Slashdot Mirror
Kanye West Is Reportedly Considering Legal Action Against the Pirate Bay
An anonymous reader writes: Kanye West apparently has a new mission: to sue The Pirate Bay. Last weekend, West announced that his new album, The Life of Pablo, would be sold exclusively as a download from his website and the artist-driven streaming music service Tidal. The news sent Tidal to No. 1 on the U.S. Apple App Store, so West pulled the album from his site and announced it wouldn't be released on other streaming services. The Internet responded by pirating his album in droves.
Can we please stop giving the retarded toddler throwing temper tantrums attention?
He'll keep this shit up until it stops, so fuck stop talking about this ignorant no talent asshat and move along. Treat him like the child he is?
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
I pirated this twice, just so I could delete it twice. Screw you Kanye West. You suck, and everyone knows it.
Tell us if he actually does sue. Otherwise, do we really care what he is considering? He might be considering a run for President, He might be considering competing in NASCAR, he might be considering any number of things, but until he actually does one of them, it's even more uninteresting.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Okay, I see.
So he created a situation where one cannot own the album outright -- only stream it. Forcing the consumer into paying in perpetuity for a service he is part owner in.
Mr. West is being the proverbial "Troll Charging for a Bridge-crossing."
The result is predictable. Macroeconomic forces are what they are. People will build another bridge, or simply find a way around the troll.
All those pirates pirating sheet music for the 2nd oboe part of W. A. Mozart's Op. 233 are doing so because the author has been dead forever. But somehow, some music publisher has tied it up in Copyright, and refuses to print more copies. What else is a person to do?
Now this is the stupidest comment I've read in a long time. No, electronic music or rap isn't "broken" - it may not fit your prejudiced idea of flow and tonal composition but that doesn't make it bad or wrong.
I'd call that word puke.
If your writing has to be explained, then you're doing it wrong. I told the same thing to one of my college English professors about some of poets we were studying. I think I'm still right. Communication should be simple and straightforward. Making it meaningful and beautiful at the same time is called talent.
The type of writing you've just explained can best be called cryptic. "Deep" doesn't mean "hard to figure out".
This totally depends. Just because you can't understand all parts of the linux kernel source code, it isn't crap code per se.
Yes, there is beauty in simplicity, but there can also be beauty in complex things. Complex poems with double and triple meaning that might not be obvious at first glance. Or things that you can't understand with background knowledge, simply because you don't share the same background as the author. What if someone writes a beautiful poem about solving a complex programming issue and the joy in that. Can everyone understand that? Is it wrong, because not everyone gets that?
Though lots of people feel like you feel. That is why almost every pop song is about love. Because that is something almost everyone, or at least everyone who buys music, can relate to. Simple and easy to understand is popular. Because it is accessible. Complex and complicated things are not popular. Thus pop songs sell better than operas. Which often is complex music that needs explaining.
Many of the "higher" arts or "fine" arts need some education or can be better enjoyed once you acquire a little background. Or to put it different: An episode of Family Guy is better enjoyed, once you get all the pop culture references. Since they use pop culture, many people get the references and thus Family Guy itself is popular.
He was only explaining it to someone who lacked either the insight, the brainpower, or the imagination to understand it himself. "If I don't get your art, then you suck" really isn't the way to go through life.
Fortunately, we don't measure literature by the ability of the least of us to understand it. If we did, James Joyce, William Burroughs, Jorge Luis Borges, Robert Coover, Baudelaire, Thomas Pynchon and many others would be unknown.
Explaining literature was my profession for 25 years. You explain it until the light goes on. Sometimes it never goes on, you know? For people like that, they make reality TV.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Even with your, translation or interpretation or whatever of the lines it still doesn't make much sense. It's just a bunch of clever or witty sounding lines with barely any connection strung together. I get there's a kind of overall theme but is it actually trying to say anything more?
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
Code isn't human communication. It's machine instruction.
Simple code is easier to maintain and should contain comments that do consist of effective human communication. And those comments are needed because code is not for human consumption.
You make the point that complex communication is "beautiful". The point that the GP made is that overcomplicated speech isn't communication. Communication is supposed to be efficient. Art isn't necessarily efficient. It's also not communication. It's expression, but not communication.
And that's where the breakdown lies. You're arguing that this expression of art is communication, and the GP is (correctly) pointing out that it isn't. It's still expression, and maybe it induces a feeling in some observers. It's still not effective communication. Effective communication is understood by all who speak the same language. The example is plainly written in English, which is a language I speak and generally understand. But that expression is not communication because I (and others) do not find it understandable despite the fact that we can read (or hear) the words.
tl;dr: It's expression, but it's not communication. And comparing its cryptic nature to computer code is way off base.