10 ms·

> The market decided a long time ago that movies, songs, books, photographs etc were, in fact, worth nothing. That's the effect of digital media. It's completel

by diab0lic 10mo ago

> The market decided a long time ago that movies, songs, books, photographs etc were, in fact, worth nothing. That's the effect of digital media. It's completely incompatible with the free market. This is such a willfully ignorant take, it’s wild. Anyone who has a cursory understanding of game theory can see that if this were true a simple recursion would occur: 1. Everyone would pirate movies/tv/books. 2. There would be $0 in producing media. 3. Significantly less media would be produced. Anything capital intensive would be gone. 4. Demand for anything that could be produced would skyrocket. Imagine putting together a blockbuster film when the world hasn’t seen one in a century. 5. People would pay money for the product of 4. Just because we can get something for $0 doesn’t make it worth $0. I could enslave my neighbors and make them work for me, that doesn’t make human labor worth $0.

Intermernet 10mo ago
It's not an ignorant take, it's reality. If you don't want that outcome, stop supporting outdated economic theories. I didn't say I wanted this to be the case, I said it is the case. The only reason digital media is sellable at all is due to laws and regulations. Not only are these laws and regualtions historically anathematic to those who defend the outdated economic theories, they're also protecting the wrong people. The distribution networks get a much larger share of profit than the actual creators. People should exchange money for digital goods. That money should go primarily to the creators of those goods. None of this is happening very much, and it's actually moving in the wrong direction.
- diab0lic 10mo ago
  Ah! I think I missed your point because I read your comment through the lens of the root comment. My apologies! We’re actually largely in agreement, especially about content creators deserving compensation and the fact that distribution is vacuuming up most of it.
  - Intermernet 10mo ago
    I thought there might have been a misunderstanding there :-) Sorry, I often get long winded and my statements can be ambiguous.
    - diab0lic 10mo ago
      My mistake for sure. Thanks for giving me a chance to realize it. :)

Intermernet 10mo ago

It's not an ignorant take, it's reality. If you don't want that outcome, stop supporting outdated economic theories. I didn't say I wanted this to be the case, I said it is the case. The only reason digital media is sellable at all is due to laws and regulations. Not only are these laws and regualtions historically anathematic to those who defend the outdated economic theories, they're also protecting the wrong people. The distribution networks get a much larger share of profit than the actual creators. People should exchange money for digital goods. That money should go primarily to the creators of those goods. None of this is happening very much, and it's actually moving in the wrong direction.

diab0lic 10mo ago
Ah! I think I missed your point because I read your comment through the lens of the root comment. My apologies! We’re actually largely in agreement, especially about content creators deserving compensation and the fact that distribution is vacuuming up most of it.
- Intermernet 10mo ago
  I thought there might have been a misunderstanding there :-) Sorry, I often get long winded and my statements can be ambiguous.
  - diab0lic 10mo ago
    My mistake for sure. Thanks for giving me a chance to realize it. :)