14 ms·

Artists need to buy groceries and retire some day--almost none of them successfully pull this off, it's like one in a million--but every day there's a dozen pos

Artists need to buy groceries and retire some day--almost none of them successfully pull this off, it's like one in a million--but every day there's a dozen posts on here about how greedy the arts industries are for trying to charge money for things. Well, no problem, in the near future you can just get a personal AI to make everything for you. The Arts will be wiped out completely. Time to celebrate? No human artist need ever get paid again, starting in 20 years, or will it be 50? Maybe it will take 75 and you won't get to personally enjoy it? All the money can go to amazon and to ISPs because they provide the REAL value, that of providing sharing or generation infrastructure Mix in the constant posts on here claiming that these tech companies get to make derivative works off of everyone's art, without compensating those artists, and, I don't know what to say

commandlinefan 3y ago
> almost none of them successfully pull this off, it's like one in a million That's pretty much always been the case, no matter how art was distributed, though - yet people still love creating it enough to take the gamble.
MichaelZuo 3y ago
One in a million still implies over 8000 successful artists at any given time. Assuming an average tenure of 20 years in the limelight, that's 32000 over the course of a 80 year lifespan, which is probably more than anyone will bother to listen to in a lifetime. Not to mention the tens of thousands of historic and famous artists. When put in that perspective it actually makes total sense why no one will bother paying to listen to the 50 000th most popular artist, the chances of any given person being more interested in the other 49 999 at any given time is approaching 100%.
- jononor 3y ago
  Assuming 100 different styles of music, there can then be 80 paid artists per style? Just 20 bands if a typical 4-piece. That is not so great for those that primarily listen to one or two styles. Today there are nearly 100'000 active bands within the metal genre alone.
  - MichaelZuo 3y ago
    Did you really read just the first sentence of my comment?
yowlingcat 3y ago
I don't like the posts castigating artists for trying to charge for things, but I do think that the financial woes from artists don't come from their pricing model or unfairness from middlemen distributors. Rather, I think they come from simple supply and demand economic imbalances. Because of how many more people want to be professional artists than have the capability to competitively operate at a professional level (inclusive of both raw artistic and second order marketing talent), there will never be enough demand to support anything but the very best of the artists who would like to make a living off of their product. But I also think that conflicts with the idea you just mentioned, that of being able to get a personal AI to make everything for you. AI has shown the ability to make a mediocre product that one can tolerate, but not a great product for personal consumption that would lead you to become a loyal fan. If anything, I think AI will take the grunt work out of all the tasks a great work an artist has to do, and let them focus on the parts that cannot be outsourced -- coming up with and distributing a great, differentiated product.
indymike 3y ago
> Artists need to buy groceries and retire some day--almost none of them successfully pull this off, it's like one in a million--but every day there's a dozen posts on here about how greedy the arts industries are for trying to charge money for things. I know a lot of artists, musicians, actors and even a painter or two who actually make a living from what they love. You know what none of them do? Make their living from people buying recordings or reproductions of their work. They all make money by playing gigs, performing and doing commissions. Some of them do really well, too. Oh, and AI is not going to replace the band on the patio, or the actress in a local production of "Crazy for You" any time soon.

commandlinefan 3y ago

> almost none of them successfully pull this off, it's like one in a million That's pretty much always been the case, no matter how art was distributed, though - yet people still love creating it enough to take the gamble.

MichaelZuo 3y ago

One in a million still implies over 8000 successful artists at any given time. Assuming an average tenure of 20 years in the limelight, that's 32000 over the course of a 80 year lifespan, which is probably more than anyone will bother to listen to in a lifetime. Not to mention the tens of thousands of historic and famous artists. When put in that perspective it actually makes total sense why no one will bother paying to listen to the 50 000th most popular artist, the chances of any given person being more interested in the other 49 999 at any given time is approaching 100%.

jononor 3y ago
Assuming 100 different styles of music, there can then be 80 paid artists per style? Just 20 bands if a typical 4-piece. That is not so great for those that primarily listen to one or two styles. Today there are nearly 100'000 active bands within the metal genre alone.
- MichaelZuo 3y ago
  Did you really read just the first sentence of my comment?

yowlingcat 3y ago

I don't like the posts castigating artists for trying to charge for things, but I do think that the financial woes from artists don't come from their pricing model or unfairness from middlemen distributors. Rather, I think they come from simple supply and demand economic imbalances. Because of how many more people want to be professional artists than have the capability to competitively operate at a professional level (inclusive of both raw artistic and second order marketing talent), there will never be enough demand to support anything but the very best of the artists who would like to make a living off of their product. But I also think that conflicts with the idea you just mentioned, that of being able to get a personal AI to make everything for you. AI has shown the ability to make a mediocre product that one can tolerate, but not a great product for personal consumption that would lead you to become a loyal fan. If anything, I think AI will take the grunt work out of all the tasks a great work an artist has to do, and let them focus on the parts that cannot be outsourced -- coming up with and distributing a great, differentiated product.

indymike 3y ago

> Artists need to buy groceries and retire some day--almost none of them successfully pull this off, it's like one in a million--but every day there's a dozen posts on here about how greedy the arts industries are for trying to charge money for things. I know a lot of artists, musicians, actors and even a painter or two who actually make a living from what they love. You know what none of them do? Make their living from people buying recordings or reproductions of their work. They all make money by playing gigs, performing and doing commissions. Some of them do really well, too. Oh, and AI is not going to replace the band on the patio, or the actress in a local production of "Crazy for You" any time soon.