|
|
|
|
|
by nimithryn
622 days ago
|
|
> My dim view is that it's just a rapacious monopolistic society. Why are there only three (four-ish) cell phone carriers in the US? Why are there only two app stores? Three (four-ish) major music platforms? The internet should have brought a diversity of choice that has failed to materialize because enforcement of monopoly laws in this space has been nascent and aggressively fought against. I think some of this aggregation is due to economies of scale, though. > You could literally grab 5 guys from the mall and __force__ them to be a hit in a few months. This is sort of a corollary to my hypothesis. Since we have a megasociety, everyone has access to music from everywhere, but limited time. There’s too much music being produced. So we now have a signaling game (advertising and marketing) to determine who people listen to. Signaling games will naturally be dominated by capital. In terms of breeding grounds for local music, where are you thinking? Nashville? |
|
You've ignored the fact that discovery is now a new service component that really didn't exist before. We can tag music and artists and we can automatically discover related music and artists very easily. All the major services do this. Think of an expanded and federated (all the way back to the artist) open source version of this.
There's no reason to think that the previous model somehow produced the most efficient way of "determining who people listen to." It was almost certainly suboptimal. It's no surprise then that this suboptimal model was more or less copied onto the internet and all new players bought out so no new model could be revealed.
The lack of available artistry and market for it extends through multiple levels, and in this case, right into the software stack that _should_ exist for artists to self publish and for listeners to automatically discover.