[thih9]

I’m not sure if I’m capable of performing fulfilling work that would also have anything resembling of a demand.

Take creative work. The pre-AI market was already extremely competitive. Few artists can chase autonomy, the rest needs to sell out to some level - usually significant; not the human flourishing we wanted.

AI may disrupt this; still, my guess is that the pool of profitable creative workplaces remains unchanged, at best.

[WalterBright]

If an artist wants to make a living making art, the art has to be something people are willing to pay for.

If that's "selling out", then so be it. Why should society support the artist if his art has no value to anyone?

[thih9]

Note that our initial goal was different - not an artist who wants to make a living, but an artist who wants to perform fulfilling work.

[WalterBright]

Draw two circles, 1. fulfilling art 2. art that pays the bills. Create the art that is in the intersection.

Otherwise, you'll need another source of income in order to create fulfilling art.

There's lots of software I'd like to write. I've spent my time writing code that lies in the intersection.

[Eisenstein]

Let's draw another circle: things you make when 'financial obligations' are not a concern. Where does that intersect? Why aren't we drawing it? How much science was done by 'gentlemen scientists' who never worried about money? How much more would we know if that one person who could have figured out electromagnetism in 1400 didn't have to plow fields all day?

[WalterBright]

There are an awful lot of professions in the world. Surely people can find one that suits them. Life is what you make of it.

My personal dream was to become a swimsuit model, but it just wasn't working out, so I switched to software.

[Eisenstein]

You can't think of any other things besides genetics and self-determination that allowed you to be where you are now?

[fragmede]

That is a really great place for you to be in! Where code useful and thus valuable, there is a lot in that intersection. Unfortunately where art is concerned, that intersection may be an empty set.

[WalterBright]

I personally derive a lot of satisfaction from other people enjoying using the programs I write, and I love it when they make money using it. (Many have described to me how D gave them a competitive advantage.) Many give back by funding our annual D conference and providing funding for several of our critical staff members.

I wrote Empire for my personal satisfaction eons ago, and when other people copied it and spread it around, I discovered that it was a lot of fun to get unsolicited emails from people who liked playing it and wanted to let me know. I still get them regularly!

[thih9]

Sounds like you’re happy in that intersection - and good for you.

[freejazz]

Do you actually know any artists or musicians? Any of them that are successful? What you described wouldn't be "selling out," it'd be success. Selling out is the food service job they do to pay their rent, or the lessons they teach, etc. The person you were responding to was pointing out that it's not likely that there is a market for everyone's art, even if everyone was true to their own creative vision.

[WalterBright]

> Do you actually know any artists or musicians?

Yes, many among family and friends.

> What you described wouldn't be "selling out," it'd be success.

"Selling out" is a common epithet leveled at artists who became successful. Nirvana, for example, was often accused of selling out.

[freejazz]

Yeah but that wasn't the context the person you were responding to was using it in. By your own example, Nirvana doesn't make any sense as they were tremendously successful doing their thing

[WalterBright]

Oh, it certainly is the context. Nirvana had its beginnings and appeal by being uninterested in success and only played to a niche as "their" group. When Nirvana suddenly became wildly successful, that group felt betrayed.

Nirvana is the perfect example of what I was talking about.

[freejazz]

Yeah, what you were talking about... not what the other poster was talking about. Try to read and understand other's posts.

[filoeleven]

It’s almost like the idea of “making a living” is what needs disrupting the most. I didn’t ask to be here, and it’s kind of a shit deal for most folks the way things work now. “How many Einsteins” etc.

If the art I’m interested in making doesn’t fit into this “utilitarian” monetary income model, it means that I can only pursue art in my “spare time”, outside of a necessary job and (for lots of us) family obligations. I guess I could become an art star, or a viral sensation, but we all know how unlikely that is for any one person. There’s not much middle ground.

The thing that we have to acknowledge as a culture is that we don’t generally value art, or highly-specific research avenues, or much of anything that isn’t “productive” in the most myopic sense. That’s a cultural choice, and it’s a bad decision. It fits in well with our naked pursuit of short-term optimization at the expense of everything else though, so at least we’re consistent. Yay.

[WalterBright]

Look at the immensity of the music business, hollywood, books, furniture, buildings, landscaping, toys, the shape of my desk phone, and we pay plenty for it! I look around my office and see the work of artists in most everything in it.

[opportune]

The art that's being disrupted is "give me a picture of a guy riding a bike through our downtown in an impressionist style" (for a brochure or some marketing material). I'd call that artisanal more than creative - it certainly takes skill to produce something that meets those requirements of an acceptable degree of quality, but I don't there is much humanity loses out on having computers do that.

People simply romanticize that kind of work because of its loose association with highly-prestigious creative work. I don't think we lose out on Picassos if we lower the number of graphic designers or caricature artists.

[JambalayaJim]

That kind of artisanal work is something that artists can rely upon to fund their more creative ventures. And it is still creative, takes advantage of their illustration skills, etc.

[bumby]

I think that's largely true and most of us are trying to find a balance. Most modern jobs have some aspect of drudgery, or at least less palatable tasks, and we're trying to move the needle towards those tasks that we find fulfilling. But I'd argue some jobs are inherently less amenable to this, if you subscribe to the previously mentioned idea of fullment.