35719385638

There is an even greater cardinality of countless artists and authors who produce amazing content or research to spend their lives with at least a nagging background thought of regret in not pursuing something more profitable than holding on to a vapid dream of equivalent exchange between creative effort and financial or social success.

A reward system for content creation by definition has to be a pyramid scheme, due to the need for the general public to have examples of normalized contrasting quality in anchoring supposed worth as well as the need for the governance structures to have a well diversified orchard of luscious fruit ripe and especially bountiful enough to cherrypick which works are most applicable for promotion at any given time on the carousel wheel of policy.

As bad as it is, I'd consider it something of a victory considering the only reason I clicked the HN link to this discussion was my cognitive expectation in yet another defeat for copyright law pessimistically substituted "end" with "extend," and evoked a defeatist reaction that I might come here to bathe in sorrow.

Once I started reading the article and comments I was really confused until I reread the title very slowly to catch my mistake in perception. I guess we really do see the world through our own predecided lenses of reality and choose how an internal narrative will match any evidence in support or censor in defense.

Or rather, that's only me. And I hope to overcome that with (un)learning. :D