[HN Gopher] Up all night with a Twitch millionaire ___________________________________________________________________ Up all night with a Twitch millionaire Author : breckenedge Score : 88 points Date : 2021-12-10 19:40 UTC (3 hours ago) (HTM) web link (www.washingtonpost.com) (TXT) w3m dump (www.washingtonpost.com) | Permit wrote: | Streaming aside, tyler1 has an almost inhuman dedication and | focus when it comes to League of Legends. On Hacker News it's | common to hear that programmers can't work (on classic | programming tasks) for more than ~4 hours a day. I also feel | exhausted after working for ~4 hours and have always wondered if | this was some sort of mental trap I'd fallen into or a genuine | limit. | | Games like League of Legends require complete focus and attention | yet he somehow manages to regularly stream for 10 hours and | sometimes reaches peaks of over 30 hours(!!!)[1]. Can you imagine | solving leetcode problems (even easy ones) for 30 hours? | | In 2020 he paused streaming so he could focus solely on going | from Diamond (mid-to-high tier) to Challenger (highest tier). If | I recall correctly, he said he would sleep on the couch by his | computer, wake up, play and go back to sleep on the couch after | ~17 hours. | | I don't follow League of Legends (I prefer Dota) but tyler1 has | always stood out to me as a person with an incomparable focus and | dedication. I haven't seen anything similar in the Dota community | and the only programmers that jump to mind would be geohotz or | maybe Nick Winter[2]. | | [1] https://dotesports.com/news/tyler1-marathon-stream-top- | lane-... | | [2] https://blog.nickwinter.net/posts/the-120-hour-workweek- | epic... | butwhywhyoh wrote: | Some heroin users are also incredibly dedicated to finding | their next score. They show intense focus when it comes to | seeking out their next hit. | | Why do you think demonstrating focus on an addictive video game | is the same as solving open-ended computer science problems? | aidenn0 wrote: | There's huge amounts of space between "open-ended computer | science problems" (your words) and "classic programming | tasks" (gp's words) | Permit wrote: | > Why do you think demonstrating focus on an addictive video | game is the same as solving open-ended computer science | problems? | | Firstly, I probably wouldn't classify the work most of us do | as "solving open-ended computer science problems" so I'm not | trying to make a comparison to that work. | | Secondly, I guess it stands out to me because I watch other | people play the same addictive game and are unable to play at | a high level for the same lengths of time. If it were just an | addictive property of the game, we should expect to see | thousands of tyler1's as we see thousands of heroin addicts. | Since we do not, it makes me think that there's something | special with him. | aidenn0 wrote: | My dad worked for startups on-and-off and he definitely was | productive for a lot more than 8 hours per day. He does agree | that for truly novel work there's a limit, but for every novel | problem to solve, there's dozens[1] of reported bugs to | investigate, so there's plenty of work to fit between work on | new things. | | 1: That number seems small today, but I got the sense that bug- | discovery by customers at least was limited by the low number | of customers that a b2b startup had in the 80s. | handrous wrote: | I think the impressive thing is doing it day after day. I can | do _lots_ of things, including programming, for 12+ hours. The | trouble is, after a day or two of that, I _desperately_ don 't | want to do whatever-it-is for several days or weeks. I want to | go do other stuff. | | It's the doing it day after day on a regular schedule that | makes me feel like I never really recover from programming, and | just want to zone out and stare at the wall until bed time, | having very little energy left for anything either fun or | productive, after 4-5 hours, most days. | | I'll even do that with video games. Get the family out of the | house and give me a weekend, I'll play vidja games for like 16 | hours. Then wake up the second day and not want to touch a game | for at least a week, and instead start doing home improvement | projects or whatever. Or sit outside and read a book all day. | Not because I feel like I should, but because it's the thing I | most want to be doing, and I have zero desire to look at a | screen for a good long while. | | The regularity of work is what makes it so damn draining, for | me. I'm sure it'd ruin gaming for me in short order, too, | though I'd have fared a lot better at it back when I was in my | teens or early 20s than I would now, for sure. I _can 't_ do 30 | waking hours of _anything_ now. 24 just about ruins me. I could | get to about 36-38 before hitting a wall and passing out for | like 12 hours, back then. 30 wasn 't that big a deal, and I hit | that mark pretty often (usually, yeah, playing video games for | a good chunk of it). | kubb wrote: | Do you really imply that playing the same game over and over | again (with some variables but still) is the same as solving | programming problems? | | The game is literally designed to hook you in and make you play | one more and one more. You absolutely can autopilot through a | game and still win. | | Don't get me wrong, the guy has a lot of dedication for sure. | But playing League all day is really not like coding all day, I | don't want anyone to get that impression. | Permit wrote: | Have you played League of Legends or Dota 2 before? It will | be hard to convey the mental/emotional exhaustion that most | people feel from playing MOBAs at even a semi-competitive | level. In my experience it's a lot different than playing FPS | or other games. | | I have a distinct memory of finishing a game of Dota 2 and | realizing that it felt as though I'd just finished a 3 hour | exam. I didn't feel happy that we'd won, just relieved. I | don't think this will convince you, but perhaps consider | being open to the possibility that it genuinely is as | difficult as solving most programming problems that we face | in our day-to-day work. In my mind, it's at least as | difficult as "easy" leetcode problems. | kubb wrote: | Yeah I've played League for a bit. It really does get | easier the more you play. | | By the way, I've just read in the article that Tyler's been | on Adderall since first grade, I guess that will help him | stay focused. | shanehoban wrote: | Nah, he's right. I play league. Coding all day is much less | draining. | kubb wrote: | Except when you're drained you won't have the creativity to | solve another programming task. But you will be able to | queue up again. It also gets easier the more you play, | because you're relying on the same skills that you build up | with every match. | aidenn0 wrote: | I haven't ever played a MOBA, but fixing bugs (which | takes up a significant amount of developer time), seems | to be about as rote as playing an RTS (which I have | played, albeit almost 20 years ago). | NelsonMinar wrote: | You skipped over the year and a half when he was banned from | LoL for being such a raging asshole. | https://www.polygon.com/2017/1/10/14179366/league-of-legends... | vertak wrote: | I find it hard to sympathize for the poor plight of the | $200,000/month healthcare-less twitch streamer working 2 more | hours a day than the average person. Was this article written | entirely to provoke outrage or is there some oppression I'm | missing? | kingcharles wrote: | https://archive.md/Dpr7S | mrtksn wrote: | 3 to 8 hours long streams seems to be the norm on Twitch. What | kind of lifestyle there's that allows the consumption of full day | long content? | elaus wrote: | I think for most streams there's no real need to watch them | from start til end. You can just tune in and out at will | without missing much. For many it probably just runs in the | background while they do other things, like some people do with | soap operas on TV. | Operyl wrote: | It's good background noise for me, albeit I watch relaxing | background content here, things like Pokemon or Animal | Crossing. | anthonycr wrote: | Personally, as a programmer I usually have a Twitch stream | (often Tyler1's) running on a second monitor as background | noise if I'm not listening to music. However, the most active | chatters are mainly college students in my experience. | cardosof wrote: | The streamer is 8 hours in, not the audience. Also, if you | think how much free time children, teenagers and NEET adults | have, yeah, 5+h per day watching games is completely doable | during a pandemic. | handrous wrote: | > What kind of lifestyle there's that allows the consumption of | full day long content? | | Kids. | | Adults without kids. | MarcelOlsz wrote: | Or just keep it on in a background tab with headphones on? | I've always got some kind of podcast running or twitch if I'm | not doing deep work (I do frontend, so I'll listen to stuff | when writing boilerplate vs problem solving). | hogFeast wrote: | You have it on in the background. Some streams have a very | engaged community, everyone is there flooding the chat all the | time. But in most streams the viewers aren't engaging, they | have it on the background, it is on their second monitor while | they play games or work or whatever. Viewership went way up | during the pandemic too. | | I don't think it is for everyone but I prefer it to | TV/Netflix/whatever. I didn't even play games when I started | watching (I do now, but only once or twice a week). Some people | prefer amateur porn to Brazzers. | jrockway wrote: | What's the career progression for streamers and eSports players, | anyway? I feel like everyone that does this now is going to be | tired of it in 5 years, and then they're just 30 and without a | college degree or job experience. | jedberg wrote: | The same career path as a professional athlete. Some go into | commentating, some go into sports management, and most retire | broke and have to pick up a whole new career in their late | 20s/early 30s. | diognesofsinope wrote: | Bingo -- they struggle through their 20s until they realize | they need to pick a practical career in their early 30s. | munk-a wrote: | Twitch streaming can be extremely practical if you're being | sustainable about it. Assuming you're actually watching | your income and expenses and being smart about when to hire | on additional help you can make a pretty darn successful | career. I'd point to T90[1] as an example of someone that | isn't near the top 1% but has built an extremely | sustainable business including paid moderators and content | editors (for sending clips to YouTube). | | 1. | https://liquipedia.net/ageofempires/T90Official/Broadcasts | claudiulodro wrote: | The skills and experience they've picked up directly | translates to a number of "practical" careers: affiliate | marketing, social media marketing, PR, community building, | video and audio editing, etc. not to mention game-related | careers in eSports, game development, etc. | xboxnolifes wrote: | Same thing people in sports do: | | - Continue | | - Retire | | - Start coaching | | - Start casting | | - Management (Organizing/growing content creators/groups) | | - Switch careers entirely | | Any of the giants should hopefully have been saving there money | and have quite a bunch tucked away. Any of the smaller ones | should have been doing something on the side, or at least have | a plan B ready. | | Also, not sure why we're assuming no college degree here. | munk-a wrote: | Or that running a successful business for a decade doesn't | count as experience that most businesses would be happy to | hire on. Being a successful twitch streamer involves | extremely good time management and a lot of hands on | advertising. They've got a lot more proof of successful | marketing than most PR folks you might look at hiring. | somerando7 wrote: | If you're one of the top streamers, with decent financial | literacy, you will easily make enough to retire by 30 if you | started streaming at say 20. | AutumnCurtain wrote: | Nowadays there are financial planers focusing on content | creators/streaming talent who will know the specifics of tax | structures and advantages, etc. as well. | jrockway wrote: | But what if you're not one of the top streamers, and you just | get 250 viewers a few times a week? I watch a lot of people | like that. It seems to pay for room and board, but I worry | about their future. | Aunche wrote: | That works for the millionaire streamers, but I'm sure a lot | of them make modest incomes as well. | gkoberger wrote: | I know a few ex-YouTubers, and they're all doing just fine. | Working in PR, marketing, agents, etc. Sure, they don't have a | degree... but they have a ton of connections and relevant | experience. | bluedino wrote: | Hopefully they invest their money and don't blow it on Ferraris | and avocado toast. | beamatronic wrote: | Their money goes into GME and crypto | floren wrote: | Jeez, at least avocados are tasty... | authed wrote: | better investment then a Ferrari | bbreier wrote: | depends on the Ferrari tbh | munk-a wrote: | I can't tell if you're being sarcastic but cars are the | definition of an absolutely terrible investment - they | might beat out randomly hoping you'll land big on | r/wallstreetbets but both are extremely poor investment | decisions. | short_sells_poo wrote: | Ordinary cars are a strongly depreciating asset. However, | above a certain level this stops being true. I had the | fortune to buy, use and subsequently sell a number of | higher end cars (Ferrari, Lamborghini) and I made little | to no loss on any of them. In fact, the Ferrari 458, | which to this day I consider the best supercar to drive, | appreciated during the year or so I had it. | munk-a wrote: | It sounds like the cars might have slightly more than | broken even on cost for you which sounds like a terrible | investment option when you've got everything from real | estate to mutual funds that will generally outperform | cars - and, much like stock picking, most of the models | you purchased didn't significantly appreciate - just one | ended up gaining in value. | | I suppose I was misinformed in that I thought that cars | of all value ranges were pretty disastrous assets to hold | - but it sounds like holding on to them for value | appreciation still isn't a particularly good tactic. | [deleted] | verve_rat wrote: | I'm assuming they were making a comment about the value | of classic cars. Some of them could absolutely be a good | investment, if, (big, giant, planet sized) if you know | what you are doing. | jareklupinski wrote: | ask your colleagues :) | | i was pleasantly surprised one day to find I was working side- | by-side with someone who was once a minor music celebrity | | they had pivoted in their 20-somethings after a decent payout, | used it to finance their education, and are now just 'one of | us' haha | alistairSH wrote: | He's on pace to earn more then $3 million before he turns 30. | He doesn't much of a plan to live reasonably for many years. | golemiprague wrote: | What's the big deal starting at age 30? you still got another | 30 years to work at least, if not more. You just study some | profession and start working in the field. | criddell wrote: | Do you have the same questions for professional athletes in | traditional sports? | valleyer wrote: | We have decades of examples of how this works out for pro | athletes. The answer is that there's a range of outcomes: | some have to find new careers after their playing days are | over; others find ancillary work (coaching, scouting) in the | sports industry; the very best make enough money that they | don't need to work anymore. In many cases, the athletes have | a college degree of at least some value. | | Professional video game streaming is relatively new. It's a | valid question. | xboxnolifes wrote: | It's a valid question, but the answer is simple: nearly the | same thing that sports players do when they stop being the | player. They either coach, manage, promote their brand, or | switch careers. | xwdv wrote: | Yes. A lot of professional athletes don't really make much | money. They get normal salaries and play for non major league | teams or federations of some sort. | | Eventually though they will have to quit their sport due to | wear and tear and no longer being at a peak level. And most | will probably never really progress to a level where they can | make some quick millions from a contract and then retire | early. | | So what then? | bsder wrote: | Yes. | | I'm a proponent of the idea that your athletic scholarship at | a Division I-A school should be for "sports degree" and that | it should entitle you to _come back prepaid_ for an | "academic" 4 year degree when that track runs out. | | That would stop a lot of the idiocy we see around "student | athletes". | heavyset_go wrote: | Some of them make enough money to retire if streaming doesn't | work out long-term. | siruncledrew wrote: | If someone is an esports player, it would be hard to stay a | professional (in most action games at least) at age 30 simply | due to natural wear on your hands and reaction times getting | slower. | mym1990 wrote: | This doesn't really make sense. Athletes in many sports are | playing way past their 'prime' these days and they are | wearing out much more than just their hands. Consistently | good reaction times are a result of consistent training. | Plenty of older baseball/tennis players have superhuman | reaction times. I would see mental fatigue and boredom as | being the major hurdle to playing esports on a professional | level at an older age. No matter how fun it started as, 10+ | years of looking at the same thing over and over has got to | be soul sucking. | blahblah123456 wrote: | It's counterintuitive, but if you look at eSports players, | the prime years are much lower (both the start and the | end). You do see 16 year olds at the top but you never see | 30 year olds. It feels like the prime is really 16-25. | Reaction times in traditional sports are not as important, | and hands are one of the worst things to wear out. More | parts != more wear out. There's a reason why there are | (general) physical therapists and physical therapists who | specialize in hands. Hands are incredibly complex and soft | tissue injuries heal very poorly due to lack of blood | supply. | | I doubt the boredom thing is that different for sports vs | eSports. At least with eSports the game is changing due to | patches. With sports, the game itself hardly changes. | | For citation: see https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article | ?id=10.1371/journal... you can see reaction time starts to | drop off rapidly starting at age 25 | KingMachiavelli wrote: | In physical sports the barrier to entry is very high. Even | if you have good reaction time, high strength, etc. you | will still need 1000s of hours of practice from a very | young age to excel. | | In e-sports there's millions of people practicing every day | and the built in ranking system can filter that down to the | current top 0.1%. At this point branching out into actual | competitions is not nearly as difficult as getting noticed | by a NBA, NFL, etc. recruiter. | | It does depend on the Game. CSGO players play a very | limited number of maps so pure reaction time and hand-eye | coordination is often the deciding factor. Strategy games | like LoL and softer FPS games like Fortnite are less | dependent on physical talent. | aidenn0 wrote: | 1. Most professional athletes have very short careers. | | 2. The athletes who do play "past their prime" are usually | making up for reduced physical acuity with other skills | (e.g. you don't see very many baseball players hit triples | after 30). | | 3. Players with long careers invest a huge amount of time | in conditioning, and to a hard-to-measure degree, PEDs. | | 4. I don't really follow eSports; If someone played | Starcraft competitively 20 years ago, are they still | playing SC, or do they switch to something else like LoL? | What's the typical competitive "lifetime" of a game? If you | picked up game-specific skills, it might be harder to apply | #2 when the game du-jour changes. | | 5. As a slight nitpick to the whole conversation, my | understanding is that "reaction time" is perhaps a | misnomer; the drop in reaction time with age for performing | a simple activity appears to be relatively minor, but more | complex activities (including habitual ones like driving), | which suggests that the performance decline is in selecting | and/or executing the proper response to a stimuli rather | than what we think of as pure "reaction time" | NineStarPoint wrote: | There are quite a few streamers who have been doing it for more | than a decade at this point with no sign of slowing down. | | On the other hand, there are plenty of ways to sell the skill | of building a large following to employers, and plenty of | companies looking for people who are experts in social | media/streaming platforms. | RobRivera wrote: | why does every endeavor require career progression? its | [Current Year] can't people just enjoy something, take the | money and invest it, then go to college, start a business, make | a RE empire? | | Ask a few military vets, many legitimately just start at the | bottom at the totem some place novel into their mid 30s. | HeyLaughingBoy wrote: | Right? Can't you just enjoy being in a good place and stay | there? | | Maybe I'm jaundiced because I just had to fill out my annual | review self-assessment and skipped the "5-year plan" because | I simply couldn't be bothered to lie about it. | dejke wrote: | I think a decent few of them find positions in related fields | like talent management or esports. They do probably develop | pretty decent relationships in those industries. | o10449366 wrote: | The comments section is truly depraved. | alistairSH wrote: | $2.5 million earned at 26 years old. Tiny little violin playing | for him. So what if he hates it and stops, he's already earned | more in a few years than most people do in a lifetime. | | Not much different than most pop stars or pro athletes. | daenz wrote: | >Streamers like Tyler form the backbone of tech giants' "creator | economy," | | Maybe this is pessimism, but calling streamers "creators" feels | like a perverse label. | gizmodo59 wrote: | " But as a gig worker for a media empire, even a successful | streamer like Tyler has a livelihood that's inherently unstable | -- without insurance, unions, sick days, retirement funds or hope | for a sustainable career." | | That's funny. He has earned more in a year than many in a decade. | Million a year and it's unstable. What makes you think the job of | a software engineer is stable! He is skilled in entertainment. He | will find a way. | npinsker wrote: | This reads as very biased and judgmental. It treats streamers as | kids who can't take care of themselves and don't understand the | long-term impact of their lifestyle and career choice. It | honestly makes me wonder if the author is jealous of the subject. | It seems like the piece is really reaching to make Tyler's life | appear as irresponsible as possible. | | Plenty of people in all careers don't know how to run their lives | at 26, and plenty decide to completely change their lives at ages | far older than that. Tyler seems like an admirable rags-to-riches | success story -- he didn't get his foot in the door by being in | the right location or knowing the right people, just hard work | and a ton of talent. The company that runs the game he plays | banned him for life, and he persevered anyway. In many ways, his | success is more rare and more difficult than starting a startup. | I'm not saying the lifestyle is necessarily worth celebrating, | but it's deserving of a lot more respect than it gets here. | obstacle1 wrote: | > It treats streamers as kids who can't take care of themselves | and don't understand the long-term impact of their lifestyle | and career choice. | | Interesting. I did not read it like that at all. Do you have an | example quotation of what makes you think that? | | The impression I got is both Tyler and Micayla are well aware | of how negatively streaming affects their lives. They both | explicitly said they don't want to be doing this forever and | want to retire, didn't they? | butwhywhyoh wrote: | What makes you think it's judgmental? | | If they had instead wrote the article about a drug dealer | making $500k a year, explaining the downsides of that line of | work, would you also think the journalist was just jealous? | | The point of the article is that this seems like a lifestyle | destined to cause issues later in life. | Drew_ wrote: | People like to be bitter about others finding success in spaces | they don't they don't like or don't take very seriously. | jeffchien wrote: | I think it's possible to both respect how they got there and | their agency, but also feel some mixed feelings about their | lifestyles. Especially if you see tyler1 and xqc do 8+/10+ hour | streams every day respectively, while taking 1-2 vacations per | year. | | "Pity" might be too judgemental, but I personally don't envy | that lifestyle. It's just like respecting boxers' and NFL | players' success, while not wanting to be in their shoes and | risk getting killed in the ring or CTE. | mjfl wrote: | youtubers / streamers keep making the mistake of thinking | reporters are there friend and letting them observe their lives. | jthornquest wrote: | Good work, capitalism. /s | Kiro wrote: | Yes, I honestly believe the donation model (which is the big | share of their revenue) shows a glimmer of hope in capitalism. | I wish for a future where the majority of the revenue coming | from donations is the norm for companies as well. | munk-a wrote: | I think, for the majority of streamers, the way to set | expenses is by looking at long term subscribers rather than | day-to-day donations - those donos can fund fun things but | you're going to want to try and keep your life expenses | carried by the regular subscription income. A lot of the | people who have gotten successful doing this have endured | extremely lean times when they were trying to break into a | decent sized audience - every streamer I've ever heard talk | about the financial side of things plans things extremely | conservatively. | munificent wrote: | This article is fascinating for the effects it has on readers. | | We likely all understand that one of the toxic forces in our | culture today is the compulsive need to turn every story and news | article into a clear moral narrative with a pure protagonist and | a villainous antagonist. Reality isn't like that at all, and when | journalists force reality into that framework, it distorts our | perception of the world in unhealthy ways. | | But when an article comes out that _doesn 't_ do that, that just | says "here are some people and what their experience is like", it | seems many of us are unprepared to handle it. In the comments | here, I see this rorschach-like phenomenon where each reader | _imagines_ a morality play, superimposes it on the article, and | then gets surprised when others saw something different. | | This isn't an acticle about good guys and bad guys, winning and | losing, the good or evil of capitalism. It's just a window into | one person's life. It's a _useful_ article because this is a kind | of person whose life affects many of us--a lot of people here | watch popular streamers--but where we have little insight into | the whole picture of how that impacts their life. | | We should relish journalism like this. There is no need to jump | to any moral conclusion. Just witness and understand a bit more | about the variety of lives people live today. | karaterobot wrote: | This sounds like a bad way to live, and I'm sure it is. But, I | wonder if a similarly anxious narrative could be written about | the average PM at a startup, or Amazon delivery person, or Uber | driver, or really anyone with a demanding job that consumes as | much of your time as it can. It seems like being swatted and | harassed online are the more unique perils of being a content | creator, but the 10-hour stressful days are not, and many people | would probably trade their 10-hour stressful days at $40k-$160k a | year for 10-hour stressful days at $2 million a year if they | could. | fizx wrote: | It's probably more stressful having a camera on you for with | thousands of fans offering critical feedback every second. | | Maybe something like an engineering management role where all | you do is share performance reviews? | hogFeast wrote: | T1 is a very extreme example. He seems to have no life, he | plays the same game for 10-12 hours/day, he is pretty toxic, he | seems to have few other interests and no social life...that is | fine, he is an astute businessman but most other streamers | aren't doing this. They play variety, they do IRL, they have | social lives, they take breaks. Even xQc, another streamer who | is notorious for 20+ hour streams every week, plays variety and | goes outside...sometimes (he recently did an IRL stream at | Universal). | | So I think it is like a lot of entertainment: the job can be | intense, there is often little separation between personal and | private but the pay is generally pretty good. Even on Twitch | which really struggles with promoting smaller streamers, there | are people far down the chain earning $50k/year with relatively | small communities. Is that better than a startup? No. But not | everyone can move to SF or go to college either. | | I don't think being swatted or harassed is that common either. | If you are a big streamer and you leak where you live, then | maybe...but it doesn't happen as much as it used to (xQc got | swatted repeatedly this year, and someone broke into his | house...it does still happen). | | Also, Twitch chat is toxic but most of the negative comments | are not serious. I understand why normies wouldn't understand | that but part of the fun for (some) streamers is battling with | chat. It isn't a very serious place. | ericmcer wrote: | I keep reading these expose's about how difficult and damaging | some career is. I rock climb and everyone is obsessed with | shining light on eating disorders and how thin athletes need to | be. No one is writing about plumbers having bad backs and | knees, or construction workers having lung problems. It's just | oh "Kim Kardashian is stressed because people say mean things | on Instagram." | | It's dumb, yes life is hard and will grind you down. If your | lucky you make enough money to step away while your still | healthy and relatively young. | dvt wrote: | Imo we should be lauding this brand new sector and the folks that | made it in it. Twitch/YouTube/TikTok literally created a new kind | of millionaire. Are we just upset we're also not uber rich for | playing video games all day? It's the same with crypto, OnlyFans, | and so on. It was the same in '99 with the dot coms. | | Merely from an economic standpoint, it's interesting to see who | these new industries are displacing (since this is a zero sum | game). I'm sure having zillions of dollars doesn't make you | happy, but there's so much unwarranted hate here on HN for new | ventures and disruptive industries, it's kind of odd. It feels HN | has become way more corporatist in the past few years -- everyone | wants to work for FAANG, no one wants to do their own thing. "If | it's popular, it must be bad" is a pretty myopic view. | belval wrote: | The article mentions that Tyler makes $300k per year in | merchandise alone (so excluding any actual sponsored content). | Frankly I don't get why this can't be seen as a legitimate very | successful business. Where is the line? Is entertainment only | valid on TV? YouTube? | | Some commenters here even said that it's all good now but that | it won't work in his thirties or something as if there aren't a | ton of jobs out there that feed on young blood that won't be | able to keep up later in life. | | I completely agree with you, this kind of "this is not a real | job" attitude really comes off as people upset that they can't | be millionaires at their job. | | EDIT: A lot of the comments point out that most people on | Twitch/YouTube/OnlyFans don't make money and would be better | off getting a "real job". I am not trying to argue against that | or say that Twitch is a good job prospect. My point is that if | they do succeed in that niche, trying to segment money-making | endeavour between "real jobs" and "just a kid playing video | games" seems very vain to me. Tyler is making millions | providing entertainment, to me that is very much a real job. | varelse wrote: | I knew G to PG-13 ratedc camgirls that were making six | figures back in 1997 to 2000. They eventually got disrupted | by the adult industry providing more explicit content for | much less money upfront. OnlyFans seems to have reinvented | this model at scale, but what's the average margin for an | OnlyFans provider? $180/month. | | https://influencermarketinghub.com/glossary/onlyfans/ | kzrdude wrote: | Not a real job is a quite good stance to take. Because there | is an absurd power law at play here, the absolute top make a | lot of money. In a "real job" you are paid a living wage, on | twitch you are paid scraps if you don't make it to the top. | belval wrote: | I am not saying this is a real job prospect. If a kid told | me he wanted to be a Twitch streamer I'd say he can't be | one, same as professional singer or musician in general. | | What I am saying that what Tyler has very much is a real | job and successful business. You wouldn't say Taylor Swift | is jobless because very few people make it in the pop music | world. | obstacle1 wrote: | >If a kid told me he wanted to be a Twitch streamer I'd | say he can't be one | | You'd be lying though, and your kid would probably grow | up to resent it. There are ways to educate kids about the | relative risks of careers in good faith. | danny_codes wrote: | I believe OP was being hyperbolic. | belval wrote: | It was a volunteer oversimplification to explain my | reasoning, not parenting advice. | rhizome wrote: | > _Frankly I don 't get why this can't be seen as a | legitimate very successful business._ | | This is going to sound glib, but I honestly think it's | because Pinterest hasn't been able to create a comparable (or | even marginally similar) business model for its users to | capitalize on. Seriously, why isn't Pinterest a big shopping | destination? The answer to that will tell us a lot about | attitudes toward influencers and e-stars. | serverholic wrote: | Society is finding ways to value a wider range of talents. | Different people are good at different things and, | unfortunately, only a subset of those things are valued in the | economy. | | These technologies are allowing people to display their talents | and allowing them to make money off of them. Back in the day | being good at video games was a fun thing to do when you had | free time. Now there is a small chance you can make a living | off it. | | I can't remember the quote but Warren Buffett once said that | the only reason he is a billionaire is that he was born at the | right time, with the right gender (back when women weren't | allowed to do much), and with the right talents. | | Valuing a wider range of talents allows more people to | participate in the economy. Crypto for example allows | developers to inject little bits of economy into apps. Perhaps | in the future someone can make a living creating really good | cat memes instead of a deadend job that is basically useless | anyways. | | If that last sentence offended you I'd suggest you checkout the | book "Bullshit Jobs". | lhorie wrote: | > Imo we should be lauding this brand new sector | | I disagree. Twitch/YouTube/TikTok didn't create a new kind of | millionaire. They're simply celebrities. The only thing that | arguably changed is that content production is so cheap and | saturated now that consumers get a lot more choice in terms of | who they want to watch, without being constrained by TV | schedules and other distribution/logistics limitations. | | There is no "new industries", it all still falls under the | entertainment industry umbrella, and even the monetization | mechanisms are the same old ones (ads, sponsorships, | merchandising). By "lauding celebrities", all we're | accomplishing is consolidate consumer attention into fewer | content production channels, solidifying the position of the | platforms where these celebrities operate. | | Arguably the only noteworthy thing here is that technology | changes and companies that embrace innovation will eat the | lunches of those that fail to keep up (e.g. Blockbuster). | "Everyone wants to work for FAANG" because a good chunk of the | entertainment industry money is flowing there. | Voloskaya wrote: | > Imo we should be lauding this brand new sector and the folks | that made it in it. Twitch/YouTube/TikTok literally created a | new kind of millionaire. | | You provide no explanation as to why we should be lauding them. | Or are you implying that because someone is a millionaire then | we should automatically laud them? Is that what late stage | capitalism looks like? | ridaj wrote: | The challenge is that many of them have unsustainable always-on | relationships with their audience that seriously burn them out. | Sure folks should be free to do what they want with their life | but remember they're not the only ones getting the benefit, | they're feeding a bunch of social and merchandising platforms | that make big $ on their backs - so the question becomes, what | responsibility does the platform have towards the health of its | creators? | fragmede wrote: | Workaholics are nothing new and date back to _well_ before | the Internet or some TV show about the phenomenon. | kevmo314 wrote: | Do investment banks have a responsibility towards not burning | out their employees? | kubb wrote: | Why is it laudable? Sure, we shouldn't be jealous of successful | people, but why go to the other extreme? It surely won't help | you have an unbiased stance on the phenomenon. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2021-12-10 23:00 UTC)