Slashdot has discussed Raskin before with disappointing results.
Instead of trying to understand some of the concepts that may, at first, sound strange - his concepts are riduculed and flamed out of hand.
Flamethrowers grab a little bit of text, twist it - without trying to really comprehend, and proclaim Raskin an idiot. A shame because Raskin has some *very* good ideas that he generally supports quite well.
The only positive from what's going to be a large amount of flames is that Raskin should take some solace that all visionaries are subject to much abuse. Most people are unwilling to give up or reconsider what they think they "know" as truths, often to their own detriment.
actually hydrogen really isn't that flammable either.
contrary to popular belief, it wasn't hydrogen that caused the Hindenburg disaster. Rather it was the paint used on the shell of the airship, made from components very similar to what is used in today's rocket fuel. A static charge caused this paint to ignite, thus sending the airship to its end.
The impressive photos of the Hindenburg burning show massive amounts of flames. Hydrogen burns clear so what was burning (visibly) wasn't the gas.
As a result of that accident hydrogen has gotten a really bad rap when it's not all that dangerous and has a lot of benefits. Clean cars being one example.
So add the "commonplace, everyday use of hydrogen" to technologies that have been given up on.
Record companies have been *screwing* over artists for decades and now they're concerned about "Artist's Rights"? Please.
The fact is that artists rarely make money from the sale of recorded albums. If they're *lucky* they'll get $1.00 - $1.25 per $15 cd sold, only after the record company, the producer, manager, agent, caterer, etc. have all been paid for their "expenses". An album for the artist traditionally is the way to promote said artist. Overpriced t-shirts and touring are how most musicians make money (t-shirts in particular). The person quoted in the article is flat-out wrong.
In some cases, artists contracts have actually been structured (%#@! lawyers) so the more albums they sell, the more in debt to the record company they become.
Furthermore, a lot of this anti-napster/mp3 campaign reeks heavily of being a music industry pr-push. In various articles (like the salon one) you'll *almost always* see an agent/record company hack saying "I showed [Artist X] this technology and s/he was shocked/horrified that s/he (the artist) was being ripped off." A transparent attempt to gain sympathy through the artist.
My guess is that most artists could care less about napster/mp3 trading as record album sales barely trickle down to them and, instead, they appreciate the increased exposure.
The musicians that do seem to be speaking about MP3s/Napster are most likely being pushed by record label/industry pr people, which is why so many of them say the same damn things in every article. And why a lot of them will remain quiet.
Slashdot Mirror
Slashdot has discussed Raskin before with disappointing results.
Instead of trying to understand some of the concepts that may, at first, sound strange - his concepts are riduculed and flamed out of hand.
Flamethrowers grab a little bit of text, twist it - without trying to really comprehend, and proclaim Raskin an idiot. A shame because Raskin has some *very* good ideas that he generally supports quite well.
The only positive from what's going to be a large amount of flames is that Raskin should take some solace that all visionaries are subject to much abuse. Most people are unwilling to give up or reconsider what they think they "know" as truths, often to their own detriment.
it may sound high, but you just know people are going to pay the fee with stolen credit card numbers. ooh, the irony...
yeah, but he's subject to a *bundle* of lawsuits from investors who got creamed from his stunt.
actually hydrogen really isn't that flammable either.
contrary to popular belief, it wasn't hydrogen that caused the Hindenburg disaster. Rather it was the paint used on the shell of the airship, made from components very similar to what is used in today's rocket fuel. A static charge caused this paint to ignite, thus sending the airship to its end.
The impressive photos of the Hindenburg burning show massive amounts of flames. Hydrogen burns clear so what was burning (visibly) wasn't the gas.
As a result of that accident hydrogen has gotten a really bad rap when it's not all that dangerous and has a lot of benefits. Clean cars being one example.
So add the "commonplace, everyday use of hydrogen" to technologies that have been given up on.
The fact is that artists rarely make money from the sale of recorded albums. If they're *lucky* they'll get $1.00 - $1.25 per $15 cd sold, only after the record company, the producer, manager, agent, caterer, etc. have all been paid for their "expenses". An album for the artist traditionally is the way to promote said artist. Overpriced t-shirts and touring are how most musicians make money (t-shirts in particular). The person quoted in the article is flat-out wrong.
In some cases, artists contracts have actually been structured (%#@! lawyers) so the more albums they sell, the more in debt to the record company they become.
Furthermore, a lot of this anti-napster/mp3 campaign reeks heavily of being a music industry pr-push. In various articles (like the salon one) you'll *almost always* see an agent/record company hack saying "I showed [Artist X] this technology and s/he was shocked/horrified that s/he (the artist) was being ripped off." A transparent attempt to gain sympathy through the artist.
My guess is that most artists could care less about napster/mp3 trading as record album sales barely trickle down to them and, instead, they appreciate the increased exposure.
The musicians that do seem to be speaking about MP3s/Napster are most likely being pushed by record label/industry pr people, which is why so many of them say the same damn things in every article. And why a lot of them will remain quiet.