[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by PKFFW

The fact that you find most paid-for content crap(which in itself is simply an opinion) isn't an argument that free content is any better.

If you'll look at my argument, you'll see that I'm not arguing that free=better, I'm arguing that free=no better or worse.

There are the very rare talents in this world that can and have created masterpieces with little or no input from anyone else. There are books out there that haven't required editing for example. These are the very very few and the very very far between. The vast majority do require proof reading, editing etc to make them worth reading. Like it or not, these things cost money.

DID cost money, DID cost money. Crowdsourcing is already proving a boon in many areas, and we're not just talking WIKI's here. Look at the foreign language translations of Doctorow's work. Done without payment by volunteers. The filesharers do this also. When they put out a rip of a book, they'll add a note with a version number and if any typos or corrections are made, the next filehsharer along makes that know by adding a new version number.

I know from my own experiences with some typos and spellings that have been caught by readers of my writing, who did this for no money might I add. Were their suggestions any less or any more helpful than a person whose paid to do the same? Will all writing cease because someone isn't making a buck off it?

Money will not turn a "bad" writer into a "good" writer I grant you. However, in the vast majority of cases, it will allow a "good" writers work to be made into something that is worth reading.

And lack of money will not make a great writer any less great. Are you honestly saying that money is the only way to make something worth reading? That the traditional process is the only way that writers can better themselves? From good to readable, what does that even mean? Stephen King is possibly one of the worst writers in history, and okay, that's subjective, but everything is when it comes to writing. Good, bad, indifferent, it's all up to YOU. You don't need someone in between to tell you what is worthwhile and what isn't. Gladly, we're living in a time where you CAN make up your own mind, where your choices aren't limited to what the companies want you to read.

The case for money is even more pronounced in the medium of film and tv.

I've cut the above quote short because I don't really care about TV and I think it's going to die out within ten years anyway. Film as well can't last at current levels. Do I know where its going? Not a clue, as far as I'm concerned TV and FILM are cultural wastelands at the moment and I can 't see that getting any better in the near future.

And if the prevailing attitude of "It should be free" continues then there will be far less for us to choose from. It wont matter how much power we have in our hands, how much we stick it to the big corps, how much filtering we do. If there is virtually nothing to choose from then is having the choice really worth it?

There is an old saying "beggars can't be choosers". When this "everything should be free" utopia if finally created then we will all truly be the beggars and we simply wont have any choice in what is served up to us.

I think your logic is way off. If everything is free then people will still create, if not create more. The barriers of entry are down, so you don't need to worry about the old gatekeepers. You can do it yourself and ask the audience what they think. There will be more cultural creativity in the next ten years than in the last sixty, that's my prediction. More writers, more musicians, all that good stuff. Your choices will be abundant (they are already). You wont have to pay for your culture, but you know what, you might pay anyway just to support people you like. This isn't a UTOPIA, its the pre-wake of the singularity in action.

Welcome to the future, it's happening now