4 ms·

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"

by 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?

by oblio 1y ago

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?