[HN Gopher] Creating Bluey: Tales from the Art Director
___________________________________________________________________
Creating Bluey: Tales from the Art Director
Author : cfcfcf
Score : 232 points
Date : 2025-04-28 01:04 UTC (5 days ago)
(HTM) web link (substack.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (substack.com)
| dang wrote:
| Recent and related (ok, maybe a bit much, but the new article
| looks good too!)
|
| _'Bluey's World': How a Cute Aussie Puppy Became a Juggernaut_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43410874 - March 2025 (313
| comments)
|
| _A look at the creative process behind Bluey and Cocomelon
| (2024)_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43339206 - March
| 2025 (215 comments)
|
| Also:
|
| _Bluey, and the hierarchy of distractions_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41510482 - Sept 2024 (14
| comments)
|
| _How Australia's 'Bluey' conquered children's entertainment_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38875399 - Jan 2024 (430
| comments)
| amiga386 wrote:
| The art director's graduate animation project (as mentioned in
| the article) from 10 years ago:
|
| Pond Scum - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2VibU-NeEI
| bombcar wrote:
| For me, at least, this shows the same emphasis on Story (talked
| about in part 4) - the animation is decent if not great, but
| the character does _exactly_ what you expect him to at the end,
| and that 's Story.
| aaronbrethorst wrote:
| _I now avoid jobs that pressure everyone into thinking a good
| show or project can only be created at the expense of everyone's
| well being. Even if the IP they're offering you a chance to work
| on is exciting (and unfortunately I've seen way too many times
| now how this can be used as a bargaining chip to mistreat
| people). It doesn't have to be that way. You can make something
| great without killing your crew._
|
| hear hear.
| jazzcomputer wrote:
| I came across a game studio a few years ago here in NZ that
| does it right. I worked in a hot desk place that housed their
| studio in a space - they were never working past 5.30, had
| amazing staff reviews (they did them in a space where I could
| overhear them), have a good IP, good wage packages, excellent
| internal mentoring, a good gender split, recruit diverse staff.
|
| I'm pretty sure there's a few other studios here too which are
| good. I'm just sharing this 'cos, well... it's nice to hear the
| positives.
| unsnap_biceps wrote:
| If you're willing to share their name, I'd love to take a
| look at their games and support a positive place.
| jazzcomputer wrote:
| Runaway Play
|
| I also hear good things about Dinosaur Polo Club
| unsnap_biceps wrote:
| Funny! I have played both the games Dinosaur Polo Club
| has released.
|
| I'll take a gander at Runaway Play later this weekend.
| Thank you for the pointer!
| ekianjo wrote:
| > You can make something great without killing your crew.
|
| You could get many counter examples of projects that did very
| well and where everyone was in crunch mode for the last 6
| months. There is no rule out there and one team being
| successful once doing things one way is not a proof of anything
| diatone wrote:
| Don't think Catriona was commenting about whether or not it's
| possible to make something great period. More that greatness
| doesn't excuse not treating people like human beings
| ninkendo wrote:
| Was this in the article somewhere? I searched and didn't see it
| (and I'm most interested in why she left, and haven't found
| anything on it.)
| jwmerrill wrote:
| The article is a four part series.
| aaronbrethorst wrote:
| Weird, I think the link changed. I was quoting from part 3, I
| believe, and it's been changed to part 1.
|
| Edit: yeah part 3 https://goodsniff.substack.com/p/creating-
| bluey-tales-from-t...
| ggm wrote:
| As a brisbane resident, seeing aspects of my city skyline
| lovingly created for kids TV is fantastic. I like to imagine
| small people the world over seeing the story bridge or "the zip
| water heater" state government building or the brown snake and to
| them it's just Shelbyville without a monorail but to anyone from
| Brisvegas..
| meander_water wrote:
| As someone who struggles to make anything that looks good, I am
| fascinated by designers ability to take a brief and bring it to
| life using their own unique artisic voice.
|
| The second part to this is a fine example -
| https://goodsniff.substack.com/p/creating-bluey-tales-from-t...
|
| I've always wondered how they managed to make the show look and
| feel Brisbane, and this delivers.
| unsnap_biceps wrote:
| Semi Related 20khtz episodes that are delightful:
|
| The Voices of Bluey w/ Uncle Stripe
| https://www.20k.org/episodes/thevoicesofbluey
|
| The Organic Sound of Bluey w/ Sound Designer Dan Brumm
| https://www.20k.org/episodes/thesoundofbluey
| jppope wrote:
| Amazing story, and what a narrative voice! The whole thing pulls
| you in and pushes you off, it builds you up and breaks you down.
| I loved this
| einpoklum wrote:
| Nitpick:
|
| > * it was the beginnings of social media in the early 2010s*
|
| - IRC + NNTP newsgroups were already popular by 1989.
|
| - Myspace was quite popular by 2004.
|
| - Facebook was popular by... 2006 I guess?
|
| and that's just a few platforms I can mention.
| aikinai wrote:
| Your perspective of "popular" is incredibly far off. Popular
| among people in your circle of socioeconomics and interests is
| not that same as popular among the general population.
| edejong wrote:
| Your position is indeed supported by the data presented here:
| https://ourworldindata.org/rise-of-social-media
| JohnScolaro wrote:
| What a fantastic write-up. As a Brisbane native and software
| developer I often feel similarly to the author about Brisbane's
| software dev scene. Brisbane so often feels like a backwater,
| with the big dogs down in Melbourne and Sydney, and the 'peak of
| industry' in the US.
|
| I'd love to move to Seattle and work for Amazon or something to
| get 'relevant industry experience' but what I'd _really_ love to
| do is make a go of it here because - like the author - I believe
| Brisbane is secretly still the best city in the world ;-)
| phinnaeus wrote:
| I lived and worked as a dev in Seattle for 8 years before
| moving to Sydney. I want nothing more than for Australia to
| have a thriving tech scene but I haven't seen much progress in
| that area since I moved here 5 years ago. I still love it and
| have no plans to go back. I just wish there was more
| opportunity here and not so much constant pressure to move back
| to the US for increased salary and challenge.
| cadamsdotcom wrote:
| Hey there, I've been in Sydney 5 years same as you (after a 7
| year stint in SF) and feel exactly the same way.
|
| If you're around in the next week or two it'd be great to
| grab coffee and talk about it! Coffee being the great Aussie
| connector and all.
|
| You can find my email on my profile.
| 2muchcoffeeman wrote:
| Australia in some ways is the opposite of the US. Too much
| regulation and not enough effort to help people start
| businesses. It really needs to change and they're missing a
| big opportunity to make the start up scene better. Just as
| long as we don't do it while throwing out sensible
| regulations.
| weeksie wrote:
| Funny. I lived in Seattle for 5 years before I moved to
| Sydney, where I lived for 5 years. That was a different era
| though, tech wasn't the industry it is now and the internet
| still felt new. I moved down in 2003 and my American accent
| helped me land a job I wasn't qualified for (having self
| taught myself some php and java in Seattle, mostly working as
| a bartender though). In 2005 I started a small software shop
| with some friends. Back then (2003) the Ruby user's group was
| too small to get a reservation at a pub so we'd have to
| partner up with the Smalltalk guys. Rails came out a year or
| so later and that changed.
|
| I got back into web stuff when I moved to the states and have
| been up and down the stack many times since, but I have a ton
| of nostalgia for the stuff we did back then. Web 2 was an
| annoying new buzzword and we were still mostly writing
| software for kiosks, device drivers in C, bridging that with
| Lua, and using Flash for the interface b/c everybody else in
| the space was using shitty C++ Motif interfaces. . . . memory
| lane.
|
| Imagine that Newtown and the Inner West are a lot different
| than when I lived there, but I do miss that time.
| dalanmiller wrote:
| Similar story but Melbourne.
|
| I just don't see _as much_ self-directed ambition or
| obsession? Going to a meetup in Seattle or SF in the early
| 2010s there were serious obsessives. Masters of domains like
| Go or JavaScript and someone from Sequoia at the Startup
| Weekend. Always flocks of folks looking to start their next
| business. That same bug just never hit here?
|
| This I find weird, surely there are people who can sense
| opportunities unlockable by tech and Australia is not at all
| easier or any less expensive than the U.S., I still can't
| quite put my finger on it. For me there's still a magical
| cultural element to a place like SF, and to an extent -
| Seattle, when it comes to creating new opportunities.
| chickenzzzzu wrote:
| I live down the street from Amazon's relatively nice suburban
| office (you couldn't pay me to step foot in Seattle).
|
| Let me save you the trip, you don't want to work for Amazon at
| the money they pay. They would have to 1.5x it or maybe even
| double it to make it worth the suffering of working there.
|
| Life is short-- work somewhere else, or failing that, on your
| own thing :)
| mnbbrown wrote:
| As someone who's from Brisbane but spent the last 7 years in
| London you're 100% correct. Brisbane is the best city in the
| world. I'm excited to eventually move back.
| lukan wrote:
| "I believe Brisbane is secretly still the best city in the
| world"
|
| Personally the 3 times I visited Brisbane, were all in all
| quite neutral for me, not great, not bad. But friends had way
| worse experiences and when I found a iconic backpackers book,
| "No shitting on the toilet", I had a good laugh about those
| passages:
|
| "A friend of mine would never leave a place until he'd had a
| good time there. Another friend would not leave a destination
| until he had learnt something encouraging about the people and
| their culture. Both are currently stuck in Brisbane."
|
| So .. I would have been stuck there as well. So please no
| offense about your home town. I love Queensland. And Bluey. And
| would give your hometown a chance again. But I do know people
| who never ever want to go there again. (But it also has been
| some years.)
| JohnScolaro wrote:
| Oh I can 100% see where all of that comes from too.
|
| I think a lot of Brisbanes secret beauty is well hidden from
| people just visiting. The temperate rainforests, glasshouse
| mountains, some of the best beaches in the world all within
| an hours drive. The strange birds, the general attitude of
| the public. I think it's all quite nice. My only personal
| gripe is that I think it's far too hot in summer!
|
| I'm also extremely biased though, so take my opinion with a
| grain of salt. Brisbane does have an awful lot of mediocrity
| too, but I'm still proud of it, and keen to show it off in
| 2032 with the Olympics!
| lukan wrote:
| "but I'm still proud of it, and keen to show it off in 2032
| with the Olympics!"
|
| Maybe see you there :)
| markus_zhang wrote:
| I live in Canada and Bluey is the reason I really want to visit
| Brisbane.
| polotics wrote:
| Wow the money shot of this I think is the quote:
|
| "...Or at least have a bit more financial security to show for
| it. My designs have generated roughly 2 billion dollars for the
| people lucky enough to be cashing in on it. Not bad surplus value
| for someone on an 88k salary."""
|
| 88k AUD is less than 60'000 USD, and as this art director worked
| one year on this, the raw ratio of wage earned to this is
| 0.00003, so 0.003 percent. Sure there were other people involved,
| but even if this art director's year of repetitive strain
| injuries is only worth one percent of the value of Bluey, then
| still it managed to capture only 0.3 percent of the value. This
| 99.7% makes the 30% Apple-tax on developers look good. I think it
| shouldn't.
|
| The lesson for me is: creative endeavours are meant to die in our
| society.
| namdnay wrote:
| But if Bluey (like most shows people will work on) hadn't been
| a huge success, he would still have kept his 88k
|
| That's the inherent trade off in a salaried position - you are
| trading potential wealth for guaranteed security
| z2 wrote:
| Not at all familiar with animation or the broader industry
| but could they have at least offered the potential for
| royalties or some sort of sales based bonuses?
| 2muchcoffeeman wrote:
| I believe most of the value of Bluey is captured by the
| BBC. The whole thing is a real shame for Australia. We've
| had a couple of the best children's entertainment ever:
| Wiggles and Bluey. Don't know why they didn't negotiate a
| bigger piece of the pie with Bluey.
| overfeed wrote:
| Why didn't ABC fund the whole shebang? I suspect the BBC
| has a much bigger warchest to deploy - recalling the
| ludicrous amounts invested into Top Gear or the numerous
| David Attenborough nature shows.
| 2muchcoffeeman wrote:
| Even the BBC war chest appears to be dwindling. Or at
| least it's become harder to produce things on their own.
| The latest seasons of Dr Who are produced in
| collaboration with Disney.
|
| But yes, they would have had bigger reach, and we might
| not have gotten this far without the BBC. I just want the
| ABC to have got a more significant chunk.
| namdnay wrote:
| For star voice actors or an animator who has already made
| their reputation on other shows maybe?
|
| The interesting question would be "if at the time they had
| offered him 40k and points, would he have chosen that?"
| ksynwa wrote:
| Would be cool if there was a middle ground between risking
| destitution by claiming a share of the income made and giving
| up your fair share of the billions made in return of a modest
| salary.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| Such as buying shares of Disney stock?
|
| Perhaps even via basically free 0.03% expense ratio index
| fund that automatically gives the owner access to business
| success across the entire economy.
|
| Bluey is also made by the government, so technically, there
| is no equity gains or profit to be had at that level, it's
| just a negotiation of compensation.
| Tade0 wrote:
| There's the option of being a freelancer and establishing a
| co-op with your freelancer friends.
|
| Easier said than done, but some people I knew from college
| actually managed to pull this off.
| brookst wrote:
| There is! You can negotiate a lower salary and higher
| participation. Obviously they have to want you, but when a
| show like this is starting up and not at all sure to even
| make it one season, an art director who would work for 25%
| pay and 1% of future profits would be snapped up.
| phreack wrote:
| Pessimistically, I'd then imagine they get burnt by
| Hollywood accounting and end up fully empty handed
| throwup238 wrote:
| The way around Hollywood accounting is to negotiate
| points on gross revenue or royalties rather than profit.
| That's SOP in TV/movies for people with decent
| representation and the leverage to ask for it. Points on
| profit are largely seen the same way tech people view
| startup options.
| jl6 wrote:
| The middle ground is usually to buy shares in your
| employer. In this case it seems like it's the BBC who have
| hit the jackpot, so I guess the real winner is... the
| British public?
| suddenlybananas wrote:
| It's not like she was offered equity and chose a meagre
| salary. Don't paint exploitation as a trade-off.
| bobxmax wrote:
| Exploitation? Thousands of people are getting paid $90k to
| paint pointless characters nobody will ever see. It's not
| exploitation because one of them succeeds.
| suddenlybananas wrote:
| It's a technical term. She produced immense value and she
| didn't receive it, someone else took it. That's
| exploitation in Marxism.
|
| I also don't get where you get these idea that there's
| this huge glut of artists producing work that's unpopular
| _and getting paid for it_. If you 're at the point you're
| getting paid 90k a year, you're working in studios that
| almost certainly turn a profit.
| AstroBen wrote:
| The vast majority of startups lose money for their
| founders. So if that happens the founders should have
| been paid? The workers were the exploiters?
|
| I've hired people first hand for projects that ended up
| being a flop. They made out much better than I did
|
| Someone has to take the risk. It's not guaranteed it'll
| be a risk with a positive expected value either
| suddenlybananas wrote:
| You know that if an employee works at a start up that
| goes under, they also face risk right? Like you're aware
| that people get laid off and fired?
| AstroBen wrote:
| No I had no idea. Thanks
| dahart wrote:
| The entire reason someone takes the risk is for the
| chance to have a 'positive' expected value, which in
| startup land means the company gets really big, hires a
| lot of people, and makes a lot of money for the owners
| (founders & investors) by selling a product for more
| money than they pay the workers.
|
| Startup investors often treat this like an odds game,
| expecting that while 9 out of 10 investments might fail,
| one of them will return better than 10x, which turns into
| a net profit on investments.
|
| The "risk" might be relatively big for small investors,
| but it's quite low for the bigger savvier institutional
| investors.
|
| Startups are economically interesting, but they are not
| the majority of the economy. When evaluating parent's
| argument, don't forget to think about companies like
| Walmart, Amazon, Exxon, and Disney.
| AstroBen wrote:
| > Startup investors often treat this like an odds game
|
| Yeah, it's not free profit though. If you're not good at
| choosing investments you end up with 9 out of 10 failing,
| and 1 only making 2x. That's what I mean by there are no
| guarantees of it
|
| It's very easy to look at an isolated case where they
| made 10x and see it as unfair.. and miss the 9 other
| shots they took which lost money. Or hell the 90 other
| shots, and they're still in the hole overall
|
| > When evaluating parent's argument, don't forget to
| think about companies like Walmart, Amazon, Exxon, and
| Disney.
|
| Yeah these are definitely a different ballgame. Not sure
| where I stand on it - I don't know enough about the
| economics of that
| dahart wrote:
| I agree, and it's objectively true, that there are no
| guarantees on investment. I don't think GP was making any
| arguments that implied otherwise.
|
| > It's very easy to look at an isolated case where they
| made 10x and see it as unfair
|
| "Unfair" is subjective and an insanely deep topic we
| can't even begin broach here thoughtfully. It's always
| true that a profitable company has incomes that exceed
| its costs, by definition. Since costs include employee
| pay, it's always true in a profitable company that
| employees are collectively providing a greater value to
| the company than they are capturing for themselves.
| You're still arguing from a failed startup perspective,
| and by and large, failing and failed startups are not
| running the economy, nor are even a significant portion.
| The majority of people in the economy are working for
| someone else's profitable company. People who have money
| do take risks on startups for the chance make it big, but
| those people had money to begin with.
| AstroBen wrote:
| Yeah unfair was the wrong word. I mean just to focus on
| exploitation in the Marxist sense suddenlybananas was
| using it
|
| The economics are the same for a startup and established
| company, no? I was just talking about that because that's
| what Bluey was. Walmart was also once a tiny business and
| the returns are still happening today. We're all free to
| own part of them through publicly traded stocks. Of
| course the returns are a lot lower now simply because
| there's less risk
|
| If they're extracting so much extra from employees that
| they're overpriced in the market, that leaves room for a
| competitor to offer lower prices. "Your margin is my
| opportunity"
|
| If they're getting outsized margins by paying tiny
| salaries, it opens up room for a competitor to get the
| best people to work for them by paying more
|
| Worker co-ops are still an option under capitalism, also
|
| It's not a perfect system but it seems to work fairly
| well?
|
| > those people had money to begin with
|
| Well.. are we not posting this on a VC firm's website?
| There are options to getting money if you're starting
| with none
|
| I can very much get behind removing generational wealth.
| That benefits no-one
| dahart wrote:
| > The economics are the same for a startup and
| established company, no?
|
| No, I don't think so at all. A startup founder and a
| startup investor are starting from completely different
| places and have completely different risks from a minimum
| wage Walmart or McDonalds employee, and they usually
| occupy different social classes.
|
| Workers in a co-op are part owner, so they become, in
| part, the capitalists. They might be fractional
| capitalists, but they are part worker and part owner.
| That's fine, and it's not what Marx was worried about.
| Marx was worried about the plight of the laborer who gets
| no share of the ownership at all. Startup founders are
| sometimes also owners, they are capitalists. Investors
| are more pure capitalists, they use their money to buy
| ownership of companies in hopes of making more money.
| Stock purchases are also a way to be a fractional owner
| in a way, that's one way to look at it. Most minimum wage
| employees don't have any stock, most of the lower class
| doesn't have any stock.
|
| Nobody said that owners don't take risks in capitalism.
| They do take risks with their capital when they invest.
|
| > Your margin is my opportunity
|
| Tell that to the low-paid & minimum-wage workers across
| the country. Somehow competition has failed to result in
| the minimum wage going up on its own. Somehow competition
| hasn't eliminated the working poor.
|
| BTW most of the ultra rich capitalists are wildly in
| favor of generational wealth, since it benefits them and
| their families. Historically it was true that the
| majority of ultra-wealthy people had inherited their
| wealth, despite all the rags-to-riches and startup
| stories we're told.
| brookst wrote:
| What studios consistently turn a profit?
|
| They have years where they make hundreds of millions,
| years when they lose hundreds of millions.
|
| It is weird to want the security of a paycheck,
| participation in unlikely huge successes, and no exposure
| to much more likely flops.
| bonaldi wrote:
| It's not weird at all; in other circumstances we call it
| a bonus.
|
| You get baseline security by trading away the unlimited
| upside, but you are still incentivised to produce your
| best work by knowing if you help create a huge success
| you'll get additional compensation for it.
| suddenlybananas wrote:
| You don't get security. You can be fired easily. It's
| workers who face the consequences of the risks taken on
| by capitalists.
| pastor_williams wrote:
| How would her work operate under Marxism? Would she get
| to keep the immense value? That's not my understanding of
| Marxism but maybe I'm mistaken.
| suddenlybananas wrote:
| I'd recommend reading about what surplus labour is so
| that you could better understand the relevant arguments.
| bobxmax wrote:
| She didn't produce value. Someone else created value out
| of what she created.
|
| You ironically and accidentally stumbled onto the very
| reason Marxism has always failed so miserably.
| suddenlybananas wrote:
| This is an insane point of view. I genuinely don't
| understand how you can hold it. You don't think the
| person who actually made the product is the one who made
| the value? Do you believe in magic? Are capitalists just
| bestowing magic juju that creates value and any actual
| labour and hard work is irrelevant?
| exitb wrote:
| The product is a cartoon (and associated services,
| merchandise), not the idea. There were countless people
| involved in creating the set of products, even if just
| one person came up with the concept.
| suddenlybananas wrote:
| Sorry, I think we're talking cross-purposes here. I agree
| that the workers are the ones who should receive the
| profits. The art director is one such worker (out of
| many).
| jdgoesmarching wrote:
| This is not a forum that is capable of factoring in power
| dynamics in any economic discussion. The market is always
| perfect, everyone has equal opportunities to capitalize on
| their own labor as an entrepreneur, just negotiate with
| your employer, etc.
| bobxmax wrote:
| She's an artist, not some poor wage slave. The fact she
| gets paid a living wage at all for doodling in a notebook
| is thanks to the miracle of consumer capitalism.
|
| Van Gogh couldn't trade his paintings for stale bread.
| suddenlybananas wrote:
| "doodling in a notebook". Are you aware of how big of a
| thing bluey is?
| treyd wrote:
| That's a great point. I'm glad to know that this is the only
| possible option and that the world can't be any better than
| it is.
| andrepd wrote:
| A certain 19th century German thinker wrote abundantly on that
| issue :-) It's not just creative endeavours.
|
| The fact that access to capital is not evenly distributed means
| that those who don't have it have to surrender their surplus
| value to those that have it.
| MrBuddyCasino wrote:
| [flagged]
| polotics wrote:
| Are you sure you read the parent post? It was not about
| wealth being immanent at all as I read it, it was about
| capital ownership granting full access to work-created
| value.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| Doesn't the British government and/or Australian
| government own Bluey?
|
| What capital is there to own? Maybe Ludo Studios
| negotiated a piece of the pie for themselves, but I doubt
| it is much in the grand scheme of things.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluey_(TV_series)
|
| > It was commissioned by the Australian Broadcasting
| Corporation and the British Broadcasting Corporation,
| with BBC Studios holding global distribution and
| merchandising rights.
| dahart wrote:
| The government part is a good point, this is not the best
| example of a capitalist endeavor.
|
| > What capital is there to own?
|
| The rights you mentioned is part of the 'capital' - these
| days capital and 'means of production' certainly involve
| intellectual property. I think it always did - capital
| was always referring to ownership - but the mix is
| starting to lean heavily on intangibles now, with
| software running so much of the world. The ABC & BBC
| capital used to include tons of high power broadcasting
| equipment, but maybe that mostly going or gone now?
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| I didn't mean capital in the accounting sense, I meant
| receiving capital as remuneration as opposed to a salary.
| The more accurate word would have been equity, but I was
| using the term polotics used:
|
| >it was about capital ownership granting full access to
| work-created value.
| dahart wrote:
| What do you mean? @plotics wasn't talking about
| remuneration for products or services, nor equity.
| "Capital ownership" in the sentence you quoted is
| referring to the company, the ol' ownership of the means
| of production. "Granting full access to work-created
| value" means the owners (investors, CEO, etc.) would
| split profits among workers rather than keep the profits
| for themselves.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| That is called equity (at least in the USA).
|
| > Granting full access to work-created value" means the
| owners (investors, CEO, etc.) would split profits among
| workers rather than keep the profits for themselves.
|
| This is remuneration, the reward in exchange for your
| effort/wares/risk.
|
| In this case, the artist would have had to ask taxpayers
| (or the taxpayers' representatives) to sell them a piece
| of the taxpayer's equity. Or some type of royalty/revenue
| sharing agreement.
|
| Obviously, that was not going to happen for a small time
| artist (that kind of stuff is reserved for well connected
| people when it comes to government assets).
|
| But the second best option the world has come up with is
| public equity markets, where the common people can invest
| and gain access to equity, which is also very liquid.
| dahart wrote:
| You asked what the capital is, and the government assets
| reserved for well connected people is the "capital" in
| this case.
|
| You can call capital equity or remuneration, but that
| seems slightly weird even though there's overlap of
| concepts. Either way, I don't think that's what the
| phrase @plotics used was referring to. The "capital" in
| that case was referring to the money, goods, and other
| means of production used to finance the project _before_
| any remuneration occurs. Capital is the leverage by which
| the well connected people assert the rights to the future
| profits. Workers not having equity is indeed what not
| having access to the full value means, which keeps
| workers from building capital.
|
| I think we're probably in agreement. And even though
| there's an analogy to capital, Bluey wasn't a capitalist
| operation so definitely not clear Marxist ideas apply
| here.
| danielvaughn wrote:
| If you've seen the show, you'd know that this artists' work
| was deeply instrumental to the creation of the wealth. It
| would be one thing if the author was an associate grabbing
| coffees and scheduling meetings.
|
| In this case, not getting a royalty for their contribution
| is shameful.
| MrBuddyCasino wrote:
| I agree it is shameful. This is however not the issue
| that is being discussed here.
|
| Fyi, George Lucas made sure everyone involved in Star
| Wars got taken care of.
| suddenlybananas wrote:
| Or maybe the people who actually build that wealth deserve
| to keep it.
| tomhow wrote:
| _Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents. Omit internet
| tropes._
|
| _Please don 't use Hacker News for political or
| ideological battle. It tramples curiosity._
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
| Uehreka wrote:
| After the number of times I've seen people invoke the HN
| guidelines to trample good spirited discussions there
| should be a guideline against quoting the guidelines.
| input_sh wrote:
| If anyone's entitled to quote the guidelines, it's the
| mod you're replying to.
| dredmorbius wrote:
| Announcement:
| <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43558671>
| dahart wrote:
| How do you think wealth works? Regardless of your political
| stance or economic beliefs, that doesn't seem like a very
| informed or thoughtful summary of Marx, who I assume is who
| the parent comment was referring to, and was one of the
| more influential economists of all time. Have you read
| Marx? He might have thought and written about wealth more
| than both you and me. FWIW he didn't argue that wealth
| somehow exists, he argued that for business owners, wealth
| stems from the discrepancy between what laborers are paid
| and what their employers collect. He went much further than
| that, but that much is technically true, right?
| bobxmax wrote:
| How does that remotely apply here? If she has the value, why
| didn't she distribute it herself?
| mrlatinos wrote:
| Was this quote removed from the post? I'm not seeing it.
| polotics wrote:
| it's in the 4-parts series, the whole is well worth a read
| fuzzfactor wrote:
| >there's a huge amount of calculated work and effort that can put
| yourself in a position for luck to occur.
|
| >I truly realised that if you create what YOU want to create, the
| jobs and opportunities that will creatively satisfy you the most
| will come out of exuding that energy into the world.
|
| This is all about the commercial application of art, but I find
| it can work for science as well.
| abbycurtis33 wrote:
| Somehow this is written with an Australian accent.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-05-03 23:01 UTC)