4 ms·
> so somehow the arts is above the telegraph operators or weavers? Yes, obviously. We haven't found 40,000 year old telegraph stations in caves. No one thinks
by tveita 4y ago
> so somehow the arts is above the telegraph operators or weavers?
Yes, obviously. We haven't found 40,000 year old telegraph stations in caves. No one thinks weaving is an intrinsic part of being human.
The cat is out of the bag, but we should think very carefully about what we're leaving behind before we embrace an artless society.
> Just because something is difficult to do, doesn't automatically mean that people need to be paying for it to allow it to continue to exist. If it isn't profitable, stop doing it, rather than demand the world be changed to allow for it to continue.
This I find positively pro-dystopian. Who cares about reality when we can get regurgitated fakes generated much cheaper? Just write "crying woman bleeds from head in front of ruined building, warzone (pulitzer) [trending on Flickr]" in the little text box, click generate, ship it, and go for coffee.
- CapsAdmin 4y ago> This I find positively pro-dystopian. Who cares about reality when we can get regurgitated fakes generated much cheaper? Who cares about playing against a chess player when you can just play against an AI opponent for free on your computer? Who cares about going to a fancy bar when you can just drink at home for less? Who cares about buying expensive concert tickets when you can just watch a recorded version for free on the internet later? Who cares about buying a luxury car when a basic model gets you from A to B just as well? . People like you and many many others who think these questions are dumb will be the primary market for art.