5 ms·

It's being redefined in such a way that 2-3 very large entities get to hold the means of production. It's a very convenient redefinition for them.

teitoklien 1y ago
[flagged]
- gloosx 1y ago
  If your focus is to solve the problem, then it makes sense to treat the process as secondary. The tools are just means to an end. This view also aligns with how generative AI is marketed – it's a way to accelerate realization, not a way to focus on the act of crafting. That said, outcome-first thinking does run the risk of disconnection, and our current culture is all about disconnection.
  - teitoklien 1y ago
    Even the process is more democratized now, Want to learn coding ? Build out your app idea first with replit -> Then export the codebase into your computer -> Run claude code on it and ask it to scan all the files and describe the tech stack to you and how it operates while giving you all the major components you need to learn to understand it with youtube channel and book recommendations for each topic + work exercises -> Use perplexity deep research once a week to further research every topic as you start to learn them If you’re a busy man/woman make gumloop or lindyai workflow to check your calendar and pack in timeslots to do all of this learning, and then auto send you worksheets via email as homework to test you skills All of this for a price of 1/15th of a college degree (not even an expensive college) This is not hypothetical conjecture I do this daily. So everyone has now 1) Low cost access to build stuff with one prompt to realise the value of tools 2) A personal tutor that can then help you scour the depths of the craft and force you to practice and learn deeply now with your added motivation of knowing what’s possible with building stuff So it has the potential to connect us more too, it’s upto humans to choose whether they do at the end tho. That is their liberty.
    - gloosx 1y ago
      This raises another interesting question to think about: if everyone has (1) low-cost access to build anything, and (2) low-cost access to learn how to build anything at the same time... ...what do you think a human would choose the most?
      - teitoklien 1y ago
        Hence said is their liberty, Im not contesting what you’re worried about. That idiocracy will rise and our nextgen will only have surface level thoughts with AI being more and more being the subtle decider of every human’s choice in the background. That is probably the more likelier possibility. However it just shows the lack of philosophy in our modern times, people don’t do things they are lazy about and a Choice between the easy way and hard way is no longer a choice for majority the easy way’s dangling carrot is the final ultimatum. I think i’ll leave it at the thought that as time progresses to find value in day to day life, to force ourselves to choose the right thing, philosophy will again have to become a much stronger actor in our lives, or else we’d all drive off a cliff at current rate. At the end what happens will be decided by choice and liberty of humans as their choices expand.
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
- oblio 1y ago
  That's step one, and you are right. Step two is... sure, every pleb can now create art. That devalues art. More than that, that makes for a "winner takes all" marketplace. So even fewer people than now benefit from it. More than that, guess who wins out: middlemen, the marketplace owners. Read the Black Swan by Nassim Taleb, especially the chapters about Extremistan and Mediocristan. Basically every time we invent something that scales and unlocks something for a great amount of people, we commoditize it and the quality of life for the average person in that field goes down while the leeches, pardon me, the middle men, are the only ones that become constantly rich, after the initial struggle to achieve market dominance (so when the market matures).
  - teitoklien 1y ago
    Tell that to the kings in medieval times who were the only ones who could afford music from finest crafts men and silk shirts This allowed people in those crafts to be very rich. Then came the evil leeches of middle men who brought cheap fine clothes for the masses and music in the hands of every broke college kid in his dorm room. So evil ! Get the sarcasm ? Calling ability for masses to do more things is somehow horrible is elitist, calling the people who make that possible leeches is just elitism in velvet glove. As long as the majority gets more value in their daily life, world is better.
    - jplusequalt 1y ago
      >Calling ability for masses to do more things is somehow horrible is elitist What are they doing other than consuming with extra bells and whistles tacked on to it? I'm sorry, but it's not art.
    - oblio 1y ago
      The problem, as usual, is one of scale. Quantity has a quality all its own, and all that. We maybe needed to go from 1 artist in 1 million people to 1 artist in 10 000 people. We do *not* need to go from 1 artist in 10 people. And regarding "cheap fine clothes", that was sort of fine. But what about when cars drive themselves (16.2 million persons - 10.3% of the U.S. labor force works in transportation)? AND What about when software mostly writes itself (4,4 million persons)? AND What about when stuff mostly manufactures itself (13 million persons)? AND ... ? (repeat ad-nauseam for every field upended right now by AI) If you think MAGA was bad (MAGA being mostly caused by manufacturing jobs being moved away/automated) what do you think will happen when 40% of the population is unemployed and unemployable, forever?
- ZoomZoomZoom 1y ago
  > I make songs daily Sorry for being blunt, but you do not. You receive some music matching your request from a service offered by an entity which aims to control as much of content creation and distribution as possible, up to total monopolization. > I’m not a musician... Now I can with $10-$15 / month. If you want to create music, do it, it doesn't require much money. If you just want to listen, there's literally thousands of authors creating all kinds of authentic, sincere, daring, skillfully performed, carefully mixed music, giving it away for next to nothing and still striving to find their listeners. What you pay for is avoiding the effort of finding what suits you.
  - teitoklien 1y ago
    No amigo, no artist out there made a japanese song on my anime obsessed schoolteacher friend and his life. When he received that song from me, he was super excited for next 3-5 days and still listens to it and flexes them to their friends. Same thing happened with a lot of my other friends and me too, I have an apple shortcut script that generates songs for me daily based on my routine for that day pulled from todoist.com I still listen to and pay for others music and songs, but this experience with AI is entirely different. What I pay for is not avoiding effort of finding what suits me but creating what suits me. > You receive some music matching your request from a service offered by an entity which aims to control as much of content creation and distribution as possible, up to total monopolization. What I receive is a high fidelity song made from prompts that i’m given full ownership of , when pooled at scale between all users allows people to make their own song generators with GPUs. Its very nature is the opposite of monopoly. I’d love to hear how you think the big 3 corps (Universal, Sony, etc) who own all the music almost globally are not a monopoly ? Never had an experience where your spotify or apple music streaming albums disappear randomly due to those big 3 corps ? My friend’s song of himself will never disappear that mp3 file he can store on a pen drive, load ig anywhere, gift to anyone. How is that the “monopoly” ?
    - ZoomZoomZoom 1y ago
      > when pooled at scale between all users allows people to make their own song generators with GPUs. I can assure you, local generation is to become a fringe activity, same as self-hosting web services, only worse, because the quality gap (which in case of software is often negligible) will be insurmountable. > I’d love to hear how you think the big 3 corps (Universal, Sony, etc) who own all the music almost globally are not a monopoly? It's not a monopoly, it's a cartel. Luckily, they don't own everything, though, too much they do. > no artist out there made a japanese song on my anime obsessed schoolteacher friend and his life. Ok, what you describe is commissioning. Yeah, you can't argue with the fact it now can be done almost free and is becoming good enough for most, but you have to keep in mind, this process had been feeding a considerable amount of artists who do it to keep producing their art. Cutting this source of income is not wrong per se, but the consequences are the opposite of supporting the diversity and abundance in arts.

teitoklien 1y ago

[flagged]

gloosx 1y ago
If your focus is to solve the problem, then it makes sense to treat the process as secondary. The tools are just means to an end. This view also aligns with how generative AI is marketed – it's a way to accelerate realization, not a way to focus on the act of crafting. That said, outcome-first thinking does run the risk of disconnection, and our current culture is all about disconnection.
- teitoklien 1y ago
  Even the process is more democratized now, Want to learn coding ? Build out your app idea first with replit -> Then export the codebase into your computer -> Run claude code on it and ask it to scan all the files and describe the tech stack to you and how it operates while giving you all the major components you need to learn to understand it with youtube channel and book recommendations for each topic + work exercises -> Use perplexity deep research once a week to further research every topic as you start to learn them If you’re a busy man/woman make gumloop or lindyai workflow to check your calendar and pack in timeslots to do all of this learning, and then auto send you worksheets via email as homework to test you skills All of this for a price of 1/15th of a college degree (not even an expensive college) This is not hypothetical conjecture I do this daily. So everyone has now 1) Low cost access to build stuff with one prompt to realise the value of tools 2) A personal tutor that can then help you scour the depths of the craft and force you to practice and learn deeply now with your added motivation of knowing what’s possible with building stuff So it has the potential to connect us more too, it’s upto humans to choose whether they do at the end tho. That is their liberty.
  - gloosx 1y ago
    This raises another interesting question to think about: if everyone has (1) low-cost access to build anything, and (2) low-cost access to learn how to build anything at the same time... ...what do you think a human would choose the most?
    - teitoklien 1y ago
      Hence said is their liberty, Im not contesting what you’re worried about. That idiocracy will rise and our nextgen will only have surface level thoughts with AI being more and more being the subtle decider of every human’s choice in the background. That is probably the more likelier possibility. However it just shows the lack of philosophy in our modern times, people don’t do things they are lazy about and a Choice between the easy way and hard way is no longer a choice for majority the easy way’s dangling carrot is the final ultimatum. I think i’ll leave it at the thought that as time progresses to find value in day to day life, to force ourselves to choose the right thing, philosophy will again have to become a much stronger actor in our lives, or else we’d all drive off a cliff at current rate. At the end what happens will be decided by choice and liberty of humans as their choices expand.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
oblio 1y ago
That's step one, and you are right. Step two is... sure, every pleb can now create art. That devalues art. More than that, that makes for a "winner takes all" marketplace. So even fewer people than now benefit from it. More than that, guess who wins out: middlemen, the marketplace owners. Read the Black Swan by Nassim Taleb, especially the chapters about Extremistan and Mediocristan. Basically every time we invent something that scales and unlocks something for a great amount of people, we commoditize it and the quality of life for the average person in that field goes down while the leeches, pardon me, the middle men, are the only ones that become constantly rich, after the initial struggle to achieve market dominance (so when the market matures).
- teitoklien 1y ago
  Tell that to the kings in medieval times who were the only ones who could afford music from finest crafts men and silk shirts This allowed people in those crafts to be very rich. Then came the evil leeches of middle men who brought cheap fine clothes for the masses and music in the hands of every broke college kid in his dorm room. So evil ! Get the sarcasm ? Calling ability for masses to do more things is somehow horrible is elitist, calling the people who make that possible leeches is just elitism in velvet glove. As long as the majority gets more value in their daily life, world is better.
  - jplusequalt 1y ago
    >Calling ability for masses to do more things is somehow horrible is elitist What are they doing other than consuming with extra bells and whistles tacked on to it? I'm sorry, but it's not art.
  - oblio 1y ago
    The problem, as usual, is one of scale. Quantity has a quality all its own, and all that. We maybe needed to go from 1 artist in 1 million people to 1 artist in 10 000 people. We do *not* need to go from 1 artist in 10 people. And regarding "cheap fine clothes", that was sort of fine. But what about when cars drive themselves (16.2 million persons - 10.3% of the U.S. labor force works in transportation)? AND What about when software mostly writes itself (4,4 million persons)? AND What about when stuff mostly manufactures itself (13 million persons)? AND ... ? (repeat ad-nauseam for every field upended right now by AI) If you think MAGA was bad (MAGA being mostly caused by manufacturing jobs being moved away/automated) what do you think will happen when 40% of the population is unemployed and unemployable, forever?
ZoomZoomZoom 1y ago
> I make songs daily Sorry for being blunt, but you do not. You receive some music matching your request from a service offered by an entity which aims to control as much of content creation and distribution as possible, up to total monopolization. > I’m not a musician... Now I can with $10-$15 / month. If you want to create music, do it, it doesn't require much money. If you just want to listen, there's literally thousands of authors creating all kinds of authentic, sincere, daring, skillfully performed, carefully mixed music, giving it away for next to nothing and still striving to find their listeners. What you pay for is avoiding the effort of finding what suits you.
- teitoklien 1y ago
  No amigo, no artist out there made a japanese song on my anime obsessed schoolteacher friend and his life. When he received that song from me, he was super excited for next 3-5 days and still listens to it and flexes them to their friends. Same thing happened with a lot of my other friends and me too, I have an apple shortcut script that generates songs for me daily based on my routine for that day pulled from todoist.com I still listen to and pay for others music and songs, but this experience with AI is entirely different. What I pay for is not avoiding effort of finding what suits me but creating what suits me. > You receive some music matching your request from a service offered by an entity which aims to control as much of content creation and distribution as possible, up to total monopolization. What I receive is a high fidelity song made from prompts that i’m given full ownership of , when pooled at scale between all users allows people to make their own song generators with GPUs. Its very nature is the opposite of monopoly. I’d love to hear how you think the big 3 corps (Universal, Sony, etc) who own all the music almost globally are not a monopoly ? Never had an experience where your spotify or apple music streaming albums disappear randomly due to those big 3 corps ? My friend’s song of himself will never disappear that mp3 file he can store on a pen drive, load ig anywhere, gift to anyone. How is that the “monopoly” ?
  - ZoomZoomZoom 1y ago
    > when pooled at scale between all users allows people to make their own song generators with GPUs. I can assure you, local generation is to become a fringe activity, same as self-hosting web services, only worse, because the quality gap (which in case of software is often negligible) will be insurmountable. > I’d love to hear how you think the big 3 corps (Universal, Sony, etc) who own all the music almost globally are not a monopoly? It's not a monopoly, it's a cartel. Luckily, they don't own everything, though, too much they do. > no artist out there made a japanese song on my anime obsessed schoolteacher friend and his life. Ok, what you describe is commissioning. Yeah, you can't argue with the fact it now can be done almost free and is becoming good enough for most, but you have to keep in mind, this process had been feeding a considerable amount of artists who do it to keep producing their art. Cutting this source of income is not wrong per se, but the consequences are the opposite of supporting the diversity and abundance in arts.