“This ‘groundbreaking’ AI proposal that they gave us yesterday, they proposed that our background performers should be able to be scanned, get one day’s pay, and their companies should own that scan, their image, their likeness and should be able to use it for the rest of eternity on any project they want, with no consent and no compensation. So if you think that’s a groundbreaking proposal, I suggest you think again.”
They’re not doing it to ‘make ends meet.’ That implies they’re struggling to survive, not thrive.
Maybe once they start getting screwed over by copyright and patent laws, they’ll stop advocating for them.
Then we can have AI movies, real movies, and any blend of the two. Only problem is nobody can use the government to protect their ideas.
It will result in cheaper products and services all around the world, at the expense of those making way too much money right now.
Do you know how much a lot of those positions make? A lot are in the $15/hour range if they’re lucky. That’s for a Production Assistant, others are very much in that range to. Given that numerous studies have shown that’s not enough to live on depending on the state, it very much means they’re struggling to survive.
Right. Do you know the difference between a need and a want?
It’s not like these people are surviving off of peanut butter sandwiches.
Please, tell the starving kids of Africa those in LA aren’t making enough money.
What’s your point here? Are you just chaffed by the terminology? The point is there’s a lot in the industry that are making a substandard wage. And now those at the top want to even take that away to make a few more pennies.
My point is that I don’t care for people who want more money. Those who need it should come first.
Greedy, entitled people have been conflating to the two to fool others into thinking they always ‘need’ more. Just look at these comments. Some people really don’t know the difference between want and need.
So… you want the rich to get richer because why bother to save anyone but the poorest of the poor?
No, I think copyright and patent laws need to die.
This will stop both parties from getting richer at everyone else’s expense.
But this is about companies not wanting to have to pay for entry level actors ever again, making it even harder to get into unless you’re already rich, also meaning less jobs for everyone but those already rich. Meaning the entertainment industry pockets even more and wealth inequality (and thus likely the velocity of money in related areas) in the entertainment industry gets even worse than it already is. Yaaaay.
Then they should work together to end copyright and patent laws altogether.
I worked sound on movies. Not big budget ones, but they were still movies made by studios.
It didn’t pay well.
I’m sure you did less work for more money than the vast majority of people struggling in Africa.
You chose to stay in LA, one of the most expensive cities in the world.
Well you can be sure of that, but it would be a lie. Days on set can be 20 hours. And then you have to come back and do another 20 hour day the next day. And you get paid very little for doing it unless you’re on a big budget film, which I never was.
Might want to see how people live in Burundi before you call it a lie.
And keep in mind, you’re only subjected to this conditions so people richer than you can be even richer at your expense. (Long hours, low wages, high rent)
This is what I mean by passing a bunch of money around at the top. It doesn’t even matter if you make more money because it’s just going to end up in the hands of landlords and investors. All of does is drive up inflation, making it so the truly poor people never benefit from our excess.
Right, so if I want to complain, I have to be a dirt farmer in Burundi. Otherwise my life is too luxurious.
No. I suggest you re-read what I said.
I am literally saying the opposite of that when I say “I’m not in the all or nothing camp.”
Edit: You got 8 upvotes for being wrong, lol. People are really upset when rhetoric goes against the status-quo.
So people should make less money in more developed countries because people in Africa do? What are you arguing for here? A person making $30 instead of $15 an hour isn’t going to affect Africa in any tangible way. Global wealth inequality is a much larger issue than Hollywood, and I’m not sure why they would even be brought into the same argument.
I’m arguing the disparity in wealth should shrink and people like those in the article are just passing a bunch of money around at the top.
We have the excess to help those less fortunate, but we’d rather further ourselves because it’s what’s cool. It’s a cultural issue centered around the idea that those who have more deserve more and those who have less don’t matter.
People like you get really mad whenever anyone suggests anything to the contrary and that’s why these problems don’t get solved. People like you don’t care to solve them.
The people mentioned in the article are background actors. Extras. Look it up, they only get paid $100-200 a day. Even if they were an extra every weekday of the year that’s $26,000 a year. These people aren’t getting rich.
I’m not mad. I agree with helping elevate Africa economically to help it become a more developed part of the world. I just don’t think that a thread about background actors being digitally copied to stiff them on potential poverty wages is the best use of your time for your attempted efforts to help Africa.
They still have more wealth and higher quality of life than the vast majority of people ever to walk to the Earth.
Have you noticed how all of these people always need more money? It’s because the moment they get more, prices go up and they’re right back where they started. All of these happens while children go without food, water, electricity, shelter, and education. These problems will not be solved by doing the same thing we’ve been doing.
The solution isn’t to make more. It’s to spend less. When that becomes sexy, these problems will be solved overnight.
Please explain to me how people in poverty in the US spending less money helps people in Africa.
Prices won’t be able to rise and we’ll have more excess to give to those who need it.
It’s a pretty simple concept if you put forth even the slightest amount of effort into understanding it.
Ask the opposite. How does paying Americans more help global poverty? Oh yeah, it doesn’t. Lol. That’s all according to plan. That’s what I mean by “passing a bunch of money around at the top.”
We focus on ‘space tourism’ before children have food and water. These problems will never be solved if people keep listening to your rhetoric, which unfortunately they do.
Wake me up when the problems get solved doing something I don’t suggest. I’d love to admit when I’m wrong so long as the problems get solved. But you’re just repeating history because you haven’t learned from it yet.