this post was submitted on 16 Sep 2023
358 points (92.6% liked)
Asklemmy
43940 readers
610 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy π
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
There is no ethical consumption under capitalism. Even if I pay for a product I love some asshole suit is going to get a bigger cut than the artists who did the work.
I'm an indie author, and all my novels ended up on PDFdrive.
Not that I'd be mad about it. If someone pirates my books and likes them, maybe they'll support me in the future.
Just saying, I'm not wearing suits. I'm working full-time and write when I have off and got the time and energy.
For us Indies, getting eyeballs on our books is next to impossible anyways, so I already gave up on the idea that writing will ever be more than an expensive hobby.
Yep! Often the math is "the people who pirated probably wouldn't have bought your product if they couldn't pirate it, so you didn't lose anything. But you did gain a reader, who can now recommend it to others, and / or make future purchases themselves". Generally speaking, pirating isn't bad to the bottom line (not saying it's good).
It hurts brick and mortar stores, but then, so do libraries. (Hah)
I've always been of the opinion that people who truly love what they piratesd will at some point want the author to carry on writing. Just like someone who just stumbled upon your work by accident. That's the beauty of humanity, people do remember, and they do care, and creative arts are a pursuit that connects author and reader.
libraries are not comparable to what damage piracy does to brick and mortar stores and small authors
Piracy does not damage at all compared to the damage monopolized america is doing to them.
That was a joke about how much capitalists hate socialist libraries.
If we had any sense as a species we would be funding artists so that they can pursue their art full time. Industry advances technology, but art advances the mind.
We might end up like people who do graphics... replaced by AI tools. There aren't any that make it as easy yet (and maybe there won't), but who knows where tech will lead us.
If you do it as a hobby, you don't need to worry about it so much, but it does take something away for sure.
AI will change the game, but I think after an initial period of growing pains that we're really facing a shift in the economy whether we're ready or not. All of the "problems" of capitalism have been due to runaway efficiency. A scarcity economy is absurd when we're infinitely capable of producing everything people want or need.
I agree, and the optimist in me desperately wants to experience a post-scarcity society like the one we're seeing in the The Culture books, where AIs run the world, and we humans are free to chase whatever it is we're dreaming of.
Maybe that's a romantic notion, but I'm hesitant to give up on in. Dreams are what's kept us going for the past millennia.
You might become bored and depression does seem to be more common when you do not have a particular sense of purpose.
I like the idea as well but human psychology might not be so conductive to easy living.
What do you mean when you say we need a purpose?
We are biologically designed to reproduce. So our current purpose is to survive until we're grown to sexual maturity, reproduce, then raise our offspring to a stage where they're able to survive on their own. Then, we either do it again, if we're still young enough, or die and make room for the next generation. That seems like a very depressing purpose to me, but this is how evolution works.
I think that we now have the intellectual capacity to transcendent this cycle. We've been for a while, and we formed societies, developed technology. Our first models were small tribes, very much hippie-like little communities, that suffered from attrition by tribe warfare and rule of the strongest, where reproduction was controlled by "the fittest". Then we developed monarchic systems that provided a much more stable life for everyone, but ran on servitude (slavery) of peasants. We experimented with systems like communism, that then lead to terror by the ruling class (can still see that in China today), and landed on a somewhat democracy-adjacent system of capitalism that we're running today, and that's not sustainable, because we're destroying our planet.
What's next, and what purpose for the individual do you have in mind?
You don't need a purpose and in fact most of the purpose people identify with are rather unnecessary for lack of better word. But people without some feeling of purpose are definately more prone to depression. Countries like Mexico should be less happy being people have far less wealth and have to work harder but the opposite it true. I find people are overall more happy and content. Now I would normal discount my experiences as being limited but if you look at the suicide rate of say the US to Mexico, the US has 4 times the rate.
This is actually true for nearly every developed to developing nations and I think speaks a great deal about human nature.
Okay, so what you're saying is that you think friction creates a sense of purpose. That might be true. People in Mexico are probably more happy about little things and enjoy them more, because that's what they have. Less freedom of choice paradox to contend with, and less free time to sink into depression (I believe in "the olden times", people were just too tired from fighting to survive to sit down and have an existential crisis). That sounds like a valid idea and is supporting your point.
The question is, how can we combine my (borrowed from the Culture series) idea of a post scarcity society with your idea of a psychological need for friction? Do you think it's impossible to simulate the same feeling of need for something to result in the same strain that then causes happiness?
First I will say the culture series is one of favorite books. But I would start by suggesting a post scarcity society would be difficult in the limited size of our solar system. The main reason being resource theory. Like animals with unlimited food, they will grow in population untill there no longer excess food. Humans likely would do the same until there again is a limit of resources and things develop value. Ie. There is a limit of ocean front property thus we will make a reason to toil to better ourselves and get the best view.
But that diverges somewhat from the question you ask. Could we be happy in such a society if it could exsist? If we bring up the culture series, nearly every character in those books have purpose. Actually great purpose in that often they are doing some deed to better humanity. So it is hard to really use that as an example. So the question then becomes could a regular person be fully happy be having all their needs met and not having to do anything? I rather think of the hedonism bot in Futurama. He does nothing all day but all his needs are met. He has to expend zero energy. To me that seems quite depressing. I would rather be doing something to better myself and overall other people but in a post scarcity society there is nothing physically anyone would need thus there would be little I can contribute. Now could there be a true post scarcity society? I suggest not While money should not exsist, there will still be currency. That will be in the form of fame or talent or power. Creative people will be in demand and trade that for favors. Actors same in that they will gain favor. People in power will use their influence to have access to interests that others may not. But these people would be the minority. The majority of people always will be your average Joe. Will they be happy just comfortable exsisting? Honestly I really don't know. Maybe we can evolve to that.
I will bring up one other point. In the history of humanity, during times of great difficulties are also the times when humans evolved the fastest. Could the opposite occur? If we have all our physical need met, might our overall intelligence decrease. I suspect it might. Then again, might it be better to be dumb and happy than intelligent and depressed?
You mean, being forced to find your own meaning instead of just going down a socially acceptable to-do list?
Boredom is simply a lack of imagination and drugs.
Honestly drugs lose their luster eventually and most people whos life resolve around them daily are often pretty uninteresting.
You seem fun at parties.
(No, not really.)
Actually I am quite fun. Do drugs few times a year. Can be interesting as well.
WeLL AWktUALLy...
Just like the invention of the camera stopped people painting portraits.
I am sorry to hear that. If it ended up on pdf drive, then I guess it's either that, enough people want to read it or pdf drive has a bot which is ruthlessly uploading all the books it can find. Have you tried self publishing on kindle? Also, name your books if you want to, it looks like some eyeballs and popularity will do you some good.
I tried on Kindle, but the reality is that every day, a six-digit number of books are being released, which leads to insane odds.
I wrote cyberpunk/urban fantasy crossover books, but am now switching over to space opera. If you're still interested, I can give you the title of the "entry book" that starts the story.
Shadowrun?
No, I'm not writing Shadowrun, but the genre has some similarities.
Just curious
why do you consider writing to be an expensive hobby? I mean, it's totally expensive from an opportunity cost perspective, but wouldn't any hobby be? Is it the cost to get it published somewhere?
If you just write for yourself, it only costs time. If you plan to (*self-) publish it, though, you want at least a good cover, and optimally, you'd hire an editor and maybe things like sensitivity readers. And then, most people seem to prefer audio books these days, which is either expensive, or hard to pull off, due to having to find a narrator who's okay with royalty share with a non-established author. And then you haven't advertised your book at all yet.
I've so far only worried about cover and editing. Wrote 4 novels. Now I'm writing a series and am considering writing the whole thing completely first, then getting a deal with an artist for all the covers. This also makes it easier to do foreshadowing properly over the course of more than one book, and it's probably advantageous to stagger book releases, even if that means a few years without putting anything out to the world.
*All these points are moot if you aim to get published by an established house, but then you're dealing with "the suits", and people who rank "will it sell" higher than "is it good".
How expensive does editing and cover art get? I imagine itβs pretty pricey to hire people to do that. You mention this is moot going the traditional publishing route β I guess because publishers will front the costs for these things if they think your book will sell? If youβre buying cover art and stuff to self-publish, where do you publish your novels? Do you sell print copies, or is it all digital? Is selling physical copies even feasible without a traditional publisher?
The cover costs anywhere from USD 100 to 1000, depending on the artist and the cover, where 100 would get you a somewhat decent one on Fiverr, while something not generic can go up in price very quickly. Most "cheap" artists have a flat rate with one or more stock image sites, where you'd then pick a model and tell them what setting you'd like to have. If you have very specific needs that would require hand crafting, the sky is your limit (The covers for ebook, print and audiobook are separate, and print/audiobook covers will cost extra).
Editors come in categories. Developmental editors check the characters and plot for consistency, logic problems and structural things. Then there are copywriting editors that focus mainly on things like grammar, spelling etc and, while being a bit cheaper, still cost quite a lot (Which is why people use tools like grammarly or pwa to self-edit, which basically saves you the copy editor).
Sensitivity and beta readers are tricky. If you already have a fan community, you might be able to recruit some of them for this purpose. You'd want them to avoid faux pas when describing people of another ethnicity, sex, gender etc, and there are professional options for that, too (I already suspect my current project might not be fireproof, because names like Born Of Rain remind Americans of natives, even though they're completely unrelated to my story -- there aren't even humans in my book).
Audiobook narration can go way, way up. You might be able to negotiate royalty share with a new voice actor who needs gigs to build skills and a portfolio, but nobody wants to spend hours every day for weeks in a recording booth if there's no money to be made, and therein lies the problem -- you need exposure to sell your books and make some money back, but exposure doesn't come for free. While less and less people read books, they do listen to audiobooks, which would increase your chances of being seen drastically.
Newcomers don't usually have a backlog of ten books, with lots of positive reviews, but most people don't buy books from some dude with two books and zero reviews. They also don't buy books that don't have a nice cover, and they demand the professional quality you're getting from having your book edited by an expert. Some genres also just sell better in general, like romance or thriller (to a lesser extent).
If you go with just a cheap Fiverr cover and some basic copywriter editing, you're already looking at approximately 1 grand, with sales extremely unlikely, unless you have a platform somewhere with a related following (you often see book-related youtubers advertising their books during their videos). For someone like me, who has 3 books out (Out of 4 -- I pulled my first novel, wasn't satisfied with the book), writing something like science fiction, which doesn't have a ravenous market, that means you calculate with 100% loss and are happy if you sell 10 units.
Indies often rely on things like Facebook/Google ads, newsletter and heavy social media marketing, all of which I hate with a passion. But it's "part of the business", which makes it a very unpleasant endeavor for me, and I've so far not done any marketing at all, which basically guarantees I'll stay an obscure writer in the hobbyist league, one small fish in an endless ocean. And that's okay.
If you think of traditional publishing, you have "the big 4" in the USA, and some foreign houses elsewhere, and you need an agent. Agents take a cut of anything you might earn, and they're not optional. An agent helps with some very basic plot doctoring, and most publishing houses won't even look at your manuscript if you send it in directly. Even with an agent, even if they're well-connected, there's a high chance your book will end up on the slush pile and never be seen. Not because editors are malicious, but because they're overwhelmed. You wouldn't believe the amount of books people put out every day, with a large percentage being unacceptable.
Agents, and editors at publishing houses, look for something they think sells. They're notoriously bad at predicting trends, but they are the ones who decide what gets published and what not. Remember the vampire hype? Then the "magic academy" boom? Editors tried to create an "angel hype" with very lacklustre success.
If you're lucky and write a book that falls into a category editors are looking for right now, they will then assign development and copywriting editors who work with you and tell you how to get the book in shape. They'll get a cover made (over which you have zero control, even if your name is Stephen King or Brandon Sanderson) and pay you a 5k advance, with a small percentage of the sales if and after your book makes the advance back (and if it doesn't, your pen name is burned).
It takes me about 3 months to write a book, which is just the writing. The planning can take weeks or months, depending on the setting, the characters, the plot and how far you lean on the planner-pantser-spectrum. If you just count the writing hours, a 5k advance means below minimum wage, so you won't live off your books. Add to that the high barrier of entry and the other activities like marketing, in which you will have to participate especially as a new author, and you'll see a very skewed effort/reward ratio.
Traditional publishing used to be more competitive, and until a few years ago the Big4 were the Big5. There also used to be a mid-list, the kind of author who could work as a writer full time, barely profitable, and usually paid for with profits from star authors' sales, in the hopes that one of their books breaks through. G.R.R. Martin was such a mid-lister for decades. The trend though has been to abandon that concept completely and fully focus on the established star authors, and on cheap newcomers who hopefully sell their books themselves by somehow going viral on TikTok.
That's why I said I see it as an expensive hobby, and why I don't mind being pirated. I want to be in creative control of my work, get a cover I like, tell the story I have in mind, without deadline or the pressure of having to sell.
I want to be read, not to sell; readers, not customers. So if someone puts it up for free, cool. Not that I could do anything about it anyway.
That all makes a lot of sense. If Iβm reading you right it sounds like you do make a profit, but youβre making much less than minimum wage? Or has it been not profitable at all and a loss in that sense? You at least mentioned that new authors go in expecting it to be a total loss, which makes it sound like it could be sensible to put the writing online (basically free self-publishing), at least if the point is just to have people read it, and youβll make a loss from a more properly published thing anyway (although it sounds like your biggest costs are editing / audiobooks / covers which maybe you consider an important part of the work in the first place). That said I feel like the internet has changed quite a lot and people donβt really follow specific creators and their websites so much anymore.
Yeah, I'm an Indie, I do self publishing without advertising. I'm spending more than I make.
The problem with putting your stuff online is, the pages that specialize in that and have it all set up and ready to go are mostly fanfiction and romance, so you won't get a lot of reads there, either.
I guess I could just upload my books on GDrive and put download links on my website. Haven't thought about that deeply yet. But I do write books, not blog posts or diary entries, and I like to have them in a neat package with proper presentation, in a format ebook reader apps can display painlessly. Nobody wants to read 70-100k word novels on a website ;)
Agreed. I can say that personally I went back and bought a lot of music that I copied off of my friends' ipods as a kid. I'm sure it isn't the norm to go back and buy stuff, but it happens.
that's the shitty part! I don't like that one bit.
Then pirate and make sure the creator gets nothing.
not ideal, you know, I would prefer it if creators had pay links attached to their accounts and you could anonymously send them money. Pirate something, pay the creator some money if you can. I mean, if enough people do it, the corps would be forced to change the game.
How do you tip say 500 people who made a film?
The sentiment is great. I'd love this also, but for film it won't work.
They were already paid during production.
The thing that would change is that we won't have movies where 500 people worked on who do it to get a paycheck, but instead 5-20 people who are really passionate about it.
While undermining the system that is already failing artists.
So you pirate it and donate the normal price to the author directly, right?
When I was in university, I watched a movie online using alternative means that I had been kind of interested in, but never went to see. I then watched it again. Then I went out and bought a DVD.
A little after that, I watched a lets play of a game that basically gave the entire experience in a single watch. I liked the game enough that I bought it immediately and just let it sit on my steam library without an install, just so the creator would receive their dues.
A year or so ago, I got a game through a charity bundle and wound up playing hundreds of hours of it. Since the creators got no money from my purchase, I bought merch, and waited for DLC to come out for me to buy instantly, just so they'd get something from me.
Recently, a AAA studio let go a bunch of creators while their game was wrapping up, essentially punishing them for a job well done. The creators will get nothing if I buy the game they made, but the studio that screwed them over will get everything. Just like I always have, I will give as much as they deserve to receive.
I did the same with Chernobyl. Originally watched it with my friends password, but I liked it so much I bought the steel book 4k. If I hadn't had that shared password they wouldn't have gotten any money out of me
Sometimes, when it's particularly impactful. But you can save your shaming for somebody who cares about your opinion. The fact that you've given me more attention than anybody with the power to change things shows where your allegiance lies.
I don't know what you mean by "allegiance", you were talking about ethics and that authors don't get what they deserve. Your problem was not compensation itself but that some people that you don't think deserve it get a bigger cut than you're comfortable with.
It logically follows that in this frame of mind the ethical thing to do is to cut out the middle man and compensate the original author for their work directly.
I don't know what kind of box you put me into based on one sentence but not everyone is out to get you who doesn't 100% agree with you. This is why civil discussion is not possible online anymore.
The problem is that pirates are mostly full of shit. They just don't want to pay. It's that simple. Everything else is an attempt to rationalize.
Not completely true. Are there shot pirates yes, just like there are shit uploaders that think itβs fun to bundle a computer virus with downloadable content.
If itβs something new, like a new book or movie, I will pay for it. The movies/shows I pirate are old and mostly out of circulation, unless they are streaming on some service. I pay for those so their is monetary transactions.
For example, I just recently spent 2 days downloading CHiPs original tv series, even with my high speed broadband it was that slow because there arenβt that many people offering it. Took me 3 days to find it to dl.
Not all piracy is bad. New stuff, ok not cool. But older stuff that has had a good run, the loss of revenue to creator/publisher is so minimal that they wonβt feel it.
Iβm an ethical pirate, if I think itβs worth watching over and over again Iβll buy it, if itβs available. I wonβt pirate software or books.
I have kindle for reading and there is nothing new worth downloading software wise, plus I use linux on my computer, so all my software is free anyway, and if I canβt donate financially I find other ways to help. Iβm not a big gamer and when I do game itβs on console, so I do pay for that.
You want to criticize my protest and waste my time, but when was the last time you sent an email to an elected official?
I'm not some kind of activist set out to undermine your movement, I asked a question. This is an online forum where anyone can comment, if you feel like it's wasting your time then don't answer.
Last time? A few months ago when a chinese company wanted to build a chemical distribution center in my district.