News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Hollywood as We Know It Is Over by krapp on Monday January 30, 2017 @12:27PM (#13523102)
The creation of those bits cost money initially, when real world and not easily replicable work was necessary. After that, the end result is more or less worthless, because the work of replicating those bits is practically nil.

There's the rub - all of that effort and money creating products with no real monetary value.

I'm not suggesting any particular model here, I like money as much as the next person, but I also believe the trend to see the price of digital media converge toward zero is valid. I don't know what the answer to that is, other than somehow convince people to pay for something they rationally shouldn't.

Re:Hollywood as We Know It Is Over by carussell on Monday January 30, 2017 @03:08PM (#13524536)
You're using some really dubious tricks to massage the numbers so they can be discounted.

Temporality is a nonsense argument.

Your sandwich shop worker served you and 80 other customers last Tuesday. I'm the boss, and it's time for me to cut the checks. Wait—what am I paying for here? Today's Friday, and all those sandwiches are already out the door.

Re:Hollywood as We Know It Is Over by krapp on Monday January 30, 2017 @04:27PM (#13525199)
>Your sandwich shop worker served you and 80 other customers last Tuesday. I'm the boss, and it's time for me to cut the checks. Wait—what am I paying for here? Today's Friday, and all those sandwiches are already out the door.

In that case, you're paying for the time your employees could have spent elsewhere - and you're likely not paying more if your employees make more sandwiches faster. Also, every sandwich is unique, and takes physical effort and resources to make - if sandwiches could be copied as easily as software, chances are you would fire all but one employee and pay that one as little as you legally could, and still charge the same price, but would that really be fair?

The problem with the economy around digital media is justifying what, exactly, the consumer is meant to be paying for.

Re:Hollywood as We Know It Is Over by carussell on Monday January 30, 2017 @05:16PM (#13525574)
[EDIT: I regret entering this conversation. I don't expect anything productive to come from it.]
Re:Hollywood as We Know It Is Over by dragonwriter on Monday January 30, 2017 @04:32PM (#13525241)
> Your sandwich shop worker served you and 80 other customers last Tuesday. I'm the boss, and it's time for me to cut the checks. Wait—what am I paying for here?

The contractual debt you incurred when the work happened. Or, in terms of expected value received from paying, you are paying to avoid the legal consequences of not paying that debt.

Re:Hollywood as We Know It Is Over by diminoten on Monday January 30, 2017 @12:33PM (#13523175)
Ah yes, the all too familiar, "What is art and why does it cost money?" conversation. At least we're in well-tread territory, right?
Re:Hollywood as We Know It Is Over by pessimizer on Monday January 30, 2017 @12:43PM (#13523276)
Because of the documentation of its provenance, the difficulty in reproducing it, and because people will pay for it.
Re:Hollywood as We Know It Is Over by diminoten on Monday January 30, 2017 @12:45PM (#13523295)
There are volumes upon volumes of the ontology of art, I just wanted to point out that's where we are now, and that such questions have been asked and answered for literally thousands of years.
Re:Hollywood as We Know It Is Over by grzm on Monday January 30, 2017 @12:33PM (#13523168)
People find value in the experiences and services that provide no lasting tangible effects all the time. Considering these to be of no real monetary value seems seriously mistaken.
Re:Hollywood as We Know It Is Over by TeMPOraL on Monday January 30, 2017 @12:43PM (#13523281)
If you take the market view (value being what people are willing to pay for), then the market clearly tells you that people value digitally delivered experiences at $not-much, rapidly falling to NIL. After all, bits are near-free to copy from the market's POV too - for everyone, it's trivial to either copy a piece of digital content themselves, or ask someone who'll copy it for them for free.

Copyrights and branding piracy as theft are ways of trying to artificially control the free market here. But they're so obviously "unnatural" in the digital space, that it makes sense to think about ways of making it so that the original creator gets paid, while copying remains free.

Re:Hollywood as We Know It Is Over by grzm on Monday January 30, 2017 @01:14PM (#13523592)
Reading this comment and your other one above, I think we are in general agreement. I think there are two pieces here: one is a change in perception to some extent: you're right that many people value digital delivery differently and lower. To some extent I think that can change. I know it's changed for myself personally over the years.

The other is along the lines of what you wrote here, which I think sums it nicely:

we need to rethink the path that currently leads from "X created it, and deserves compensation" to "Y receives a copy and should pay for it".

What I'd like to hear is more about potential solutions as opposed to descriptions.

Re:Hollywood as We Know It Is Over by TeMPOraL on Monday January 30, 2017 @02:09PM (#13524071)
> (...) many people value digital delivery differently and lower. To some extent I think that can change. I know it's changed for myself personally over the years.

I know it changed for me too, and I think it's mostly because of having more disposable income nowadays than in the past. As a teenager, there was no way I could afford movies or video games. Now, my natural first instinct for media is buying / subscribing on Amazon, Netflix and Steam.

> What I'd like to hear is more about potential solutions as opposed to descriptions.

I've been thinking about one, and it turns out to be exactly what 'endominus described here:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13523515.