> The work is the same, yet if the take home is different, you've proven that your income is not in fact earned through work in a moral sense.

You could say the same about musicians and authors. Are they immoral as well?

▲

atq2119 8 hours ago | parent [-]

Yes, the same is absolutely true for many other professions. And artists are probably more aware than most, at least on average, how much luck plays a role.

But note that I have been very careful not to call the fund managers individually immoral.

▲

taffer 7 hours ago | parent [-]

I fail to see the moral problem with being able to write a book that millions or even billions of people can enjoy. To me that's a feature, not a bug.

▲

ForHackernews 6 hours ago | parent [-]

Work on your reading comprehension. The comment you're replying to specifically said they were not impugning the morality of artists or fund managers.

Making great art is wonderful, but it's certainly not "work" the same way that digging a ditch or answering tech support calls is.

	▲	taffer an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith. [1] I was talking specifically about the moral implications of books that can be read without any additional work from the author. This statement is about books, not authors. > but it's certainly not "work" the same way that digging a ditch I don't think so. Value comes from utility, not from toil. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html