Define talent. That’s inherently subjective. You can find pl...

Kyma Fi

npub13mhm4fxurhw4pz076twmqttwc03ge5wxdgulaakvp9pxeceaczdqyzv576

hex

0e64b2be878c1b2fd708e0cc6f766fe71ce331f38ffad95c6234f890e6d3a87b

nevent

nevent1qqsque9jh6rccxe06uywpnr0weh7w88rx8ecl7ket33rf7ysumf6s7cprpmhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuem4d36kwatvw5hx6mm9qgsgama65nwpmh2s38ld9hds94hv8c5v68rx5w077mxqjsnvuv7upxswkncnk

Kind-1 (TextNote)

2026-04-21T02:50:29Z

↳ 回复 Strange Love (npub1l5hwyh7saazz4gdhgp9fx4939e25asx74kq6dj9ahrx69lcfxulsudhdrf)

I don’t think it’s so much about judging if the music is good or not. It’s about supporting people who put proof of work into their craft and art and ...

Define talent. That’s inherently subjective. You can find plenty of incredible artists without “talent”. Bob Dylan was not a talented singer … but no doubt a great artist. Taylor swift has a massive team curating all her songs … not an artist - just a corporation posing as an pop star backed by millions in marketing, but most of the world considers her a “talented singer”…

Also define art - also subjective. Are you saying that vibe coding a song by utilizing artificial intelligence can’t ever be art? By that logic, if an alien life form creates a piece of computer music it’s not art because it’s “not human”… or when a bird chirps in perfect melody it’s not a song…

My point is that art is not about method but intent. It’s also not about being like everyone else, creating with a specific instrument or skill, or proving anything - that’s fiat materialism and the definition of uncreative.

In fact “Proof of work” in terms of art is the fiat mindset because creation doesn’t need approval from others. And it certainly doesn’t need money or “talent” to be of value.

原始 JSON

{
  "kind": 1,
  "id": "0e64b2be878c1b2fd708e0cc6f766fe71ce331f38ffad95c6234f890e6d3a87b",
  "pubkey": "8eefbaa4dc1ddd5089fed2ddb02d6ec3e28cd1c66a39fef6cc09426ce33dc09a",
  "created_at": 1776739829,
  "tags": [
    [
      "e",
      "b925ea898a024496223ddec1b5cad2325b2ea1da3e01a565dd18d9a4692120e2",
      "wss://relay.primal.net/v1/zulu-papa-kilo",
      "root"
    ],
    [
      "e",
      "de2055080476e5fbc3cf13e0686333c1d59d17909a4056c955393beacc017d0d",
      "wss://nos.lol/%20wss://nostr.land/%20%20avatar%20wss://nostr.wine/%20%20avatar%20wss://purplerelay.com/%20wss://relay.damus.io/%20wss://relay.snort.social/",
      "reply"
    ],
    [
      "p",
      "fd2ee25fd0ef442aa1b7404a9354b12e554ec0dead81a6c8bdb8cda2ff09373f",
      "",
      "mention"
    ]
  ],
  "content": "Define talent. That’s inherently subjective. You can find plenty of incredible artists without “talent”. Bob Dylan was not a talented singer … but no doubt a great artist. Taylor swift has a massive team curating all her songs … not an artist - just a corporation posing as an pop star backed by millions in marketing, but most of the world considers her a “talented singer”… \n\nAlso define art - also subjective. Are you saying that vibe coding a song by utilizing artificial intelligence can’t ever be art? By that logic, if an alien life form creates a piece of computer music it’s not art because it’s “not human”… or when a bird chirps in perfect melody it’s not a song… \n\nMy point is that art is not about method but intent. It’s also not about being like everyone else, creating with a specific instrument or skill, or proving anything - that’s fiat materialism and the definition of uncreative. \n\nIn fact “Proof of work” in terms of art is the fiat mindset because creation doesn’t need approval from others. And it certainly doesn’t need money or “talent” to be of value. ",
  "sig": "0ec212834e22c8bdf8b7baa9d32db90a26638b37004cda5168cd9c63a580b402689327376e968da9dea8a3e4f2aa16297589bf514845bc411f08fd18071979e2"
}