The truth is much "pursuit of art" is a status exercise by those with the leisure capacity to do so, and this only maintains status because most people do not have the spare time and energy to put into it.

In the event everyone is sitting around with time on their hands wondering what to do and we have machines that spit out endless reams of anything it is a very curious question what exactly it is most people would end up doing, which would probably be some new status seeking exercise.

▲

jodacola 5 hours ago | parent [-]

Whoa, fascinating: what to call this paradox I'd never considered before?

From the blog post:

> In my dream world, the robots do all the boring jobs and humans spend all their time being creative, connecting with one another, learning about the universe, and sharing our ideas and creations in a great big prosperous circle.

But with this and your other comment [0] about humans churning out 10 articles a day and changing the idea of what's "valuable" leads me to a bit of a conundrum I can't quite unwind:

If AI took over all the boring jobs (chores, labor, etc.) and we had all the time in the world to be creative, and we did just that, to the effect of humans generating dramatically more from "creative" ventures, have we created the same scenario, from a different approach? What then?

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49122692

	▲	fidotron 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		My guess is energy gets redirected towards sport, and everything associated with it. It's already often an abstracted form of things that used to be work (sailing, hunting etc.), but it's also something more unique that a machine participating in makes no sense.