there's more to it than that... see Africa, as a land mass, is more vertical, making it more difficult to spread crops/livestock from one area to another. Euro-Asia are oriented horizontally... causing the same tasks to be much more easy to accomplish....
I'm summarizing part of Guns, Germs, and Steel - by Jared Diamond
a good read, IMO (incidentally, I've only ever seen it with a Bill Gates praise quote on the back; looks like one can't travel far these days without him)
They aren't rich because of talent, they aren't rich by virtue of working harder or smarter. They are rich because they were lucky or wicked. Thus it is moral to redistribute their ill gotten gains to the noble downdrodden poor.
Maybe... or maybe not. Maybe there's more to it than that. Perhaps there was someone who was a hard worker, and had a little bit of smarts, and decided that they'd rather look out for themselves because all the stupid lazy people out there weren't going to lend a hand. And through this, not so much being wicked, they became rich.
I think that there is truth in your claim, but I hope you're a little more careful in dealing out your punishments than to say that everyone who is of sort x gets punishment y... and would consider that there are outliers who might not, and morally should not, be punished with the rest of the herd... who are you to dictate moral standards?
that being said, on a personal level I'd like to see the rich boiled live in oil
Why is it that some musicians, after 10,000 hours of practice, are struggling with their day jobs, and others are mega-stars?
Well, it seems a choice of priorities... day job, or obsessiveness over music... see, the creative peak for males (who seem to make up a disproportionate amount of mega-stars) tends to be in the early-mid 20s. Now, if a person can manage to put in their 10,000 hours by the time they hit that home stretch for creativity, they have a much higher chance of being able to produce at the exact right time that opportunity happens to drunkenly barge in their front door. If the musician isn't quite there, then opportunity might not stay long, or if the creative peak is too far past, there might not be as much drive behind the music. It's not easy to put in that sort of practice. If you began playing guitar, for example, for 2.739... hours every single day for 10 years, you'd have 10kHrs in that time, if you only put in one hour of practice each and every day, you wouldn't reach 10kHrs until sometime after 27 years.
I happen to believe that the majority of current mega-stars aren't quite up to par. Then again, when opportunity happened to come calling, they happened to be in the right place, and were good enough, maybe not the absolute best... there wasn't enough competition in the right place. More difficult to be in the right place if you have a day job to worry about.
Not everyone who can even manage to put in enough time has that certain factor that separates the good, the bad, and the ugly. And those that do, can't always feel free to just disregard the rest of all their possible responsibilities.
PM me if you'd like to have a larger (two-way) discussion on the whole bit about musicians...
oh yeah... and the money as a score card thing, it seems to be that from an economist standpoint of trying to quantify something, money makes a handy place-holder. Just as how insurance companies will pro-rate your body, and the usefulness there of, in the case of calculating compensation for loss of use due to injury. I even heard on NPR a couple of years back someone explaining that corporations assign values (in units of money) to get people to do certain tasks, such as earn $x working a job that requires moving to a new location, earn $y to have a job which might not be so conducive to having/starting a family, etc. Yeah, money is only useful to the point of having enough to do what you want from the perspective of an individual gaining money. But, it is also useful as a valuation system. I am in the camp of people that don't think money indicates success, my mother is opposite. Though we disagree, I have found that with no-other data on a given matter of success, the vast majority of people in western(ized) cultures would say that someone with a greater amount of monetary assets is more successful. However, if you take into account that so-and-so1 only earns $q but is also a devoted, loving parent, who never misses childhood event n, where as so-and-so2 earns $q^8 but is never around to spend time with the offspring (or whatever the local popular consensus happens to be as to what makes a person a good person)... and views on success tend to change.
sorry if that's difficult to understand (it's late in my local time, and I might have made large errors in my logic)
I think what he is getting at with the Joy/Gates bit, is that not too many people were at the right place at that right time... If you can provide me with a list of people, who, having early access around the same time-frame (say 1968-1970/1 to begin with) that Joy/Gates would have been learning to program, who also managed to put in the same large chunk of time (about 10,000 hours worth of programming) just before the world writ large suddenly found a need for their skills (sudden crops of personal computers required sudden computing gurus), and didn't become successful, I will concede your point in this matter.
I think I remember hearing that interview (a few hours ago actually), and he mentions that it is also a trait of the Bill's personalities that drove them to spend their time in such a matter; that part being the individual effort. Yeah, maybe other people had access, but they didn't all put in the time required (10kHrs). The fact that Bill and Bill did put in the long hours is a testament to their individual efforts. Gladwell does seem to understand this bit. Just the same, not every shitty british dive band from the 50's had the chance to go to Hamburg and become a strip club house band (not exactly sure on the strip club part), and of those that might have had the opportunity presented to them, only one seems to have gone and put in the work needed to become a superb group at that time... etc etc
as for the higher IQ peeps... eh, yeah, that'd be interesting too
This computer processing shit is like A1 sauce -- you put it on a poor cut of meat to cover for the taste, it's got no business being anywhere near a good cut of meat.
Yes, and no.
I recently heard a death metal cover (live) of Paint it Black, it was awesome. So I bought the local band's disc, the one with same cover tune. It sucked. By the same regard I've seen other bands who have put out stellar albums, only to not be anywhere near worth listening to live. Then there are other bands, still, such as Tool, who put out amazing albums, with at least a little wizardry. The albums, IMO, are great. To see them live, I can't even explain. If you ever have the chance, go see them. Don't even watch the live recorded videos unless you're already a Tool junkie, it won't do anything to move you.
None the less, yeah, computers can help doctor some stuff up, and in some cases it's a disaster... Much like bad plastic surgery. But you should also consider that, like plastic surgery, a lot of this great technology was devised to be used for good, and sometimes still is.
I view it almost like being able to custom mix the exact color pigment that you want. Yeah, it can be tedious, and used mostly for ill gain, but for the person who wants to take the time to learn to do it intuitively, and can still channel that je ne sais quoi, it can lead to some very beautiful things. Unfortunately those things tend to be overlooked when everyone starts using the same technique to produce a whole lot of rubbish.
I don't like any form of hate speech... but I like censorship even less
take my view to be whatever you will
I do wonder if you would vote for a law that would punish a person for using said word on the street... I mean people by far and large are anonymous in large public places. just wondering, that's all.
then again, why stop at just that one word? you can guess where this is going, and so I will stop here.
Associated Press. I think press in this usage refer to a collecctive group of individual people (members) who report on news, rather than an individual print-press machine (as opposed to expeller, or other presses) which is associated with something (entity)
I spent years trying to figure it out (what the letters were abbreviating), and then another hour trying to determine if it would be an association of people, or printing presses. yes, I am that slow
Letting the world know what they find offensive is practically the feminists' national sport. Rather, it would be if they had their own country.
I'm a feminist, and am offended by this claim (I am a feminist, but am going for funny with this...)
I think the feeling of entitlement that often leads to the bitching comes from something besides the ism/ist in question... at least I attribute it to a sense of entitlement. and by that I don't mean that anyone is not particularly entitled t... ah what's the use
I totally agree, one size does not fit all. Hell, one size doesn't even always suite me.
My original claim was that existing markets shouldn't have to expand themselves to be all inclusive. That being said, I see nothing wrong with new people coming into the foray, as it were, and trying to see if there's enough pie there to eat and be merry, and I'm glad there are lots of little bands trying. However, if there were such a plethora of musicians creating enough music to fit every individual need then I would likely be hard pressed to find the particular thing that fit me, without wading through endless amounts of other bits. Other than when I'm working (and can't really listen to the music I prefer due to being outnumbered...) I don't listen to anything that is likely to be found on a radio-station or television. I'm glad the things I listen to are around, but even in the current climate these take forever to find. My brain is racked with over stimulation searching through literally thousands of similarly shaped albums, with evident trending artwork, and a rather nondescript base set of titles. whatever, I guess I don't have the energy to finis.....
don't like the terms, don't partake in the content
this is not an argument over something as much needed as food or water.
granted I feel that my life has been saved by other people's music, but your argument seems to hinge on a claim that a market should provide for all the demands that are present (or at least in a reasonable way)
Thankfully that is not the sort of society that I live in. I would hate to have to spend countless hours searching for the exact thing that I want every time I wanted something. I mean when I really get a hankering for something exotic I don't mind, but if I want steak and potatoes...
then again, I do prefer exotic quite a bit... (my vision of exotic may not be what yours is)
and Theft (in the Pirate Bay sense) is when you make a copy, in violation of provisional contract law, of an article for which you have not provided compensation to the rights executor as per means agreeable to all involved parties.
You are both wrong actually. It's not even about copyright infringement, it's about contributory infringement which in this case basically it means they are being accused of giving out the address of a location where copyright material may or may not be located.
no offense dude, but I think the argument stopped being about the article a long time ago;)
and if neither can agree with the other on terms of interaction, neither should get what they want. The side that uses the law is doing so because the side that uses the technology breeched the offered terms first. If no-one ever pirated a single piece of media, no one would ever have brought legal action over these matters.
I don't know what your skills are, and I'm not about to tell you how you're supposed to make money from them. You don't know why people do what they do, you know why you do what you do (maybe), don't suppose as to what any one else did, does, or should do. Maybe these artists need every penny to live the lives that they want. I hear coke is expensive.
tell you what, if you don't like the prices don't buy If you don't buy, don't partake fair is fair, you don't like the offered terms, you don't get to have your half of the arrangement either
I make art. I make very little money making art. I wish to make a living making art. I want to spend as little time as possible worrying about the making money part. I would rather spend my time making art than making money from art. This may or may not apply to anyone else. I don't care.
If you like my art, you can have it, but I want compensation which I deem agreeable. If you cannot compensate me in a way that I think is fair, then don't partake in my art. I currently accept friendship as means of reciprocation, I also accept food, and sometimes even a small amount of money. I only have so much time for socialization, as I said... I would rather make art, and I am fairly pleased to have the friends that I do. Also, I can only eat so much food.
Now here's where it gets funny: I work as a means to support myself. Not all of this work is related to my making art. C'est la vie, at least for now. See, sometimes that little inspiration will come when I am not really in a position to do anything about it because I must do work which provides for me. A person can write down bits of an idea. I have plenty of quick notes... but for me, personally, I cannot capture that inspiration and save it for later. I either use it or I lose it. Maybe you wouldn't even like my art. I don't care. Making my art is pretty much the only thing that keeps me even remotely happy. It's an escape. However, maybe you would like my art. I would love that, some people might even compromise their art to help ensure this. Good for them if they lack that little voice telling them not to. I wish I didn't have that voice. That aside, if you like what I do, and want to partake in it, compensate me.
I cannot spend time to arrange a way of having enough compensation to keep me doing this, and may consider assigning this task to someone else, so long as the terms of the arrangement are agreeable to me. I am not opposed to doing work. I just don't want to have to do that sort of work, thankfully no-one is going to force me. Under such an agreement I may have to give up some aspects, or perhaps rights, of/to what I do. Fine by me, so long as I get something which I value at least equally in return. Now, you, even if you like what I do, might not like the terms being offered by the entity which I have granted the rights of contract to, and so your option, as regards what I do, is this: don't buy it. However, if you are not willing to make such compensation, you should not partake in the art (yes, exceptions... parties, radio [where there is compensation], hell, I'd even be willing to overlook mix tapes so long as they were not being sold, and only where it is a direct laying of hands sort of deal... etc...) Simply, if you do not like the terms being offered, I am not ok with you deciding that you are going to make your own terms. EVEN if I disagree with some aspects of the terms being offered on my behalf. If ever there were a point in time where I was recognizable enough, and again free of such an agreement, I might decide to open things up with people who still want to partake in what I do... maybe something like NIN or that one off Radiohead thing (I'm at a loss for examples in any other art form/medium, sorry)... but at that point there may possibly be a different set of constraints.
P.S. I love The Pirate Bay. I use it. I just bought the Toadies album Rubberneck, having recently rediscovered it's greatness through a torrent over yonder. I had a copy from a friend years ago, it had some glitches and such, but it was free, and good enough for me. If I had not obtained the illegal copy then I wouldn't have spent $8 purchasing it. Not everyone does this. Some do.
What irks me are people who download something in violation of the terms being offered by the parties offering the (goods), enjoying said (goods), but still not buying them. I mean, really, if you like it, buy it. If you can't afford it, do with out. Yeah, that's right, buy less if you have to, it's ok, b
Have you considered dressing up as a minstrel and playing some music? Apparently, that's worked before.
I think that was actually allegory for some christian so and so driving all the pagans out of wherever (someplace in the UK if I recall correctly) by means of torture and such... serious yo
after RTFA i realized that this is nothing new, or exciting... essentially all the video game is doing is being a medium for delivery of the visual part of the information. you could do the same thing with flash cards.
a better study would be linking in game rewards for in game stimuli to to real life responses to similar real life stimuli
Slashdot Mirror
there's more to it than that... see Africa, as a land mass, is more vertical, making it more difficult to spread crops/livestock from one area to another. Euro-Asia are oriented horizontally... causing the same tasks to be much more easy to accomplish....
I'm summarizing part of Guns, Germs, and Steel - by Jared Diamond
a good read, IMO (incidentally, I've only ever seen it with a Bill Gates praise quote on the back; looks like one can't travel far these days without him)
They aren't rich because of talent, they aren't rich by virtue of working harder or smarter. They are rich because they were lucky or wicked. Thus it is moral to redistribute their ill gotten gains to the noble downdrodden poor.
Maybe... or maybe not. Maybe there's more to it than that. Perhaps there was someone who was a hard worker, and had a little bit of smarts, and decided that they'd rather look out for themselves because all the stupid lazy people out there weren't going to lend a hand. And through this, not so much being wicked, they became rich.
I think that there is truth in your claim, but I hope you're a little more careful in dealing out your punishments than to say that everyone who is of sort x gets punishment y ... and would consider that there are outliers who might not, and morally should not, be punished with the rest of the herd... who are you to dictate moral standards?
that being said, on a personal level I'd like to see the rich boiled live in oil
Why is it that some musicians, after 10,000 hours of practice, are struggling with their day jobs, and others are mega-stars?
Well, it seems a choice of priorities... day job, or obsessiveness over music... see, the creative peak for males (who seem to make up a disproportionate amount of mega-stars) tends to be in the early-mid 20s. Now, if a person can manage to put in their 10,000 hours by the time they hit that home stretch for creativity, they have a much higher chance of being able to produce at the exact right time that opportunity happens to drunkenly barge in their front door. If the musician isn't quite there, then opportunity might not stay long, or if the creative peak is too far past, there might not be as much drive behind the music. It's not easy to put in that sort of practice. If you began playing guitar, for example, for 2.739... hours every single day for 10 years, you'd have 10kHrs in that time, if you only put in one hour of practice each and every day, you wouldn't reach 10kHrs until sometime after 27 years.
I happen to believe that the majority of current mega-stars aren't quite up to par. Then again, when opportunity happened to come calling, they happened to be in the right place, and were good enough, maybe not the absolute best... there wasn't enough competition in the right place. More difficult to be in the right place if you have a day job to worry about.
Not everyone who can even manage to put in enough time has that certain factor that separates the good, the bad, and the ugly. And those that do, can't always feel free to just disregard the rest of all their possible responsibilities.
PM me if you'd like to have a larger (two-way) discussion on the whole bit about musicians...
oh yeah... and the money as a score card thing, it seems to be that from an economist standpoint of trying to quantify something, money makes a handy place-holder. Just as how insurance companies will pro-rate your body, and the usefulness there of, in the case of calculating compensation for loss of use due to injury. I even heard on NPR a couple of years back someone explaining that corporations assign values (in units of money) to get people to do certain tasks, such as earn $x working a job that requires moving to a new location, earn $y to have a job which might not be so conducive to having/starting a family, etc. Yeah, money is only useful to the point of having enough to do what you want from the perspective of an individual gaining money. But, it is also useful as a valuation system. I am in the camp of people that don't think money indicates success, my mother is opposite. Though we disagree, I have found that with no-other data on a given matter of success, the vast majority of people in western(ized) cultures would say that someone with a greater amount of monetary assets is more successful. However, if you take into account that so-and-so1 only earns $q but is also a devoted, loving parent, who never misses childhood event n, where as so-and-so2 earns $q^8 but is never around to spend time with the offspring (or whatever the local popular consensus happens to be as to what makes a person a good person)... and views on success tend to change.
sorry if that's difficult to understand (it's late in my local time, and I might have made large errors in my logic)
take care and be well
I think what he is getting at with the Joy/Gates bit, is that not too many people were at the right place at that right time... If you can provide me with a list of people, who, having early access around the same time-frame (say 1968-1970/1 to begin with) that Joy/Gates would have been learning to program, who also managed to put in the same large chunk of time (about 10,000 hours worth of programming) just before the world writ large suddenly found a need for their skills (sudden crops of personal computers required sudden computing gurus), and didn't become successful, I will concede your point in this matter.
I think I remember hearing that interview (a few hours ago actually), and he mentions that it is also a trait of the Bill's personalities that drove them to spend their time in such a matter; that part being the individual effort. Yeah, maybe other people had access, but they didn't all put in the time required (10kHrs).
The fact that Bill and Bill did put in the long hours is a testament to their individual efforts. Gladwell does seem to understand this bit.
Just the same, not every shitty british dive band from the 50's had the chance to go to Hamburg and become a strip club house band (not exactly sure on the strip club part), and of those that might have had the opportunity presented to them, only one seems to have gone and put in the work needed to become a superb group at that time... etc etc
as for the higher IQ peeps... eh, yeah, that'd be interesting too
This computer processing shit is like A1 sauce -- you put it on a poor cut of meat to cover for the taste, it's got no business being anywhere near a good cut of meat.
Yes, and no.
I recently heard a death metal cover (live) of Paint it Black, it was awesome. So I bought the local band's disc, the one with same cover tune. It sucked. By the same regard I've seen other bands who have put out stellar albums, only to not be anywhere near worth listening to live.
Then there are other bands, still, such as Tool, who put out amazing albums, with at least a little wizardry. The albums, IMO, are great.
To see them live, I can't even explain. If you ever have the chance, go see them.
Don't even watch the live recorded videos unless you're already a Tool junkie, it won't do anything to move you.
None the less, yeah, computers can help doctor some stuff up, and in some cases it's a disaster... Much like bad plastic surgery. But you should also consider that, like plastic surgery, a lot of this great technology was devised to be used for good, and sometimes still is.
I view it almost like being able to custom mix the exact color pigment that you want. Yeah, it can be tedious, and used mostly for ill gain, but for the person who wants to take the time to learn to do it intuitively, and can still channel that je ne sais quoi, it can lead to some very beautiful things. Unfortunately those things tend to be overlooked when everyone starts using the same technique to produce a whole lot of rubbish.
I'm a non-drummer, although sometimes I pretend in my home studio.... but I've got an appreciation for Danny Carey
IMO, best drummer, ever
My heart leaped when I first read that as "Judge Orders Record Company Execs To Death". I'm so disappointed.
Have you ever been to Minnesota in March?
Lizards don't survive well in such a climate.
(I'm from Wisconsin)
So it all comes out in the wash, and as the great Yogi Berra said " When you come to a fork in the road, take it. "
there, fixed that for ya
I don't like any form of hate speech... but I like censorship even less
take my view to be whatever you will
I do wonder if you would vote for a law that would punish a person for using said word on the street... I mean people by far and large are anonymous in large public places. just wondering, that's all.
then again, why stop at just that one word?
you can guess where this is going, and so I will stop here.
Associated Press.
I think press in this usage refer to a collecctive group of individual people (members) who report on news, rather than an individual print-press machine (as opposed to expeller, or other presses) which is associated with something (entity)
I spent years trying to figure it out (what the letters were abbreviating), and then another hour trying to determine if it would be an association of people, or printing presses. yes, I am that slow
Letting the world know what they find offensive is practically the feminists' national sport. Rather, it would be if they had their own country.
I'm a feminist, and am offended by this claim
(I am a feminist, but am going for funny with this...)
I think the feeling of entitlement that often leads to the bitching comes from something besides the ism/ist in question... at least I attribute it to a sense of entitlement. and by that I don't mean that anyone is not particularly entitled t... ah what's the use
I think AC was going for +1 Funny
I totally agree, one size does not fit all. Hell, one size doesn't even always suite me.
My original claim was that existing markets shouldn't have to expand themselves to be all inclusive. That being said, I see nothing wrong with new people coming into the foray, as it were, and trying to see if there's enough pie there to eat and be merry, and I'm glad there are lots of little bands trying.
However, if there were such a plethora of musicians creating enough music to fit every individual need then I would likely be hard pressed to find the particular thing that fit me, without wading through endless amounts of other bits.
Other than when I'm working (and can't really listen to the music I prefer due to being outnumbered...) I don't listen to anything that is likely to be found on a radio-station or television. I'm glad the things I listen to are around, but even in the current climate these take forever to find. My brain is racked with over stimulation searching through literally thousands of similarly shaped albums, with evident trending artwork, and a rather nondescript base set of titles.
whatever, I guess I don't have the energy to finis.....
It'd be much worse to send them to a federal prison, but not grant them any extra protections when inside... you know, let the populace deal with them
don't like the terms, don't partake in the content
this is not an argument over something as much needed as food or water.
granted I feel that my life has been saved by other people's music, but your argument seems to hinge on a claim that a market should provide for all the demands that are present (or at least in a reasonable way)
Thankfully that is not the sort of society that I live in. I would hate to have to spend countless hours searching for the exact thing that I want every time I wanted something. I mean when I really get a hankering for something exotic I don't mind, but if I want steak and potatoes...
then again, I do prefer exotic quite a bit... (my vision of exotic may not be what yours is)
and Theft (in the Pirate Bay sense) is when you make a copy, in violation of provisional contract law, of an article for which you have not provided compensation to the rights executor as per means agreeable to all involved parties.
You are both wrong actually. It's not even about copyright infringement, it's about contributory infringement which in this case basically it means they are being accused of giving out the address of a location where copyright material may or may not be located.
no offense dude, but I think the argument stopped being about the article a long time ago ;)
and if neither can agree with the other on terms of interaction, neither should get what they want. The side that uses the law is doing so because the side that uses the technology breeched the offered terms first. If no-one ever pirated a single piece of media, no one would ever have brought legal action over these matters.
supposed to my ass.
I don't know what your skills are, and I'm not about to tell you how you're supposed to make money from them. You don't know why people do what they do, you know why you do what you do (maybe), don't suppose as to what any one else did, does, or should do.
Maybe these artists need every penny to live the lives that they want. I hear coke is expensive.
tell you what, if you don't like the prices don't buy
If you don't buy, don't partake
fair is fair, you don't like the offered terms, you don't get to have your half of the arrangement either
I make art. I make very little money making art. I wish to make a living making art. I want to spend as little time as possible worrying about the making money part. I would rather spend my time making art than making money from art.
This may or may not apply to anyone else.
I don't care.
If you like my art, you can have it, but I want compensation which I deem agreeable. If you cannot compensate me in a way that I think is fair, then don't partake in my art. I currently accept friendship as means of reciprocation, I also accept food, and sometimes even a small amount of money. I only have so much time for socialization, as I said... I would rather make art, and I am fairly pleased to have the friends that I do. Also, I can only eat so much food.
Now here's where it gets funny:
I work as a means to support myself. Not all of this work is related to my making art. C'est la vie, at least for now. See, sometimes that little inspiration will come when I am not really in a position to do anything about it because I must do work which provides for me. A person can write down bits of an idea. I have plenty of quick notes... but for me, personally, I cannot capture that inspiration and save it for later. I either use it or I lose it.
Maybe you wouldn't even like my art.
I don't care. Making my art is pretty much the only thing that keeps me even remotely happy. It's an escape.
However, maybe you would like my art.
I would love that, some people might even compromise their art to help ensure this. Good for them if they lack that little voice telling them not to. I wish I didn't have that voice.
That aside, if you like what I do, and want to partake in it, compensate me.
I cannot spend time to arrange a way of having enough compensation to keep me doing this, and may consider assigning this task to someone else, so long as the terms of the arrangement are agreeable to me. I am not opposed to doing work. I just don't want to have to do that sort of work, thankfully no-one is going to force me.
Under such an agreement I may have to give up some aspects, or perhaps rights, of/to what I do. Fine by me, so long as I get something which I value at least equally in return.
Now, you, even if you like what I do, might not like the terms being offered by the entity which I have granted the rights of contract to, and so your option, as regards what I do, is this: don't buy it. However, if you are not willing to make such compensation, you should not partake in the art (yes, exceptions... parties, radio [where there is compensation], hell, I'd even be willing to overlook mix tapes so long as they were not being sold, and only where it is a direct laying of hands sort of deal... etc...)
Simply, if you do not like the terms being offered, I am not ok with you deciding that you are going to make your own terms. EVEN if I disagree with some aspects of the terms being offered on my behalf.
If ever there were a point in time where I was recognizable enough, and again free of such an agreement, I might decide to open things up with people who still want to partake in what I do... maybe something like NIN or that one off Radiohead thing (I'm at a loss for examples in any other art form/medium, sorry)... but at that point there may possibly be a different set of constraints.
P.S. I love The Pirate Bay. I use it. I just bought the Toadies album Rubberneck, having recently rediscovered it's greatness through a torrent over yonder. I had a copy from a friend years ago, it had some glitches and such, but it was free, and good enough for me. If I had not obtained the illegal copy then I wouldn't have spent $8 purchasing it. Not everyone does this. Some do.
What irks me are people who download something in violation of the terms being offered by the parties offering the (goods), enjoying said (goods), but still not buying them. I mean, really, if you like it, buy it. If you can't afford it, do with out. Yeah, that's right, buy less if you have to, it's ok, b
then again, I could have made that up completely ...
Have you considered dressing up as a minstrel and playing some music? Apparently, that's worked before.
I think that was actually allegory for some christian so and so driving all the pagans out of wherever (someplace in the UK if I recall correctly) by means of torture and such...
serious yo
after RTFA i realized that this is nothing new, or exciting ... essentially all the video game is doing is being a medium for delivery of the visual part of the information. you could do the same thing with flash cards.
a better study would be linking in game rewards for in game stimuli to to real life responses to similar real life stimuli