Just to try to understand this, do you think anyone should be able to make, say, a Harry Potter movie right now paying nothing to the author?

>That model is completely counter-intuitive and punitive to the consumer.

I disagree with this so much. Paying for a thing once and getting the thing is absolutely intuitive. Subscription models where you pay generally for access over a time period to a broad swath of things is counter-intuitive. I want to read a handful of articles from NYT a month. I will never sign up for a subscription for that, so I just don’t really get to read NYT articles. I’m sure there is an amount I could agree to pay for an article.

AI is good at coding because it is heavily text focused with excellent documentation and a relatively clear binary on works/doesn’t work. I wouldn’t so quickly lump all other kinds of remote work into the same bucket based on your experience coding.

Having a roommate and an annual transportation budget under $9000 probably isn’t the right demarcation line for poverty.

How do you read this article and hear indigence? It’s clearly someone grieving something personal about their own relationship with the technology.