Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
A riddle wrapped in a mystery inside a rich, flaky crust

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                                                         

Prevalent life sponsorship

Sponsor each other
 
(+1, -1)
  [vote for,
against]

The value of music and software is zero, as that's the price that people are prepared to pay for it.

In what should be a thing, sponsoring other humans to do what they are doing.

Without needing to sale given works, such as music, software or art. We have non-corporate sponsorships.

It means we can give away things for free.

chronological, Apr 24 2020

Adam Smith https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Smith
Considered to be the father of the discipline of political economy. [8th of 7, Apr 24 2020]

Pantisocracy https://en.wikipedi...g/wiki/Pantisocracy
A noble idea, but a failed one. [8th of 7, Apr 24 2020]

Patreon https://www.patreon.com/
Patreon helps you build direct relationships with your most engaged fans. [tatterdemalion, May 02 2020]


Please log in.
If you're not logged in, you can see what this page looks like, but you will not be able to add anything.



Annotation:







       That's different because your kids don't release any thing for free. Sponsorship without expectation. Noble, no, necessary for children. I guess you expect them to take care of you when you're old. This idea is for non-relations a la Patreon.
chronological, Apr 24 2020
  

       Patronage is WKTE. How is this different?
pertinax, Apr 24 2020
  

       Patronage doesn't happen for most artists, software authors etc
chronological, Apr 24 2020
  

       True - but why would this? Isn't it a "Let's All", for patronage? And doesn't crowd-funding approach this anyway, subject to the limits of human generosity? (Quiet, [8th]!)
pertinax, Apr 24 2020
  

       I guess it's a let's all/wkte
chronological, Apr 24 2020
  

       What [pert] said.
Voice, Apr 24 2020
  

       // (Quiet, [8th]!) //   

       Bah...   

       // Patronage doesn't happen for most artists, software authors etc //   

       Not in modern times, but from the medieval period to the Industrial Revolution, patronage by the wealthy was the principal form of support for authors and artists. It was also commonplace in the Roman Empire, if you want to look further back. If you examine the first editions of many famous literary works, the dedication page is often a gushing eulogy to the author's patron. Musicians would write a work for a rich benefactor, after which everyone else got it for free. Copyright and royalties didn't develop properly until the 19th century (patents in the 18th).   

       It's not a new model.
8th of 7, Apr 24 2020
  

       I think it's a shame because the price of music, art software has been pushed down to zero because that's what people are willing to pay for it.   

       Starving artists.
chronological, Apr 24 2020
  

       Have you considered live-streaming your job search on Twitch.tv?
sninctown, Apr 24 2020
  

       // If you want to support a starving artist, nobody will stop you. //   

       This is true.   

       However, is it the case that the artist is starving because their work is simply not very good ? In which case, you would simply be reinforcing failure. Would that ultimately benefit either you or the artist ?   

       Hey, [kd], how are you getting on with Economics 101 ? What do you consider Adam Smith <link> might comment on the "starving artist" scenario ? This is a serious question.
8th of 7, Apr 24 2020
  

       If everything else was given away for free, such as food, champagne, houses, cars, fuel, clothes and electric nasal hair trimmers, then the producers of zero-value products would nonethelesss be able to afford those things.
pocmloc, Apr 24 2020
  

       There's no doubt that a lot of created art and cultural content actually does have zero value in market terms. I think this has always been the case, and such things have therefore only been distributed by the creator to friends and family, or even just consumed and enjoyed by the creator alone.   

       The difference now is that these goods can be distributed online worldwide at zero cost, so that the cost of distribution equals the market value.   

       The idea here is an inflationary idea, in that it proposes artificially increasing the value of the produced content to try and match the cost of other items in the economy. My riposte above is the deflationary solution, to reduce the cost of the desired goods to match the creators spending power. For some reason in recent times, market interventions are mostly inflationary rather than deflationary, e.g. minimum wage for workers rather than maximum pricing for goods.
pocmloc, Apr 24 2020
  

       // t in 8th of 7's case I can only put it down to malice. //   

       Based on the available evidence that is an entirely reasonable conclusion.
8th of 7, Apr 24 2020
  

       On second thought, I fully support communal living on a "large village" scale. Not for everyone but I like the idea of people being able to live in the type of social arrangement they want to live in. And such a village would presumably support marginally productive members to at least a "subsistence" level (free beans and a bunk) at no charge out of charity and solidarity.
sninctown, Apr 24 2020
  

       It's been tried - the usual term is "pantisocracy" - and so far it's always ended very badly, in one of three or four consistent and sadly predictable ways. Societal fracturing and communal violence; the rise of a charismatic leader, creating a cult; A brutal and repressive clique enslaves the majority; or ... oh, make something up.   

       But it never, ever turns out well, because these communities are unfortunately made up of humans, and humans are nasty, selfish, greedy venal things, programmed by their DNA to exploit others if they think they can get away with it.   

       If you had better humans, it might work. Good luck with that. Evolution is standing behind you with a large hammer, and grinning.   

       Of course, you could try setting up an anarcho-syndicalist commune, where members take it in turns to act as a sort of executive officer for the week, but all the decisions of that officer have to be ratified at a special biweekly meeting ... after which you can go and see the violence inherent in the system.
8th of 7, Apr 24 2020
  

       //through college/ I don't think the economic system that can afford to have all go to college, most have to do better things.   

       Nature had does have a limited number of freeloaders but nothing like the number, economics and monetary systems can set up using legal systems. It's lucky farmers don't get paid very well.   

       It all went a pair shaped, when people sold items not on physical worth but the on the perceived value of a contract relationship.   

       An AI enttiy might turn out to be expensive to copy so there might end up some real copying cost in the future.
wjt, Apr 27 2020
  

       //Evolution is standing behind you with a large hammer//   

       Evolution can give you eusocial ants, as well as cannibalistic spiders. For a human(oid), adopting the spider role is an existential choice, for which science provides no alibi.
pertinax, Apr 27 2020
  

       It does, however, provide an extensive choice of cooking methods.   

       What makes humans uniquely unpleasant is that although they often do understand the nature of a moral choice, they just as often choose the "wrong" one.   

       A spider or a mantis acts from instinct. There's no mens rea.   

       // alibi//   

       Do you mean "justification" ? An alibi is something different ...
8th of 7, Apr 27 2020
  

       If I had meant "justification", then I would have written "justification".
pertinax, Apr 27 2020
  

       Not necessarily; you might be experiencing mild aphasia combined with short-term memory deficit, in which case you might have written "alibi" when you actually meant "justification", but you now have no recollection of the event and are trying to make a rationalization to link your current perceived reality with the available evidence.   

       In fact, you've got no reliable evidence that everything you remember up to now isn't in some way merely the product of a deranged imagination, perhaps not even your own, and that you're actually the focus of some vast, secret psychological experiment, carried out by others for their own unpleasant and perverse motives.   

       Do you ever dream about unicorns ? Or electric sheep ?
8th of 7, Apr 27 2020
  

       On the other hand, I might not.
pertinax, Apr 27 2020
  

       Would science give justification? Science does tool us up. A large procedural mistake could turn human on human.
wjt, May 01 2020
  

       Humans turn on one another as a matter of course; no intervention is needed.   

       Some humans, if alone, turn on themselves. This is an impressive trick, and fascinating to watch.
8th of 7, May 01 2020
  

       Hm. There must be a way to hook up a Patreon account to the HB. Then I could get sponsors to pay me a couple bucks a month for every idea I post.
tatterdemalion, May 02 2020
  

       Make sure that's not "Every good idea I post".   

       You'd starve...
8th of 7, May 02 2020
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle