|
|
|
|
|
by civilized
726 days ago
|
|
In the past I have thought about it as you do. But it occurs to me now that this is also a property of tech products, isn't it? These products can be built by a small team and serve millions or billions of people. The most successful ones usually expand the team (Google Maps now employs over 7,000 people!) but it remains true that only a small team is really needed to keep the thing going. So why are tech employees thought of differently than entertainers? Why is the math so different, such that tech employees have much more predictable and favorable employment prospects? |
|
People won't work on Google products for free.
This is one of the many reasons I'm for a UBI, it makes it easier to do art without having to be a "starving artist".