3 ms·
Uh, you’re not actually required to watch something just because it exists. Some subset of people not liking content isn’t, in and of itself, reason to stifle p
by dougabug 4y ago
Uh, you’re not actually required to watch something just because it exists. Some subset of people not liking content isn’t, in and of itself, reason to stifle peoples ability to create said content.
The job of a literature professor is not to protect Literature by ensuring that inadequate students are never allowed to write.
If some combination of AI and community driven filtering can prevent sub-par works from entering your queue, you are no worse off.
On the other hand, some scripts like Severance, which languished for years on the best-scripts-never-made list, would likely never have been (finally) made but for the vast expansion of content creation due to the rise of streaming. In fact, if only a dozen movies were allowed to be made each year, they would probably all be Marvel movies or something with similar mass appeal. Most of the truly innovative work appears at the margins, hence expanding the margins is more likely to yield groundbreaking art (along with a ton of crap).
- peoplefromibiza 4y ago> Uh, you’re not actually required to watch something just because it exists believe it or not, if the money goes all in one direction, you're at one point between a rock and a hard place when it's about choice. > The job of a literature professor is not to protect Literature by ensuring that inadequate students are never allowed to write. But the job of a film production company is not to produce as much content as possible, but taking the financial risk to produce something that will make an impression.