Paul Graham has lost the plot • Hacker News Board

Re: Paul Graham has lost the plot

#101

Post by jes5199 » Wed, Mar 21, 2012, 7:06 PM UTC

GiraffeNecktie wrote: post #25

jes5199 wrote: post #9

"The distribution might be virtually free, but the production certainly isn’t." Well, all of the music available on iTunes, Amazon, and the Pirate Bay has already been produced, it just needs to be distributed. If I want to pay for music to be produced , I use Kickstarter. (Or go to concerts, since playing a song live could be considered a new production) It's a historical accident that we use charging for distributi…

"Well, all of the music available on iTunes, Amazon, and the Pirate Bay has already been produced, it just needs to be distributed." Just because it has already been produced, doesn't mean that it has already been paid for. The studio and the session musicians have probably been paid, but the artist should be compensated on a scale commensurate with the popularity of the work and that needs to be measured across what…

As a consumer, I don't actually have much power over who does and doesn't get paid for various things.

Re: Paul Graham has lost the plot

#102

Post by jfoutz » Wed, Mar 21, 2012, 7:06 PM UTC

vladd wrote: post #85

InclinedPlane wrote: post #27

I'll just cherry pick this gem here: "What would happen if creators couldn’t charge for their creations? The same as if you couldn’t charge for lines of computer code: there’d be less of it." Spotted the massive, gaping flaw in the argument yet? It's 2012, if you make this argument then I am done with you. Linux is how old? How much of the internet runs on it? Done. Edit: Wow, really? Why is this still a necessary ar…

Naming an example (Linux) doesn't contradict "there's be less of it".

That's right. Charging for software was microsoft's big invention. It took, what, 30 years to realize that the software had enough value beyond the hardware.

I guess the flip side is, if there was no free software, there would be no pay software.

Re: Paul Graham has lost the plot

#103

Post by rdtsc » Wed, Mar 21, 2012, 7:07 PM UTC

aamar wrote: post #36

rdtsc wrote: post #16

There is a difference between a prescriptive argument and descriptive (and I just made these up on the spot). A prescriptive argument admonishes others to do something. So for example he would admonish people to pirate because information is like smells. A descriptive argument describes what the situation is without necessarily telling others what to do. This is the argument that I see pg making. Basically the idea t…

But pg's argument is prescriptive. For example, it includes the question "Should people not be able to charge for content?" and then gives a (conditional) answer. There's nothing wrong with writing a prescriptive essay; it doesn't make it in any sense weaker. But it is prescriptive, and Rob's argument here is specifically with the prescriptive part of the argument--in other words, he argues that music is not so much…

I think it is prescriptive for the distributor and creators, but descriptive for consumers. He is not admonishing consumers to pirate, as it seems many have misunderstood, he just describes what is happening and what will happen with information. But he asks distributors and creators to change and adapt to a new way of doing things.

The original blog didn't claim pg was encouraging piracy directly, so my post was a bit off topic, but I wrote it because I found when discussing this essay/talk with others, many tend to draw that conclusion.

Re: Paul Graham has lost the plot

#104

Post by grok2 » Wed, Mar 21, 2012, 7:08 PM UTC

redthrowaway wrote: post #81

The author, and the content industry in general, are misunderstanding basic economics: Just because there is a cost to produce something does not mean that it has market value . pg was right in pointing out that the content industry is built on the economics of scarcity, and that this scarcity no longer exists. You could charge someone to see a movie in a theatre when doing so was the only way to see the movie. You c…

Not sure why you call it economics of scarcity. The distributors want control over the distribution method to make sure they are paid for whatever they are distributing, not to create scarcity. If something is popular, won't distributors try and sell as much of it as is possible.

Re: Paul Graham has lost the plot

#105

Post by jes5199 » Wed, Mar 21, 2012, 7:08 PM UTC

J3L2404 wrote: post #28

jes5199 wrote: post #9

"The distribution might be virtually free, but the production certainly isn’t." Well, all of the music available on iTunes, Amazon, and the Pirate Bay has already been produced, it just needs to be distributed. If I want to pay for music to be produced , I use Kickstarter. (Or go to concerts, since playing a song live could be considered a new production) It's a historical accident that we use charging for distributi…

>If I want to pay for music to be produced, I use Kickstarter. If I want to pay for software to be produced, I use kickstarter. Now I can download AutoCAD, Illustrator and Photoshop guilt free.

I actually have paid for software to be produced using Kickstarter. And I donate to open source projects, too.

I happen to use the GIMP, Inkscape, and FreeCAD for free, and I don't feel guilty about that.

Re: Paul Graham has lost the plot

#106

Post by jonnathanson » Wed, Mar 21, 2012, 7:08 PM UTC

I hear this argument a lot. I've heard it in comments sections on HN, on Reddit, and elsewhere. I've heard it from colleagues in the Entertainment business. I've heard it from friends who are artists and producers -- some established, and some just getting started.

Here's the thing: production needs to change. If production is too expensive to justify digital revenue streams, then either we need to get creative about revenue streams or we need to rethink the cost side of the business. I'm less concerned with whether we feel this is "right" or "wrong," as such concerns are largely irrelevant. Arguments about right and wrong are distractions, and they offer us little in the way of practicality.

What's relevant is that a shift has occurred in the marketplace, and now the players in the market needs to adapt to it. Adaptation isn't going to be easy, and the status quo will need to undergo a painful transition. But we need to adapt, one way or the other.

Hoping the genie gets sucked back into the bottle is not a business strategy. But rethinking the revenue and/or cost sides of the business is.

Re: Paul Graham has lost the plot

#107

Post by Luyt » Wed, Mar 21, 2012, 7:08 PM UTC

This reminds me of a medieval tale, telling the adventures of the Belgian scoundrel Tijl Uilenspiegel:

"Tijl was visiting the market, and noticed a food stand where a butcher was roasting chickens over a fire, spreading a delicious smell.

Tijl stood a while next to the barbecue, sniffing the exquisite smells. Then the butcher noticed him just standing there, sniffing, and not buying anything.

The butcher said: "Hey, you're enjoying the smell of my grilled chickens, not buying anything, you know what? You should pay me for the cooking smells of these chickens instead!"

Upon which Tijl produced his wallet, made tinkling noises with the coins, and replied: "I pay for the smell of these chickens with the sound of my coins!". Faced with such impertinence, the butcher got angry and chased a laughing Tijl away."

Re: Paul Graham has lost the plot

#108

Post by davidw » Wed, Mar 21, 2012, 7:09 PM UTC

redthrowaway wrote: post #81

The author, and the content industry in general, are misunderstanding basic economics: Just because there is a cost to produce something does not mean that it has market value . pg was right in pointing out that the content industry is built on the economics of scarcity, and that this scarcity no longer exists. You could charge someone to see a movie in a theatre when doing so was the only way to see the movie. You c…

Content is scarce if you think not just about distribution, but creation. As a thought experiment, if no one earned anything off of information goods, at all, then fewer of them would be produced.

Re: Paul Graham has lost the plot

#109

Post by DennisP » Wed, Mar 21, 2012, 7:09 PM UTC

"Graham doesn’t offer any alternatives"...ok, here's an alternative. Let the public pay for music creation in advance. When files are released, they function as advertisements to help the musician sell more creation.

Musicians can help the pledge process along by releasing low-quality or partial files, and releasing the full files once pledge targets are reached.

There's a game theory argument that this won't work, but million-dollar pledges on Kickstarter pretty much prove that it works just fine in the real world.

Re: Paul Graham has lost the plot

#110

Post by npsimons » Wed, Mar 21, 2012, 7:09 PM UTC

TL;DR: "Paul Graham has written some very insightful and entertaining essays, but I disagree with one of his more recent ones, so he has obviously 'lost the plot'. PS, I make my money from imaginary property, which is what the Paul Graham essay I don't like argues against."