4 ms·

People write and create regardless of profit motive, it has been that way for thousands of years.

_DeadFred_ 2mo ago
Actually no. The original copyright laws were created in part because of the realities of needed profit motive to have high value writing done, time consuming compilation work done. It was even titled "An Act for the Encouragement of Learning". The thousands of years writing you are talking about was often funded by patrons, who kept the output in their private libraries to show off (and maybe lend out) for prestige. It was a horrible limitation of knowledge and ideas. Much worse than the profit motive, copyright based system that came after that spawned a new age of knowledge in which everyone had cheap access, and those that didn't had access to the (no longer just private) libraries. I'm sure the billionaire class would love a return to patronage based libraries, NDAs on authors of books, and the elitism they would feel with a return to private libraries locking away all kinds of knowledge that would happen if patronage become the only way authors could make money (such as with AI just regurgitating their works, or if the stupid 'do away with copyright' people got their way).
- nairboon 2mo ago
  It's not copyright that caused cheap access. The printing machine allowed for cheaper publications, that's what spawned the new age of knowledge. The raw materials and the duplication of knowledge was the bottleneck. With digital systems this cost is minuscule, but still there.
  - _DeadFred_ 2mo ago
    Disagree. The printing machine was killing the industry allowing copies where people earned nothing. Copyright was created to ensure quality works existed to be copied.
    - inigyou 2mo ago
      That's the stated purpose. What's the POSIWID?
- graemep 2mo ago
  Actually it grew out of censorship and monopolies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_Anne#Background https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_Anne#Background Cheap access came from the invention of cheap printing . The laws were passed to restrict it.
  - _DeadFred_ 2mo ago
    No, cheap books came from the invention of cheap printing. But the quality of works was going down because printers were just printing with zero copyright protections. Copyright is what brought the wealth of works worth reading that were then printed using cheap printing. If the only money is in private works for private libraries, that is where the quality stuff is going to go. Making the avenue of creating for the average person also the avenue for the most income was huge in creating our modern literature landscape.
    - graemep 2mo ago
      > Copyright is what brought the wealth of works worth reading that were then printed using cheap printing Evidence for this statement? > If the only money is in private works for private libraries, that is where the quality stuff is going to go. Evidence that this ever happened? > Making the avenue of creating for the average person also the avenue for the most income was huge in creating our modern literature landscape. That only leads to higher quality (as you claim) if your definition of higher quality is "what the average person buys".
watwut 2mo ago
People are way less likely to write if there is no one to read it. And blog were also monkey see monley do - people seen other peoples blogs and got inspired. When people wont see others blogs, they wont start writing own. When there will bw no ome to actually read it, they will go to do something else.
intended 2mo ago
I had a flippant answer which was “who ever wanted to write for a machine in the past thousands of years” But maybe that is the future. Every country starts erecting their own towers of babel that we talk at, and it constantly compresses our conversations down to the most effective distribution of weights. At some point talking at the machine becomes a high status job, and we give respect to the people who whisper to it the most.
- satvikpendem 2mo ago
  They don't write for machines, they write for themselves.
  - intended 2mo ago
    Why write publicly then? Theres many people I know who write notes that I know would be great to read. However they never publish them. So… are we saying that the only public writing in the future is meant to be consumed by the machine?
    - satvikpendem 2mo ago
      There are other replies in this thread that say why. It doesn't matter if robots read them as long as some humans do too.

Actually no. The original copyright laws were created in part because of the realities of needed profit motive to have high value writing done, time consuming compilation work done. It was even titled "An Act for the Encouragement of Learning". The thousands of years writing you are talking about was often funded by patrons, who kept the output in their private libraries to show off (and maybe lend out) for prestige. It was a horrible limitation of knowledge and ideas. Much worse than the profit motive, copyright based system that came after that spawned a new age of knowledge in which everyone had cheap access, and those that didn't had access to the (no longer just private) libraries. I'm sure the billionaire class would love a return to patronage based libraries, NDAs on authors of books, and the elitism they would feel with a return to private libraries locking away all kinds of knowledge that would happen if patronage become the only way authors could make money (such as with AI just regurgitating their works, or if the stupid 'do away with copyright' people got their way).

nairboon 2mo ago
It's not copyright that caused cheap access. The printing machine allowed for cheaper publications, that's what spawned the new age of knowledge. The raw materials and the duplication of knowledge was the bottleneck. With digital systems this cost is minuscule, but still there.
- _DeadFred_ 2mo ago
  Disagree. The printing machine was killing the industry allowing copies where people earned nothing. Copyright was created to ensure quality works existed to be copied.
  - inigyou 2mo ago
    That's the stated purpose. What's the POSIWID?
graemep 2mo ago
Actually it grew out of censorship and monopolies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_Anne#Background https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_Anne#Background Cheap access came from the invention of cheap printing . The laws were passed to restrict it.
- _DeadFred_ 2mo ago
  No, cheap books came from the invention of cheap printing. But the quality of works was going down because printers were just printing with zero copyright protections. Copyright is what brought the wealth of works worth reading that were then printed using cheap printing. If the only money is in private works for private libraries, that is where the quality stuff is going to go. Making the avenue of creating for the average person also the avenue for the most income was huge in creating our modern literature landscape.
  - graemep 2mo ago
    > Copyright is what brought the wealth of works worth reading that were then printed using cheap printing Evidence for this statement? > If the only money is in private works for private libraries, that is where the quality stuff is going to go. Evidence that this ever happened? > Making the avenue of creating for the average person also the avenue for the most income was huge in creating our modern literature landscape. That only leads to higher quality (as you claim) if your definition of higher quality is "what the average person buys".

watwut 2mo ago

People are way less likely to write if there is no one to read it. And blog were also monkey see monley do - people seen other peoples blogs and got inspired. When people wont see others blogs, they wont start writing own. When there will bw no ome to actually read it, they will go to do something else.

intended 2mo ago

I had a flippant answer which was “who ever wanted to write for a machine in the past thousands of years” But maybe that is the future. Every country starts erecting their own towers of babel that we talk at, and it constantly compresses our conversations down to the most effective distribution of weights. At some point talking at the machine becomes a high status job, and we give respect to the people who whisper to it the most.

satvikpendem 2mo ago
They don't write for machines, they write for themselves.
- intended 2mo ago
  Why write publicly then? Theres many people I know who write notes that I know would be great to read. However they never publish them. So… are we saying that the only public writing in the future is meant to be consumed by the machine?
  - satvikpendem 2mo ago
    There are other replies in this thread that say why. It doesn't matter if robots read them as long as some humans do too.