5 ms·

> If I copy your MP3, you still have your MP3 and haven't been deprived of anything. The world is actually just a better more abundant place now. It seems you

> If I copy your MP3, you still have your MP3 and haven't been deprived of anything. The world is actually just a better more abundant place now. It seems you haven't considered the point of view of, say, someone who makes music and sells recordings of it for a living. I hope you can imagine how it would sound to that person when you tell them that the world is "actually just a better more abundant place now" you have got their music without paying for it, and they're out of a livelihood. I think that, at best, it would sound like you haven't thought much at all about what you're saying and how it applies to the real world and the people in it.

dnautics 6y ago
What? There's plenty of musicians that feel as the gp. Even solo full length animated movie makers.
- manicdee 6y ago
  That's no comfort for the people trying to make a living from their work.
  - account42 6y ago
    And? People can adapt. [0] Creating laws to artificially restrict technological advancements in order to protect one specific class of jobs is insanity. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Obsolete_occupations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Obsolete_occupations
    - manicdee 6y ago
      I'm not sure how you expect content creators to create content when they're not creating content anymore. How do they "adapt" to putting food on the table when they're not getting paid for the work they do?
- yesenadam 6y ago
  Aside from the unhelpful "What?", that seems like DH4 Counterargument in pg's disagreement hierarchy[0], subtype "arguing against something slightly different from what the original author said". Presumably "someone who makes music and sells recordings of it for a living", the people I was talking about, won't "feel as the gp". It doesn't seem like your criticism really touched on what I said. (Maybe you are also assuming "No-one is entitled to make a living selling their music" or something like that.) [1] http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html
  - dnautics 6y ago
    I'm assuming no one is entitled to make money off of anything in particular, so yeah, music falls in that bin.
    - yesenadam 6y ago
      "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize." Sorry, but I'm convinced this exchange is pointless.
      - account42 6y ago
        > "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize." You literally were triggered by "What?" in your previous response so maybe you should take this guideline to heart yourself.
f1refly 6y ago
Thinking you could earn a living from music sales is like living in a dream land. As a musician you make your money with live shows and merch. 99% of music consumption is streaming and radio stations and both of those pay a fraction of a fraction of a cent per listen, buyers might as well pirate and you most likely wouldn't see a difference.
- yesenadam 6y ago
  > Thinking you could earn a living from music sales is like living in a dream land. Ok great, that's where I live, I guess. What type of music are you talking about there? Seems you have a very small range of musician in mind with those comments. Like, rock/pop music or whatever you call it. "merch"? Doesn't exist for most musicians, I guesstimate 99.999% It seems in these music "pirating" discussions, for their mental image of a musician, a lot of people imagine millionaire rock/pop musicians, signed to huge record labels, and they feel fine about screwing them however they can. I suggest they are a tiny, numerically-insignificant minority of the musicians in the world. And it seems to me that when you say "As a musician you make your money" you are thinking of these people.
  - f1refly 6y ago
    I buy most of my music on bandcamp when it's available there. The genres I'm buying range from indie-synthwave stuff to classic rock to death metal to jazz and folk. I love to give them my money if I enjoy the music enough, but honestly I consider it more of a symbolic gesture. The midnight had at some point a letter that their music sales are cool and all, but they can only make a living because people where coming to their shows. They made an exclusive deal with amazon to bridge some time during the pandemic, but things are going downhill for them currently. I heard the same from fiddlers green when I saw them live, telling us the live shows and the merch are the thing that keeps them running. So I've got two artists telling me the money is in performances and merch, in addition to the statistics about the payments from streaming companies.
  - account42 6y ago
    > "merch"? Doesn't exist for most musicians, I guesstimate 99.999% And that's a failure of those musicians. It does not mean that society should implement draconian measures to ensure that they have another specific way of being paid.
csallen 6y ago
You're assuming the only possible world is one in which musicians selling music is a viable business model. But the reality is that there are infinite business models that simply don't work, and it's perfectly fine. There was a time before you could copyright music and people still made music. That was perfectly fine, too. It's likely that there'd be a much stronger market around live performances and experiences, remixes, and lots of other stuff that's hard to imagine. I think you're neglecting to consider the complexity and self-organizational nature of markets. We don't really need a higher power to artificially create and protect specific jobs, especially around the arts.

dnautics 6y ago

What? There's plenty of musicians that feel as the gp. Even solo full length animated movie makers.

manicdee 6y ago
That's no comfort for the people trying to make a living from their work.
- account42 6y ago
  And? People can adapt. [0] Creating laws to artificially restrict technological advancements in order to protect one specific class of jobs is insanity. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Obsolete_occupations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Obsolete_occupations
  - manicdee 6y ago
    I'm not sure how you expect content creators to create content when they're not creating content anymore. How do they "adapt" to putting food on the table when they're not getting paid for the work they do?
yesenadam 6y ago
Aside from the unhelpful "What?", that seems like DH4 Counterargument in pg's disagreement hierarchy[0], subtype "arguing against something slightly different from what the original author said". Presumably "someone who makes music and sells recordings of it for a living", the people I was talking about, won't "feel as the gp". It doesn't seem like your criticism really touched on what I said. (Maybe you are also assuming "No-one is entitled to make a living selling their music" or something like that.) [1] http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html
- dnautics 6y ago
  I'm assuming no one is entitled to make money off of anything in particular, so yeah, music falls in that bin.
  - yesenadam 6y ago
    "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize." Sorry, but I'm convinced this exchange is pointless.
    - account42 6y ago
      > "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize." You literally were triggered by "What?" in your previous response so maybe you should take this guideline to heart yourself.

f1refly 6y ago

Thinking you could earn a living from music sales is like living in a dream land. As a musician you make your money with live shows and merch. 99% of music consumption is streaming and radio stations and both of those pay a fraction of a fraction of a cent per listen, buyers might as well pirate and you most likely wouldn't see a difference.

yesenadam 6y ago
> Thinking you could earn a living from music sales is like living in a dream land. Ok great, that's where I live, I guess. What type of music are you talking about there? Seems you have a very small range of musician in mind with those comments. Like, rock/pop music or whatever you call it. "merch"? Doesn't exist for most musicians, I guesstimate 99.999% It seems in these music "pirating" discussions, for their mental image of a musician, a lot of people imagine millionaire rock/pop musicians, signed to huge record labels, and they feel fine about screwing them however they can. I suggest they are a tiny, numerically-insignificant minority of the musicians in the world. And it seems to me that when you say "As a musician you make your money" you are thinking of these people.
- f1refly 6y ago
  I buy most of my music on bandcamp when it's available there. The genres I'm buying range from indie-synthwave stuff to classic rock to death metal to jazz and folk. I love to give them my money if I enjoy the music enough, but honestly I consider it more of a symbolic gesture. The midnight had at some point a letter that their music sales are cool and all, but they can only make a living because people where coming to their shows. They made an exclusive deal with amazon to bridge some time during the pandemic, but things are going downhill for them currently. I heard the same from fiddlers green when I saw them live, telling us the live shows and the merch are the thing that keeps them running. So I've got two artists telling me the money is in performances and merch, in addition to the statistics about the payments from streaming companies.
- account42 6y ago
  > "merch"? Doesn't exist for most musicians, I guesstimate 99.999% And that's a failure of those musicians. It does not mean that society should implement draconian measures to ensure that they have another specific way of being paid.

csallen 6y ago

You're assuming the only possible world is one in which musicians selling music is a viable business model. But the reality is that there are infinite business models that simply don't work, and it's perfectly fine. There was a time before you could copyright music and people still made music. That was perfectly fine, too. It's likely that there'd be a much stronger market around live performances and experiences, remixes, and lots of other stuff that's hard to imagine. I think you're neglecting to consider the complexity and self-organizational nature of markets. We don't really need a higher power to artificially create and protect specific jobs, especially around the arts.