> The fundamental problem isn't streaming, as much as it is that natural systems follow power law distributions I think that's an important truth to keep in mi

> The fundamental problem isn't streaming, as much as it is that natural systems follow power law distributions I think that's an important truth to keep in mind when discussing this. > That was just as true 20 years ago as it is today. Hmm. Let's consider 3 different periods of time. 1. Olden times before radio. To listen to music, you had to play it yourself, or go see it in person. 2. Radio and Records exist. 3. Internet streaming. Each artist has a problem along the lines of: how much of my time do I spend figuring out how to make money, and how much making music or performing? Obviously, after a certain point, it is way more efficient to let Warner Bros. do the marketing, etc. However, the power dynamic of this new business model means that that "natural" power law (if each musician were doing all the business stuff themselves), is more like a power-power law. Each step above increases the max payout to the Mozarts and the Jay-Zs, but more importantly, it concentrates power in the hands of the rights-holders. Among other things, now your cost of entry to the super-star lottery is to give up rights that would otherwise give you a better chance at a lower, but more certain return in another system. I agree that we can't go back. But the fact that someone twice as good may get 10 times the attention is not the only effect at play. In an ideal society, we get to choose how the market works. And it should probably work differently for businesses that have different functions in society. For example, some different classes might be Entertainment, the Internet, Power & Water utilities.