, but perhaps even more fundamental is the individual's own need to feel useful. De-coupling creative output from ones livelihood does not necessarily have to be a terrible thing.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- visarga 10y agoPeople can care for their own needs, or team up to care for the needs of their community. There is still work to do. Some communities could become self reliant, also making use of technologies such as 3d-printing, automation and solar panels. It would make people the creators of their own future, instead of passive recipients.
- milesrout 10y agoWhether or not you think that 'the last 150 years [...] is a historical anomaly' is irrelevant. The fact is that it was better, and there's no legitimate reason that it should now be worse except for the anticompetitive actions of a few big corporations that loss lead by providing expensive-to-produce services for free to eliminate competition.