- I guess I object to defining “creator” as specifically “online content creator”. Maybe there was some golden age in the past, but I think that was always aspirational and there was always a nearly power-law distribution of success. Making a living from online content was always a struggle except for the winners that made it look easy.
- Super piece. Well worth reading. I keep wondering if there's some structural economic fundamental that disperses money the way it does. Is the dispersion purely a consequence of the attention economy? Probably, but I'm guessing. Engagement and outrage always sell, but so does visibility, and how one becomes visible. I guess that's come down to advertising, brand, and the platform algorithms that present the content and create or amplify the brand. I get why OC finds it tiring and depressing.
- Content, like software, is easy to copy and distribute. Traditional supply-demand diagrams no longer apply; content doesn't get more expensive to produce if it reaches more people.
This creates a monopolistic economy where top content creators can create slightly "better"/more viral content at a multiple of the cost, and starve out smaller creators.
- I have no proof of this but I suspect that when rent is cheap enough the middle and lower classes can work a single job or a part time job with roommates, they will have enough time pursue their artistic passions, you get great art and technology breakthroughs.
Look at Seattle in the 90's, NYC, early San Fran, etc., the before real estate prices skyrocketed or 17th and 18th century enlightenment post-plague, when massive amounts of the rich died and the wealth became more evenly distributed.
I feel like real estate prices, inequality, and inflation truly squander the intellectual wealth of the poor and middle classes and it hurts the human race as a whole.
- I think there is a flaw in thinking that "Creators" have some intrinsic value. The reason the middle gets pushed out is correct in this article but it is missing an important point: there are too many creators.
That is why the top gets heavier and the bottom spreads out.
- That's true.
Although I think the article is really hinting at a larger problem than just creators. The problem of the power law distribution - few winners taking all vs the losers in the long thin tail. Sometimes it's not an entirely meritocratic distribution, quality doesn't always rise to the top.
- The problem with this line of thinking is that the more humanity succeeds at becoming efficient at providing for its essential goods and services, the more the economy rests on unnecessary ones. Should we really accept that the more successful we are, the less individuals can expect to be valued?
- [dead]
- [dead]
