7 ms·

I think a more interesting story would be about the people that grind for years and years and never make it. You're left without a useful skill and no money, an

I think a more interesting story would be about the people that grind for years and years and never make it. You're left without a useful skill and no money, and probably a deficit on your mental health because you didn't go out and talk to people in real life for years. I think its not at all worth getting into as a career because making it big is like starting out as an actor, you have to know people. If you hit it big and are complaining about being burnt out, just walk away. Sorry that you pissed away your money and don't own a house, I guess? Could live pretty damn well on the money you made from it for a decade or more if you have self control, and have zero debt. Find something else to do in the mean time. What other career can you make as much money, with such a low barrier to entry in skill and capital? Pretty much every other job requires just as much sacrifice of your time with nowhere near the same earning potential. Most of the big earners started streaming within the last 5 years[2], and even then, the top 2000 streamers are making 100k+[1]. I heard YouTube streaming is paying even better now. 1. https://twitch.pages.dev/en https://twitch.pages.dev/en 2. https://twitchtracker.com/statistics/active-streamers https://twitchtracker.com/statistics/active-streamers

nigamanth 4y ago
This smart way to have cash and follow your passions is what needs to be inculcated in the future of tomorrow. Just by chasing and grinding on something with no results after several years then the chances are you (or whoever) won't make it.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
CobrastanJorji 4y ago
The folks who don't make it are an interesting group on their own. Something like 95% of streamers have under five viewers, and the majority of those have exactly zero viewers. Thinking about all those thousands of people broadcasting day in and out to exactly nobody is kind of fascinating. It's not like broadcasting on a ham radio or shouting into the aether or blogging on a little independent site thinking that maybe somebody might be reading it. They know that exactly zero people see it. And they do it for months and months. There are some interesting articles out there that look at the motivations and experiences of the zero viewer streamers: https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/16/17569520/twitch-streamers-zero-viewers-motivation-community https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/16/17569520/twitch-streamers... There are also some websites that send you to streams that nobody is watching: https://nobody.live https://nobody.live Anyway, not really your point, but a fascinating group of people to think about.
- fbdab103 4y ago
  Probably not all that different from musicians/artists/writers/bloggers who never attain any audience. However, the immediacy of the feedback would be soul crushing. Truly interesting.
  - quickthrower2 4y ago
    Your blog post today may be read tomorrow.
    - cableshaft 4y ago
      Twitch streams can be sent or uploaded to Youtube so they can be viewed later. Of course the couple that I bothered to do that with also have basically no views as well :)
  - Balgair 4y ago
    Mostly true for most academic papers as well. Not just the humanities, but the sciences too. Since you can track how many people actually clicked on the download button for a paper, you can get a sense of how many people actually read it. Only one of my few papers has ever been downloaded by someone not on the author's list (we can compare with each other). Granted, that one's been downloaded a lot. But still, most of that hard work and going back and forth with editors is for naught.
  - cultofmetatron 4y ago
    The difference is creating music, art, writing has its own intrinsic reward. I have a ton of photos on my instagram and barely any followers for the amount I put in. If I was just doing it for the likes, i would have given up on it a long time ago.
- tobr 4y ago
  > Something like 95% of streamers have under five viewers, and the majority of those have exactly zero viewers. Thinking about all those thousands of people broadcasting day in and out to exactly nobody is kind of fascinating. When you say the majority of 95% have exactly zero viewers, do you mean at a given point in time, or ever? That makes a big difference for how to think of their situation to me.
dmix 4y ago
Is Twitch earnings their primary source of income? They arent making income as a media personality outside in addition to the subscriptions and/or connections that could help them after? I have a feeling the same warning could be given to actors going to LA trying to make it. A percentage become dish washers after washing out in a couple years but tons who don't find a reliable pay cheque via work in the thousands of related jobs that help run the movie business. The personable ones could use their media skills in the wider business world (marketing/pr/events/etc). I guess you could say they are all in their parents house's bedrooms not touching grass 24/7 which is different than a failing actor, but being an internet personality is much more involved than just being a pro-gamer who falls off by 25.
- PurpleRamen 4y ago
  The endgame of twitch-income is getting sponsors and cooperations. Subs and donations are limited by your viewer-numbers and how many whales you can play. But even a small company has pockets which can compete with any whale one has. And you can have multiple companies at your hand, feeding you, if you are good enough.
jrmg 4y ago
Your last paragraph seems to have the opposite sentiment to your the first half of your first?
jatins 4y ago
> I think a more interesting story would be about the people that grind for years and years and never make it. I wonder the same for athletes. Was recently reading Nadal's biography and parts of book describe his routine in childhood and teenage. And my first thought on reading that was "what if he hadn't made it to the top?" because he essentially had no semblance of a regular childhood/teenage. Being out on the field at 5am day after day, year after year seems only worth it in hindsight if you make it to the top. I guess, in the end, Gita captured this as well: the only way to be able to put extraordinary effort is to not care about the outcome.
- holler 4y ago
  Seems like this could apply to startup founders as well.
  - jatins 4y ago
    Startups are much more team work as compared to success in sports. And success of many startups can be attributed to being in the right circles rather than founder's skill/grit. The modern day founder hero worship is exaggerated imo.
    - j33zusjuice 4y ago
      It seems like you’re downplaying the importance of teamwork in sports. There are very few who succeed in sports who aren’t team players. Most of them fizzle out before we ever hear about them. Otherwise, I agree.
  - emodendroket 4y ago
    You can always just get a job later in that case.
    - kaashif 4y ago
      This is true. Founding a startup probably makes one more employable for more jobs than training for tennis every day.
langsoul-com 4y ago
This is basically true of any creative endeavour. It takes an insane amount of time/effort with very high opportunity cost. I guess it's just a question of risk/desire. Are you willing to risk it for a chance, or opt for something more stable like an office job or the like. I think the world is shifting towards more stability, like how uni degree is for getting a job.
emodendroket 4y ago
Either it’s easy and nobody should complain or it’s hard and people are making a crazy investment with no idea about return. I don’t know if it’s so different than sports. Yeah, it’s better to be LeBron than a guy who was just short of being good enough for the pros. But playing at that level is not easy no matter how much you are being paid.
boomboomsubban 4y ago
>Most of the big earners started streaming within the last 5 years[2], and even then, the top 2000 streamers are making 100k+[1]. The leaked data reports earnings made over almost a two year period, 23 months to be exact. So the earning potential isn't quite that good, it's more like around 1000 people earning the US median income and 1000 above it
qikInNdOutReply 4y ago
Grind is also not the hacker mentality. One wants to move a mountain by carring it to another place, the other wants to find a stick, a small rift and cause an avalanch after a nice walk, that will redirect a river.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
underbrush 4y ago
The far majority of twitch streamers do not have some illustrious career waiting for them. People in big cities with competitive degrees are underrepresented on twitch relative to other areas. > Most of the big earners started streaming within the last 5 years I'm not sure what numbers you are referring to. There was a huge increasing in streaming and watching during the pandemic. Many of the big streamers are in their late 20s or even early 30s. Which is relatively old considering you can start streaming in your teens.
MomoXenosaga 4y ago
I disagree on the low barrier. Twitch is entertainment. You are a professional actor and clown. It's a real job just as hosting the Daily Show is a real job.
Havoc 4y ago
>You're left without a useful skill Not convinced that's 100% e.g. I've watched streamers keep ~50 people entertained on a stream for 3+ hours. Monologuing that long and still have people listening seems like there is definitely "something" there even if not easily transferable to an office job or whatever.

nigamanth 4y ago

This smart way to have cash and follow your passions is what needs to be inculcated in the future of tomorrow. Just by chasing and grinding on something with no results after several years then the chances are you (or whoever) won't make it.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

CobrastanJorji 4y ago

The folks who don't make it are an interesting group on their own. Something like 95% of streamers have under five viewers, and the majority of those have exactly zero viewers. Thinking about all those thousands of people broadcasting day in and out to exactly nobody is kind of fascinating. It's not like broadcasting on a ham radio or shouting into the aether or blogging on a little independent site thinking that maybe somebody might be reading it. They know that exactly zero people see it. And they do it for months and months. There are some interesting articles out there that look at the motivations and experiences of the zero viewer streamers: https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/16/17569520/twitch-streamers-zero-viewers-motivation-community https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/16/17569520/twitch-streamers... There are also some websites that send you to streams that nobody is watching: https://nobody.live https://nobody.live Anyway, not really your point, but a fascinating group of people to think about.

fbdab103 4y ago
Probably not all that different from musicians/artists/writers/bloggers who never attain any audience. However, the immediacy of the feedback would be soul crushing. Truly interesting.
- quickthrower2 4y ago
  Your blog post today may be read tomorrow.
  - cableshaft 4y ago
    Twitch streams can be sent or uploaded to Youtube so they can be viewed later. Of course the couple that I bothered to do that with also have basically no views as well :)
- Balgair 4y ago
  Mostly true for most academic papers as well. Not just the humanities, but the sciences too. Since you can track how many people actually clicked on the download button for a paper, you can get a sense of how many people actually read it. Only one of my few papers has ever been downloaded by someone not on the author's list (we can compare with each other). Granted, that one's been downloaded a lot. But still, most of that hard work and going back and forth with editors is for naught.
- cultofmetatron 4y ago
  The difference is creating music, art, writing has its own intrinsic reward. I have a ton of photos on my instagram and barely any followers for the amount I put in. If I was just doing it for the likes, i would have given up on it a long time ago.
tobr 4y ago
> Something like 95% of streamers have under five viewers, and the majority of those have exactly zero viewers. Thinking about all those thousands of people broadcasting day in and out to exactly nobody is kind of fascinating. When you say the majority of 95% have exactly zero viewers, do you mean at a given point in time, or ever? That makes a big difference for how to think of their situation to me.

dmix 4y ago

Is Twitch earnings their primary source of income? They arent making income as a media personality outside in addition to the subscriptions and/or connections that could help them after? I have a feeling the same warning could be given to actors going to LA trying to make it. A percentage become dish washers after washing out in a couple years but tons who don't find a reliable pay cheque via work in the thousands of related jobs that help run the movie business. The personable ones could use their media skills in the wider business world (marketing/pr/events/etc). I guess you could say they are all in their parents house's bedrooms not touching grass 24/7 which is different than a failing actor, but being an internet personality is much more involved than just being a pro-gamer who falls off by 25.

PurpleRamen 4y ago
The endgame of twitch-income is getting sponsors and cooperations. Subs and donations are limited by your viewer-numbers and how many whales you can play. But even a small company has pockets which can compete with any whale one has. And you can have multiple companies at your hand, feeding you, if you are good enough.

jrmg 4y ago

Your last paragraph seems to have the opposite sentiment to your the first half of your first?

jatins 4y ago

> I think a more interesting story would be about the people that grind for years and years and never make it. I wonder the same for athletes. Was recently reading Nadal's biography and parts of book describe his routine in childhood and teenage. And my first thought on reading that was "what if he hadn't made it to the top?" because he essentially had no semblance of a regular childhood/teenage. Being out on the field at 5am day after day, year after year seems only worth it in hindsight if you make it to the top. I guess, in the end, Gita captured this as well: the only way to be able to put extraordinary effort is to not care about the outcome.

holler 4y ago
Seems like this could apply to startup founders as well.
- jatins 4y ago
  Startups are much more team work as compared to success in sports. And success of many startups can be attributed to being in the right circles rather than founder's skill/grit. The modern day founder hero worship is exaggerated imo.
  - j33zusjuice 4y ago
    It seems like you’re downplaying the importance of teamwork in sports. There are very few who succeed in sports who aren’t team players. Most of them fizzle out before we ever hear about them. Otherwise, I agree.
- emodendroket 4y ago
  You can always just get a job later in that case.
  - kaashif 4y ago
    This is true. Founding a startup probably makes one more employable for more jobs than training for tennis every day.

langsoul-com 4y ago

This is basically true of any creative endeavour. It takes an insane amount of time/effort with very high opportunity cost. I guess it's just a question of risk/desire. Are you willing to risk it for a chance, or opt for something more stable like an office job or the like. I think the world is shifting towards more stability, like how uni degree is for getting a job.

emodendroket 4y ago

Either it’s easy and nobody should complain or it’s hard and people are making a crazy investment with no idea about return. I don’t know if it’s so different than sports. Yeah, it’s better to be LeBron than a guy who was just short of being good enough for the pros. But playing at that level is not easy no matter how much you are being paid.

boomboomsubban 4y ago

>Most of the big earners started streaming within the last 5 years[2], and even then, the top 2000 streamers are making 100k+[1]. The leaked data reports earnings made over almost a two year period, 23 months to be exact. So the earning potential isn't quite that good, it's more like around 1000 people earning the US median income and 1000 above it

qikInNdOutReply 4y ago

Grind is also not the hacker mentality. One wants to move a mountain by carring it to another place, the other wants to find a stick, a small rift and cause an avalanch after a nice walk, that will redirect a river.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

underbrush 4y ago

The far majority of twitch streamers do not have some illustrious career waiting for them. People in big cities with competitive degrees are underrepresented on twitch relative to other areas. > Most of the big earners started streaming within the last 5 years I'm not sure what numbers you are referring to. There was a huge increasing in streaming and watching during the pandemic. Many of the big streamers are in their late 20s or even early 30s. Which is relatively old considering you can start streaming in your teens.

MomoXenosaga 4y ago

I disagree on the low barrier. Twitch is entertainment. You are a professional actor and clown. It's a real job just as hosting the Daily Show is a real job.

Havoc 4y ago

>You're left without a useful skill Not convinced that's 100% e.g. I've watched streamers keep ~50 people entertained on a stream for 3+ hours. Monologuing that long and still have people listening seems like there is definitely "something" there even if not easily transferable to an office job or whatever.