4 ms·

> Systems that don't allow people to extract value from the hard work they put into collective advancement [...] one's going to spend all day making candy and p

• pschuegr 3y ago
  "Maybe the future model in business and sales is more like the academic researcher" funny how nobody ever suggests that.
  • zztop44 3y ago
    To the contrary, the future of the academic researcher is business and sales.
• cpill 3y ago
  yeah, but they also get to work on what they love as opposed to what ever the corporate interest currently is. it's rare you get paid will for doing what you love i.e. music, teaching, designing hand bags etc
  • karencarits 3y ago
    Well, researchers usually have to get their own grants and must thus work on whatever various funding sources deem worthy. Further, academic positions typically have duties that researchers may not like - administration, reporting, teaching, etc
• chefandy 3y ago
  No it's not-- researchers generally get paychecks. Even if they're small, they can pay for their housing and buy their kid food. Artists don't see a single red cent from their work being sucked up into some AI content blender. Their work is being taken and used-- often in service of others making a profit-- and they receive nothing. Not even credit. Edit: Well, they don't receive nothing-- they get a bunch of people telling them they're selfish jerks for wanting to support themselves with their work.
  • cwkoss 3y ago
    The majority artists never receive a single red cent from the humans who consume their work. This is how it has always been, and fundamental to the economics of art. Things people are willing to do regardless of financial compensation rarely pay well.
    • chefandy 3y ago
      Putting commercial artists, aspiring fine artists, and hobby artists in the same bin doesn't make sense. There are a ton of career commercial artists that make money solely off of their work. If you think there are more aspiring career fine artists that don't end up making it than career commercial artists, you're wrong. They're not even in the same business.
      • cwkoss 3y ago
        Did you notice how you called all of them artists?
        • chefandy 3y ago
          You're not serious, right? How about sandwich artists? Custodial artists? Con artists? Are Social engineers, microsoft certified systems engineers, cisco certified security engineers, mechanical engineers, technical support engineers, train engineers, and agricultural engineers all functionally and economically equivalent? Are professional cooks and home cooks economically equivalent because they're both cooks?
          • cwkoss 3y ago
            Nobody is necessarily owed money for creating art, regardless of whether it was done by hand or with machines (unless they were specifically commissioned to create the work). The economics of art are subject to market forces, and they always have been - long before AI became an additional factor (among many others) in why an artist may not earn a living from their art. Deviantart in the 00s was a huge repository of art people were mostly making for free. Some people got lucky and turned that into a full time occupation, but the vast majority didn't.
• munificent 3y ago
  PhDs and professors are paid a living wage (though less so over time as federal funding for higher institutions has dwindled). Academia is a carefully constructed system whose incentive structure is based on highly visible explicitly measured citations and reputation. People aren't generally just trying to maximize wealth. They're trying to maximize their sense of personal value, which tends to be a combination of wealth, autonomy, and social prestige. Academics (and some creative fields) tend to be biased towards those who prioritize prestige over wealth.