Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Creative workers deserve better than a choice as to who rips them off

pluralistic.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 133 posts

Re: Creative workers deserve better than a choice as to who rips them off

#41

Post by guccigav »

paulpauper wrote: post #5

Yeah this is why despite office jobs sometimes being described as 'soul-crushing' , the alternatives are not that great either. Service sector work means bad managers and bad customers. Creative works means non-paying or overly demanding clients and inconsistency of work/pay. Another problem is success at creative work typically requires top talent . Most people who aspire to be creatives cannot outcompete GPT/AI whe…

A job is a job, construction jobs are physically demanding although pay can be competitive for the bar of entry, pilots can be a fun and prestigious career but your trade-off is your sleep schedule and days away from home every week. I vaguely remember Richard Thaler published this research on risk as the determinant for career earning.

Re: Creative workers deserve better than a choice as to who rips them off

#42

Post by anigbrowl »

Rinzler89 wrote: post #32
MourYother wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unironically stealing this for pasta; what a content.

It's flagged, can you share it?

You can turn on 'showdead' on your HN user page. It's more worth it than not in my experience.

Re: Creative workers deserve better than a choice as to who rips them off

#43

Post by wincy »

MourYother wrote: post #26
Dalewyn wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Why should non-creatives go along with this? We shouldn't. Art has historically been vastly overvalued and I like that its perceived/demanded value has been sharply declining over the past several decades and especially now with the advent of "AI". I'm sorry if anyone reading this is an artist and I just twisted your pantaloons, but artists don't serve any valuable role in society. Artists exist strictly because soc…

I don't think you realize what a hellscape the world without art would be.

We’d go outside? Derive pleasure from being around people near us instead of seeking external validation and watching shows crafted by Hollywood midwits? Maybe we’d have more hobbies and do sports?

Re: Creative workers deserve better than a choice as to who rips them off

#44

Post by bequanna »

MourYother wrote: post #22
pfdietz wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about no? The evidence is that markets are essential. Attempts to use central planning instead have been universally disastrous, for reasons that were predicted ahead of time.

[flagged]

Central planning of anything is generally very inefficient and results in the concentration of power.

So far, we haven’t been able to find a way to concentrate power without corruption. The lesson is: only give the government as much control as necessary, never more.

In a system that is more socialist, the people forfeit their power to the party. Super easy for one party to dominate in these systems so votes mean little and you enter a doom loop of inefficiency caused by corruption.

In a system that is more capitalistic and consumer-based, the people retain a good amount of their power through purchasing choices. It is also tough for any one political party to take complete control, so the people also retain power through votes.

Re: Creative workers deserve better than a choice as to who rips them off

#45

Post by SR2Z »

MourYother wrote: post #26
Dalewyn wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Why should non-creatives go along with this? We shouldn't. Art has historically been vastly overvalued and I like that its perceived/demanded value has been sharply declining over the past several decades and especially now with the advent of "AI". I'm sorry if anyone reading this is an artist and I just twisted your pantaloons, but artists don't serve any valuable role in society. Artists exist strictly because soc…

I don't think you realize what a hellscape the world without art would be.

Humans create art like snails exude slime. Not getting paid for art doesn't mean no art is gonna get made.

Re: Creative workers deserve better than a choice as to who rips them off

#46

Post by portaouflop »

rayiner wrote: post #33
pfdietz wrote: post #4

What this is saying is that creativity is privileged and (unlike other forms of labor) should be given more than the market says it's worth. Why should non-creatives go along with this?

It’s especially hard to defend given that the barriers to entry for creatives today (thanks to cheap editing equipment and Internet distribution) is extremely low.

The barrier to getting paid is significantly higher though, so in the end it’s more or less the same: if you want to make a living off creative work you’re going to have a hard time

Re: Creative workers deserve better than a choice as to who rips them off

#47

Post by nradov »

MourYother wrote: post #22
pfdietz wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about no? The evidence is that markets are essential. Attempts to use central planning instead have been universally disastrous, for reasons that were predicted ahead of time.

[flagged]

What specific market regulations would you suggest in this industry?

Re: Creative workers deserve better than a choice as to who rips them off

#48

Post by vunderba »

Dalewyn wrote: post #14
pfdietz wrote: post #4

What this is saying is that creativity is privileged and (unlike other forms of labor) should be given more than the market says it's worth. Why should non-creatives go along with this?

>Why should non-creatives go along with this? We shouldn't. Art has historically been vastly overvalued and I like that its perceived/demanded value has been sharply declining over the past several decades and especially now with the advent of "AI". I'm sorry if anyone reading this is an artist and I just twisted your pantaloons, but artists don't serve any valuable role in society. Artists exist strictly because soc…

Just a clarification, art has never been overvalued historically.

In point of fact, artisans and musicians were considered a fairly lower class as a mere trade within the medieval time period outside of a few rockstars such as Beethoven and Liszt (later in the 18th and 19th centuries).

Re: Creative workers deserve better than a choice as to who rips them off

#49

Post by anigbrowl »

mbrumlow wrote: post #35
anigbrowl wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not only my nature, but human nature. No it isn't. It's the nature of about 30% of people, who can't be happy without knowing that someone else is worse off. Many of the characteristics that you ascribe to stupidity are actually examples of selfishness, and you're leveraging the existence thereof to rationalize your own selfishness. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.1600451 Your wealth likely derives f…

Actually. I find it the opposite. The 30 percent you speak of don’t care and are not in the web yelling eat the rich. The real problem is the 70% who can’t be happy knowing that others are better off than them. (It’s actually not 70% most don’t care but anybody who says eat the rich is the problematic person)

I didn't pull that number out of the air, but from the attached paper. I disagree with your second comment in that your position suggests any criticism of the rich is unwarranted. The startling upward transfer of wealth pursuant to the pandemic, for example, is a rather stark illustration of a particular social group exploiting a general tragedy for profit.

https://siepr.stanford.edu/news/qa-how-pandemic-savings-are-...

Consider the recent phenomenon of 'shrinkflation', where consumers are sold a lower volume of a commodity product for the same price they were paying previously. I find this interesting because it's not a pure supply-and-demand situation where the price of a bulk good changes and you get less product in a box or bottle; companies have to invest money in changing packaging and retooling their production lines. In other words, they choose to spend money on concealing the change in value proposition, whereas if cost inflation was the only economic factor they'd keep selling the same product but raise the price.

Re: Creative workers deserve better than a choice as to who rips them off

#50

Post by whimsicalism »

portaouflop wrote: post #46
rayiner wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s especially hard to defend given that the barriers to entry for creatives today (thanks to cheap editing equipment and Internet distribution) is extremely low.

The barrier to getting paid is significantly higher though, so in the end it’s more or less the same: if you want to make a living off creative work you’re going to have a hard time

low barrier to entry lowers cost, so this is exactly the desired outcome
Post reply on HN