"just look at viewer ratings, total views and cinema turnouts of Hollywood movies in the last 10 years compared to for example 1999-2005. The decline in quality is obvious and measurable."
I attribute this to the self organized dismantling of of movie studio industry in their anti-union fight, the rise of streaming, and the fear of primary investments that drives enshittification same as many other industries in the west.
One thing that the multiple entertainment industry unions did is raise quality by ensuring continuity by ensuring livable pay. Now the studios are systematically dismantling and moving major production stages, and they're applying silly metrics and "risk" based production decisions - see the endless remakes. What little art and pride of production value that was in the industry is tightly squeezed out today.
>One thing that the multiple entertainment industry unions did is raise quality by ensuring continuity by ensuring livable pay.
Was the pay not livable back then for the people who made the likes of The Matrix, The Gladiator, The Dark Knight, LoTR trilogy, Tropic Thunder?
> the rise of streaming
Streaming still needs workers to make movies and shows. Rise of streaming means an increased demand for movies and shows. Does not explain the fall in quality.
The entertainment CEOs in charge would happily enshittify to stream AI slop with no workers if they thought they could get away with it. As it is, they try to leverage the threat, as well as relocating and restarting studio locations, resetting skill quality bases in order to break unions and reduce wages.
>The entertainment CEOs in charge would happily enshittify to stream AI slop with no workers if they thought they could get away with it
You're missing the point of my argument again and moving the frame of the discussions to random tangents you make up, but don't disprove what I'm saying.
Let me disprove your point AGAIN, this time with numbers. According to my Google-Fu, 2000-3000 people worked on making the Matrix in 1999, while today Disney employs 4000-6000 people for their shitty Marvel movies or remakes like snow white.
So no, the enshitification is not due to execs cutting workers, since more people work today on blockbuster movies than before, while quality is more shit.
The enshitification is because the people they employ now are either incompetent or malicious or a mix both.
Disney built a whole Marvel studio complex in Georga, USA moving production away from earlier Marvel production in Hollywood and union labor (and chasing tax breaks). Now they're tearing down that down to move to an even lower cost site in the UK. Marvel movies have been dropping in quality all while the execs pinch pennies and opt for lower and lower cost labor. Your data seems to support my assertions more.
"Tangents" of discussion are the whole point of a conversation I'm not approaching this as some competitive one upsmanship proving ground - I don't think either of us are going to get "proof".
100% enshittification, similar with video games and their anti-union efforts. The conservatives have twisted and co-opted that into their reactionary culture war propaganda, and exported that too evidently.
The tulip craze and many other market excess crashes occurred under non-fiat currency schemes. The money system being fiat or metals backed or crypto is incidental to "let the corporations go out of business, let efficient small companies take their place". If you want smaller corporations and more competitive marketplaces, it's anti-megascale taxes and anti-monopoly regulation that can achieve that.
The one entry level job that's been wiped out for good by LLMs is human marketing copywriters, i.e. the people whose job was to come up with the kind of slop LLMs learned from. They're just rebranding as copyeditors now because AI can write the slop itself, or at least its first draft.
That public statement could easily be an open negotiation tactic saying they'll do it, but want more money to do it. Especially if it is gov't money which would be paying for that feed.
The interesting thing is this is Spain's second wave of doing this, and the economic studies on the first wave of it showed visibly positive results. Spain's economy moved in growth, and with a size larger than many other European nations in similar background conditions of flat to negative population growth, but tighter immigration allowances.
Horrible fiscal ticking time bomb that ignores the fact that regularization means naturalization over the next 10-15 years and so access to EU healthcare system.
The biggest drag on government budgets in EU are socialized healthcare and retirement costs. At this point we know healthcare costs are severely backloaded, with most spending coming out of the last 10 years of someone's life. Regularizing now allows them to show a fiscal boost now and for next 4-5 years(edit: maybe even like 10-15 years) and accumulate a massive liability as they age.
Think about it this way: If you regularize a 30 year old illegal migrant right now with a path to citizenship over next 10-15 years, the government NPV is positive over a 15 year horizon(whilst he works) and then will go flat to negative as he starts using the healthcare system whilst retired.
They contribute to GDP spend, but from the fiscal point of view they are a drag. As for actual percentages per country, I think it heavily varies. In EU i think family spending is like 3% of GDP.
The hope is that this drag will either generate higher cash flows later (i.e money spent on education now will allow them to create value for economy later) or reduce outflows later (i.e a child that gets braces and dental health care now won't spend their whole adult life dealing with teeth issues on taxpayer's dime).
The latter half of careers, and certainly 30-55 is generally the period of highest productivity of working careers. Its even higher value for the economy when wages do a catch up slowly over their time. I think it is politiczed fear mongering to suggest that the economic balance is negative in that kind of exchange.
Legal immigrants if this change goes through - and if the minimum wage of these nations doesn't support any citizen living through their life perhaps the minimum wage should be increased and non performant businesses that can't support it will be shed
You're mentally stuck in 2009-2015. The world has moved on and Spain is now significantly outperforming Germany in growth (obviously not yet in wealth, which is the integral of growth over much longer time periods). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-YZeqk8NCQ&t=456s
I have no doubt that this has positive effects on the national economy as a whole (you get workers, on demand, without really paying for raising, educating, training them), but it is not really sustainable because population growth is low/negative pretty much everywhere, and it also leads to significant pushback from cultural friction and local workers (that dislike competition).
You could argue that the whole rise of somwhat radical rightwing parties all over Europe is mainly the result of policies like this during the last half century...
As I see it, the root of unhappiness in voters is nonperformant housing markets and unaddressed growth of inequality where wages are not sharing in growth of profits. This creates a raft of difficult issues. And the rightwing indeed has an effective playbook to exploit these unaddressed shortfalls while blaming immigration. And the center left parties seem unwilling or unable to address the root problems.
I think western companies and governments have ingrained into their own thinking that the optimization strategy of of minimal investments in fundamental sciences and engineering as real constraint. (actually in more that just that, but that goes off topic..) It's a short term focused fictionalization / profit extraction constraint, but because that's so built into the experience and performance companies in the west, many predictions completely misunderstand what is possible with a different focus. We'll see how fast this can be re-calibrated.
- an office suite, where La Suite is at least partly a coherent package bundling existing software which has documents, chat, video calls, etc but wouldn't really play the role of an office suite IIUC - they serve different purposes mostly
- E2EE, which comes with its unique set of benefits and drawbacks
(and yes, sadly at XWiki SAS we host our code on GitHub too, I wish it wasn't like this)
What a great way to inhibit a path for a nation to advance it's manufacturing capabilities - putting roadblocks in the way of individuals learning how to manufacture things.
I think some the prevalence of AI is actually turning the bias on this. It would actually be a return to the roots of the start of early business computing - and sort of picking up where excel et al left off. I don't think it's AI the tech itself, it's the confidence for companies to build a customized software stack and maintain it is what AI mostly contributes.
Curious how AI is giving people the confidence that they can maintain custom software. Is this Dunning-Kruger at work? It gives me great confidence in being able to stand up a new system, but as someone who has maintained software and databases for 5+ years it gives me nightmares about future maintainability.
Companies have always been able to hire software engineers as well. At least that's my impression in the UK. Is this different in other parts? Not enough engineers left after big tech has hired them all?
Unfortunately what is a “specialization” these days that broadly applicable enough that it isn’t a commodity? Front end? back end? Mobile? “DevOps” [sic]? AWS?
I attribute this to the self organized dismantling of of movie studio industry in their anti-union fight, the rise of streaming, and the fear of primary investments that drives enshittification same as many other industries in the west.
One thing that the multiple entertainment industry unions did is raise quality by ensuring continuity by ensuring livable pay. Now the studios are systematically dismantling and moving major production stages, and they're applying silly metrics and "risk" based production decisions - see the endless remakes. What little art and pride of production value that was in the industry is tightly squeezed out today.
reply