i would like to point out that when intellectuals and academics write, they don't have to be right, they only have to sound right.
this article, while it is very persuasive, is purely speculative. not a single piece of supporting evidence is provided. The entire argument can be destroyed with two simple words:
[citation needed]
i live in a country with fairly strict gun control (Canada) and i do not need to carry a gun 'to enable me to be unafraid'. I do not need to carry a weapon to feel safe in my own country.
actually, 'geometry wars' is some of the most fun i've had on my NDS.
its also a perfect example of 'game-play first' kind of game design. the particle effects make the visuals interesting enough to hold their own against today's FPS, but its still button mashing greatness.
zelda: phantom hourglass (also for the NDS) is, in my opinion, another example of 3D done well in a game. it is a 3D game, but its overhead view is almost 2D.
i'm sick of playing games that look fantastic, then get horribly boring after 15 minutes of game play.
in south korea, it is believed that dog meat tastes better when the animal was killed slowly and painfully.
* warning, disturbing content below *
dogs are often killed by hanging. they have a rope going through a pulley, they tie a rope around the dog's neck, then pull on the rope until the dog's hind legs are just off the ground.
personally, i didn't notice any difference between humanely killed dog, and tortured dog. and dog doesn't really taste any better than beef. i don't understand the appeal of eating dog. why pay more money for dog meat, when it is significantly less tasty than beef or pork?
As a final note: I am unaware of any school even attempting to assert ownership of IP created by liberal arts students, such as creative writings or art portfolios, etc. There may well be some definitive precedent within that area.
as a graduate of a fine arts program, i can tell you first hand that with liberal arts, this kinda stuff doesn't happen. the school does not own any part of what i have created. even if i made it during class time, using school materials, the end product is mine, and i can do what i want with it, sell it to anyone, whatever. i've even sold stuff at my school, where they take no additional commission or fees, even when i'm selling on school property.
technology education should not be any different.
perhaps this difference exists because liberal arts education has bee around for a very long time, when post secondary education was about person growth, not corporate greed. programming and IT stuff seem to have emerged from a very different environment.
...Such a process could easily provide materials for an antimatter catalyzed fission drive. Possibly even enough to power new forms of interplanetary propulsion...
Am I the only one who's getting really excited about this?
probably. they still haven't been able to crystallize di-lithium yet.
i treat a show like an album, most shows have 10-15 pieces. several pieces (3-4) will be 'singles' i release those photos under the CC attribution license, people can do whatever they want with them, so long as my name is attached to it.
but the other photos of my work are released with share-alike restrictions.
I'm curious, if a commercial magazine were to print an image with a share-alike condition, would they have to release that page under the CC as well? (I ask because that's why i don't attach a SA condition to the pieces i use as singles)
ps: cool website, by the way. i've been wanting to get a Linux audio setup going for a while, and the info you give is a great guide.
i will definitely suggest that to them. CC covers are a great place to start experimenting with different licensing and distribution models.
when i eventually get my website built and posted, everything on it will be attribution-share-alike-non commercial at the minimum, some of it will be attribution only. I'm at that stage where publicity is more important than earning money. I'm just concerned that I might be watching a movie someday, and see a painting of mine or sound piece in the background. while that would be really cool, I don't want a huge multi-million dollar production ripping me off, i only want other poor artists ripping me off.;)
But, most people don't do graphics work for a living, and they won't care about getting accurate colours, they just care that they look good enough. LCD's use less power, look nice, and save desk space, these are things most people care about. Also, LCD's don't flicker, and are much better for long jobs, as they cause less eye strain. I get headaches if i spend more than 4 hours in front of a CRT.
personally, I've been using both kinds of monitors, so i can get the best of both worlds. 90% of my work is done on a cheap LDC screen, then for the final 'touching up', before i send something off to be printed, i switch to a CRT to tweak the image.
i have been encouraging my friend's bands to do something similar.
start with 128kbps mp3's, which are free, but the site has a donation box. when enough money is received, higher quality mp3's will be released, after some more donations, flac files become available, then if more money comes in, the multi-tracks get released, and if the whole thing raises a ridiculously huge amount, like 4 million, (1 million per person) release it all into the public domain.
so far, i haven't had much luck convincing them to try it out.
I have been giving away high rez prints of all my work free of charge under the Share-Alike non-commercial. if it's a photo of a painting, i don't care about the photos. it's the original painting i intend to make money off of, photos and prints are just advertising for it.
it's my photography i can't bear to give away for free. i like your increasing resolution idea, thank you once again.
attn. lawyers: see what happens when actual artists get talking about this sort of stuff. good things happen
You could get close to pulling this off for your own original works by dual licensing different bits.
Put the lyric and sheet music under BY-SA and your recording under BY-SA-NC.
that is absolutely brilliant!
it's so simple, i have never thought of treating the recording and the score as 2 different pieces. i know the big labels and radio stations do, but for some reason, i never thought of my own stuff as being 2 separate parts.
thank you.
now, i just gotta work out something similar on how can i apply this kind of idea to video/photography/painting...
but when you allow commercial use of your work, it allows people to take your work, burn it and sell it as is.
eg. if a song is released creative commons share alike where commercial use is allowed, i can take your song, put it on my CD, and sell it as my own, so long as i mention that you wrote it in the fine print. i can even take your whole album and sell it on the subway
there needs to be some sort of condition saying that a work is non-commercial if it is used as-is, but commercial use is fine when the context is changed somehow.
eg. if i make a song on a CD, you can use it freely as background music for your movie or computer game, you can record a cover for your own album, but you cant just take my version and slap in on your CD and sell it.
for me, the most frustrating part of the whole copyright law vs. culture thing is how the big guys calling the shots always say that they are doing this 'for the artists'.
well, i am an artist, and copyright law isn't helping me, it's getting in my way.
there have been many times when I've had to work around it. yes, i can usually do *almost* what i originally wanted to do, but a lot of my time is wasted researching laws, re-recording, writing new material, re-shooting things, covering up certain parts, etc. Not only does this water down what i originally wanted to say, but it also wastes valuable time that i should be using to make my next piece (or post on/.)
copyright should not be abolished, there are legitimate uses for it, like stopping subway station vendors selling burnt CD's and DVD's for $2 a pop, but we need a sudden outbreak of common sense to be injected into this debate immediately.
non-commercial infringement should never be a crime. re-appropriation should always be fair use. permission should not be required.
i believe that if the 'creative commons attribution share-alike non-commercial' was the default license that creative works would be released under; and people had to register for 'copyright, all rights reserved', we would all be much better off.
this really bugs me, how people keep on saying "Obama has no experience."
The job they are applying for is 'President of the United States." That is a position that neither man has held before, so they are both inexperienced.
In fact, every president in US history has been inexperienced during their first term.
I got sick of these outrageous boot times a long time ago. here is how i fixed it:
I have an old IBM PS/1 that i picked up in the early 90's. (for the kids: 386 processor, 2 megs of RAM)
When I turn it on, the system is usable in about 5-10 seconds. I can have a word processor open AND be typing away happily within 15 seconds of hitting that button.
now it takes me a minute to load my OS, and another 20 seconds before my word processor is usable
I'm pretty sure 100% of the users noticed the DRM when they had to type in serial number to activate the product. most of them just forgot about it right after.
Get rid of that and you'll not only get better sound, you don't need to crank it up to 11 either.
actually, you could not possibly be any more wrong here.
one of the biggest reasons FOR the loudness war is noisy listening environments.
when you have very dynamic music being played, the quieter sections are often lost in the background noise, and all you can hear are the peaks. I have some old CD's with good dynamic range, and they are completely unlistenable on buses and subways because i can't hear anything except for the occasional symbol crash.
music that has been over-compressed is loud all the time, so i CAN hear everything, even the quiet sections, over the background noise.
i am not endorsing the loudness war here, i enjoy music with a wide dynamic range-when i have ideal listen conditions. When I'm on the go, compressed music works better.
Ideally, band would make 2 releases, a CD with full, rich, beautiful dynamic range, and a free mp3 release that's compressed for optimal listening in noisy environments.
as a former ESL teacher, i can say with a fair amount of authority that you are being a douche. language is about communication. if you understand the idea the other party is trying to express, they have done well enough.
English spelling is extremely hard to pick up. i know many people who are able to make conversation with ease, yet when you ask them to write out a word, they are lost.
some easy examples: c, g.
circle. is it "sir-kle", "sir-sle", "kir-klr", or "kir-sle" giga: is it gi-ga, or ji-ga, ji-ja? gi-ja? any word that ends in "tion" is also problematic. how the hell would i figure out that that sounds like "shone" unless someone told me.
im not even going to start on articles, or sarcasm, which simply do not exist in many other languages, or the very vague nature of our language.
unless you have spent the better part of a lifetime learning the English languages 's peculiarities, you are going to make frequent mistakes. so ease up. if you spent 6 years studying another language, would you be able to participate on a web forum? especially one with highly technical language like slashdot?
if you dont write your own damn songs, you dont deserve as much as an artist who does.
bands that write and perform their own work deserve to keep every penny. if musicians don't like that, tough, write your own songs and get a bigger piece of the pie.
note: i am an artist, and i do work with a lot of small times bands, i am not in anyway defending labels, just songwriters.
Slashdot Mirror
i would like to point out that when intellectuals and academics write, they don't have to be right, they only have to sound right.
this article, while it is very persuasive, is purely speculative. not a single piece of supporting evidence is provided.
The entire argument can be destroyed with two simple words:
[citation needed]
i live in a country with fairly strict gun control (Canada) and i do not need to carry a gun 'to enable me to be unafraid'. I do not need to carry a weapon to feel safe in my own country.
"i'm sick of playing games that look fantastic, then get horribly boring after 15 minutes of game play."
So sex is out for you, huh?
what? sex that lasts MORE than 15 minutes?
I'm posting on slashdot from my parent's basement.
if i were anywhere close to a woman, i'd likely be finished well before ubuntu had even finished loading on my system.
(i would have said 'vista', but that's more than enough time to do it twice)
actually, 'geometry wars' is some of the most fun i've had on my NDS.
its also a perfect example of 'game-play first' kind of game design. the particle effects make the visuals interesting enough to hold their own against today's FPS, but its still button mashing greatness.
zelda: phantom hourglass (also for the NDS) is, in my opinion, another example of 3D done well in a game. it is a 3D game, but its overhead view is almost 2D.
i'm sick of playing games that look fantastic, then get horribly boring after 15 minutes of game play.
in south korea, it is believed that dog meat tastes better when the animal was killed slowly and painfully.
* warning, disturbing content below *
dogs are often killed by hanging. they have a rope going through a pulley, they tie a rope around the dog's neck, then pull on the rope until the dog's hind legs are just off the ground.
personally, i didn't notice any difference between humanely killed dog, and tortured dog. and dog doesn't really taste any better than beef. i don't understand the appeal of eating dog. why pay more money for dog meat, when it is significantly less tasty than beef or pork?
I can't imagine a less efficient way to get any actual work done
tried Vista?
...an extremely realistic-looking city with very little effort. Automatically, with roads that make sense (EG: don't lead nowhere)
roads that lead somewhere...hmmm...it wouldn't be much good for simulating Ireland, then.
As a final note: I am unaware of any school even attempting to assert ownership of IP created by liberal arts students, such as creative writings or art portfolios, etc. There may well be some definitive precedent within that area.
as a graduate of a fine arts program, i can tell you first hand that with liberal arts, this kinda stuff doesn't happen. the school does not own any part of what i have created. even if i made it during class time, using school materials, the end product is mine, and i can do what i want with it, sell it to anyone, whatever. i've even sold stuff at my school, where they take no additional commission or fees, even when i'm selling on school property.
technology education should not be any different.
perhaps this difference exists because liberal arts education has bee around for a very long time, when post secondary education was about person growth, not corporate greed.
programming and IT stuff seem to have emerged from a very different environment.
...Such a process could easily provide materials for an antimatter catalyzed fission drive. Possibly even enough to power new forms of interplanetary propulsion...
Am I the only one who's getting really excited about this?
probably. they still haven't been able to crystallize di-lithium yet.
i have a d70 too!
and i bought mine used, so even if they are able to trace it back to my exact camera, that doesn't prove that I was the one who shot the image.
how would this technology deal with used goods and re-sellers?
I'm willing to risk my safety on a metric to standard conversion problem for a car that will run.
um...metric is the standard.
that's fair.
i treat a show like an album, most shows have 10-15 pieces. several pieces (3-4) will be 'singles' i release those photos under the CC attribution license, people can do whatever they want with them, so long as my name is attached to it.
but the other photos of my work are released with share-alike restrictions.
I'm curious, if a commercial magazine were to print an image with a share-alike condition, would they have to release that page under the CC as well? (I ask because that's why i don't attach a SA condition to the pieces i use as singles)
ps: cool website, by the way. i've been wanting to get a Linux audio setup going for a while, and the info you give is a great guide.
yea, but the colours on my LDC screen aren't nearly as good as the ones on my LSD screen.
i will definitely suggest that to them.
CC covers are a great place to start experimenting with different licensing and distribution models.
when i eventually get my website built and posted, everything on it will be attribution-share-alike-non commercial at the minimum, some of it will be attribution only. ;)
I'm at that stage where publicity is more important than earning money.
I'm just concerned that I might be watching a movie someday, and see a painting of mine or sound piece in the background. while that would be really cool, I don't want a huge multi-million dollar production ripping me off, i only want other poor artists ripping me off.
agreed.
you get much better colour and contrast on a CRT.
But, most people don't do graphics work for a living, and they won't care about getting accurate colours, they just care that they look good enough. LCD's use less power, look nice, and save desk space, these are things most people care about.
Also, LCD's don't flicker, and are much better for long jobs, as they cause less eye strain. I get headaches if i spend more than 4 hours in front of a CRT.
personally, I've been using both kinds of monitors, so i can get the best of both worlds. 90% of my work is done on a cheap LDC screen, then for the final 'touching up', before i send something off to be printed, i switch to a CRT to tweak the image.
i have been encouraging my friend's bands to do something similar.
start with 128kbps mp3's, which are free, but the site has a donation box. when enough money is received, higher quality mp3's will be released, after some more donations, flac files become available, then if more money comes in, the multi-tracks get released, and if the whole thing raises a ridiculously huge amount, like 4 million, (1 million per person) release it all into the public domain.
so far, i haven't had much luck convincing them to try it out.
I have been giving away high rez prints of all my work free of charge under the Share-Alike non-commercial. if it's a photo of a painting, i don't care about the photos. it's the original painting i intend to make money off of, photos and prints are just advertising for it.
it's my photography i can't bear to give away for free. i like your increasing resolution idea, thank you once again.
attn. lawyers: see what happens when actual artists get talking about this sort of stuff. good things happen
You could get close to pulling this off for your own original works by dual licensing different bits.
Put the lyric and sheet music under BY-SA and your recording under BY-SA-NC.
that is absolutely brilliant!
it's so simple, i have never thought of treating the recording and the score as 2 different pieces. i know the big labels and radio stations do, but for some reason, i never thought of my own stuff as being 2 separate parts.
thank you.
now, i just gotta work out something similar on how can i apply this kind of idea to video/photography/painting...
i agree completely.
but when you allow commercial use of your work, it allows people to take your work, burn it and sell it as is.
eg. if a song is released creative commons share alike where commercial use is allowed, i can take your song, put it on my CD, and sell it as my own, so long as i mention that you wrote it in the fine print. i can even take your whole album and sell it on the subway
there needs to be some sort of condition saying that a work is non-commercial if it is used as-is, but commercial use is fine when the context is changed somehow.
eg. if i make a song on a CD, you can use it freely as background music for your movie or computer game, you can record a cover for your own album, but you cant just take my version and slap in on your CD and sell it.
for me, the most frustrating part of the whole copyright law vs. culture thing is how the big guys calling the shots always say that they are doing this 'for the artists'.
well, i am an artist, and copyright law isn't helping me, it's getting in my way.
there have been many times when I've had to work around it. yes, i can usually do *almost* what i originally wanted to do, but a lot of my time is wasted researching laws, re-recording, writing new material, re-shooting things, covering up certain parts, etc. /.)
Not only does this water down what i originally wanted to say, but it also wastes valuable time that i should be using to make my next piece (or post on
copyright should not be abolished, there are legitimate uses for it, like stopping subway station vendors selling burnt CD's and DVD's for $2 a pop, but we need a sudden outbreak of common sense to be injected into this debate immediately.
non-commercial infringement should never be a crime.
re-appropriation should always be fair use. permission should not be required.
i believe that if the 'creative commons attribution share-alike non-commercial' was the default license that creative works would be released under; and people had to register for 'copyright, all rights reserved', we would all be much better off.
...since Obama has no experience...
this really bugs me, how people keep on saying "Obama has no experience."
The job they are applying for is 'President of the United States." That is a position that neither man has held before, so they are both inexperienced.
In fact, every president in US history has been inexperienced during their first term.
I got sick of these outrageous boot times a long time ago.
here is how i fixed it:
I have an old IBM PS/1 that i picked up in the early 90's. (for the kids: 386 processor, 2 megs of RAM)
When I turn it on, the system is usable in about 5-10 seconds.
I can have a word processor open AND be typing away happily within 15 seconds of hitting that button.
now it takes me a minute to load my OS, and another 20 seconds before my word processor is usable
what the hell happened?
I'm pretty sure 100% of the users noticed the DRM when they had to type in serial number to activate the product.
most of them just forgot about it right after.
Two words: Loudness War.
Get rid of that and you'll not only get better sound, you don't need to crank it up to 11 either.
actually, you could not possibly be any more wrong here.
one of the biggest reasons FOR the loudness war is noisy listening environments.
when you have very dynamic music being played, the quieter sections are often lost in the background noise, and all you can hear are the peaks. I have some old CD's with good dynamic range, and they are completely unlistenable on buses and subways because i can't hear anything except for the occasional symbol crash.
music that has been over-compressed is loud all the time, so i CAN hear everything, even the quiet sections, over the background noise.
i am not endorsing the loudness war here, i enjoy music with a wide dynamic range-when i have ideal listen conditions. When I'm on the go, compressed music works better.
Ideally, band would make 2 releases, a CD with full, rich, beautiful dynamic range, and a free mp3 release that's compressed for optimal listening in noisy environments.
as a former ESL teacher, i can say with a fair amount of authority that you are being a douche.
language is about communication. if you understand the idea the other party is trying to express, they have done well enough.
English spelling is extremely hard to pick up. i know many people who are able to make conversation with ease, yet when you ask them to write out a word, they are lost.
some easy examples: c, g.
circle. is it "sir-kle", "sir-sle", "kir-klr", or "kir-sle"
giga: is it gi-ga, or ji-ga, ji-ja? gi-ja?
any word that ends in "tion" is also problematic. how the hell would i figure out that that sounds like "shone" unless someone told me.
im not even going to start on articles, or sarcasm, which simply do not exist in many other languages, or the very vague nature of our language.
unless you have spent the better part of a lifetime learning the English languages 's peculiarities, you are going to make frequent mistakes.
so ease up. if you spent 6 years studying another language, would you be able to participate on a web forum? especially one with highly technical language like slashdot?
i have to agree with you.
if you dont write your own damn songs, you dont deserve as much as an artist who does.
bands that write and perform their own work deserve to keep every penny.
if musicians don't like that, tough, write your own songs and get a bigger piece of the pie.
note: i am an artist, and i do work with a lot of small times bands, i am not in anyway defending labels, just songwriters.
like saul williams?
well, he did get some help from Trent Reznor, but still, hes independent making a good living off his music.