Wouldn't it just be cheaper to move the entire population of gambia/senegal/guinea-bissau/guinea conakry) to China/Continental USA/Canada/non-kyoto-signatories? Reversing the CO2 trend in the atmosphere is awfully expensive, so it might be cheaper? the people being relocated, if they know what's good for them, will willingly escape the desert as long as there isn't a slaughterhouse ahead of them, the locals would benefit from an immediate surplus of labour.
I mean, if you're already at the point where you're willing to spend your money, effort and capital to help them, why not be serious about it?
You made some good points, and the anonymous poster also kind of touched on this but there is a 3rd path for 'advertising' beyond your 2-point list---metainformation.
A forum for discussing the content, or in some way giving feedback for a directories, imho, is extremely valuable. I don't need to buy a million shovels, even if they are an exceptionally good deal, because I'm not specialized in shovel distribution. But if I see a well built shovel for a dollar, that lasts longer than 5 years or so, you bet I'd be willing to make a post on a forum linked with the shovel. Same goes for other things--- ncix has forums for each peice of computer equipment that you can buy, consequently the difference between shopping at a place like BestBuy and NCIX is that the latter you're likely to get real feedback, real information that you can use to become informed on a product, whereas the former you're just likely to get suckered in by a salesman. It's not really a directory, but it's information about a directory, usually provided by the users of the directory.
Similarily, I guess, you can provide feedback about #2. reddit, for example, allows you to discuss the banner adds on the site. So you can say the product sucks, for example. This activity is fairly new, expect more from this in the future.
Google kind of does this, but could certainly do a lot more. If there was a 'click here to discuss this URL' on every search result on Google, complete with support for, say, orkut members to log in, ideally with/. or reddit like discussion threading, well firstly stuff like StumbleUpon would be all but forced to use Google as a backend, and second everyone would be much better informed on not only every URL, but how people perceive every URL. A huge benefit.
StumbleUpon, imho, was ahead of it's time, but it's become a bloated peice of garbage. But the idea of a universal discussion based on webpage has yet to truly come to fruition, and in this context, it has yet to truly become the solid 3rd part of 'advertising'.
Who gets to define what is and is not embarrassing? Is it embarrassing to not wear a headscarf? How about talk about masturbation? Sexual thoughts concerning one's mother? The kinds of music you listen to(what if you secretly listen to metallica?)? Your political beliefs? The fact that your life is boring enough that drinking once in a while to excess is a reasonable alternative? Let's go a little deeper; The dopamine level in your brain?
Because if the definition of that doesn't take into account the 100s of GB of photo evidence to the contrary, then it shouldn't carry any weight at all.
That list is kind of outdated, and a lot of the steps no longer apply. It really doesn't matter what Heritage Canada and Industry Canada think anymore; the bill is already written. Contact your MP, the Prime Minister, and get others to do the same. The facebook group (*gag*) is probably a good thing to join (*gag*). And not giving the MAFIAA your money is always a good idea. But outside of that, we just need lots of voters, being as public as possible against this.
Canadians tried marching to the hill, once, with a Conservative government, although for different circumstances. Just keep in mind how that turned out: the march was stopped in Regina(where I am), and blood was shed.
I definitely get a lot of hits hits from baidu, and a percentage of my outgoing traffic is your stuff.
If it makes you feel any better, there's a good chance people from baidu are wandering around on my site and downloading your stuff(at a whopping ~200B/s, no doubt).
2007 was one of the best years I can remember in a long, long time, for music. You just weren't listening to the right places.
As for the really big name acts:
Nine inch Nails - Year Zero(okay, was mostly a really striking departure from what we expect from music, but isn't that the point?)
Processor - My Industry (not technically big name, but should be -- released at the same time as year zero, so it was easily eclipsed, but it is well worth the download)
Radiohead - In Rainbows
Of course, the really good stuff came from the growing army of independant and smaller bands that don't have exposure, and that you'll be lucky to hear on last.fm, pandora, rantradio, or other icecast/shoutcast internet radio streams. There was a lot of emo stuff, too, although I haven't heard most of it, some of it isn't too bad(Arcade Fire - Neon Bible?), if you can get yourself past the "oh these kids and their emo" point, and dig through the corporate crap. There's also a huge amount of underground hip hop stuff out there, and some of that isn't too bad. Obviously 99% of the current music of crap, but 99% of everything is crap, and has always been crap. The good stuff *is* out there, though.
try ^ d - listen
Nyet to the Neins - Homely Architexture
were released right at the end of 2006, so may as well have been 2007. The latter is pretty damn good.
8 bit peoples toured, and I'm sure there's good stuff still being created there
Alex Gibson - Rockabye Baby!
DJ Earworm was active in 2007
Personally, I was too busy with work & school to do much, although I had some good ideas, and some really raw stuff, but nothing to compare to the above(especially year zero). I have a feeling Michael Crawford was in a similar state, since I don't see anything new on his page.
"I would oppose both copyright and opposite-to-copyright, supporting only physical property rights in the media that underlie information patterns. They're the only thing that even exists!"
I'm sorry, I'm having a little trouble making out what this post is about, since there's no meaning in it. Since the only thing that exists is physical objects, there doesn't appear to exist any meaning in the above post(or for that matter, this one). Maybe you could try rephrasing?
What part of legitimate user rights, including the right to own your own computer makes one 'want everything for free'? How is desiring the right to treat data in your own thinking apparatus in the most optimal manner, as opposed to being something you're only allowed to have access to if properly licensed by a CRIA panel, and then only through a copyright-fascist filter immature? Or what about freedom from the abuse of copyright law to stifle dissent, weaken democratic institutions and generally cause harm to random members of the general public? Copyright law is anti-technology law, and the Canadian government could very easily make Canada less competitive in anything relating to computer technology through use of the wrong law(although they will probably bank on (relatively inefficient)automotive and (non-sustainable)tarsands to bridge that gap).
There is a lot of room in the Canadian Copyright debate for a pro-copyright stance; one that does not entail jailtime for breaking through DRM to get at public domain content, for example. Or perhaps, legally being able to connect to an internet without a "trusted" computer. Or being able to copy media files for timeshifting and other private or educational use.
All of these things are at stake right now in Canada, although since the Prentice and the CRAP has refused to put forward a bill after almost 6 months of baiting us, it's hard to feel alarmed, this really could come out this week for all we know.
Hell, we're have a shortage of Computer Science students, and it won't be easy to raise our numbers if the student body is afraid of jailtime for seemingly innocuous activity such as listening to a song with C code in it. And yet that's exactly the sort of thing that has happened in places where milder copyright law than the one that was supposed to be put to the floor of The House in Decembre held sway.
That's because the problems you mentioned were unimportant in the large scheme of things. No one is going to care who won the olympics in 2008 just like no one really cares who won the olympics in 1948. But people *will* care if we discover a new fundamental force via particle accelerator, prove P!=NP decisively, or save our species from extinction. And no amount of drugs will subtract away from their importance.
There are important problems to solve *to humanity* and if it takes drugs to solve them, we should start pouring on the drugs. The progress we get from science has long-lasting side effects and can even reduce the net need for drugs.
This lawsuit probably won't succeed, but more will undoubtedly follow. I would suggest to either help me mirror wikipedia(admittedly that link is english and english-meta only), or you could alternatively get a complete fresh copy from them, and seed it on bittorrent.
So wrong it's harmful
on
Is AMD Dead Yet?
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
1) People do not choose their BIOS(yet, anyway); so you're going to have an awful lot of people caught when they start having 'Trusted' Bios not allowing them the kind of control over their computer that we now have.
2) You're assuming that your ISP is going to allow you to connect without 'trusted' software running.
TCPA is designed to "secure" whole networks of computers for the trusted computing group, not just your own device(as if *anything* you own is going to actually be your own). Unless you are solidly sure that you'll always be able to connect to a 'non-trusted' network, this is fine. But for the rest of us, this stuff is *not* our friend.
Hey, musician here, I'm probably more going to agree with you than anything on this one(especially since you seem to be with us against this bill, I'll overlook some differences) but;
"It would be like doing 10 years of good investing on the stock market, retiring on $10M dollars only to be told 5 years down the track to hand all your capital gains over because you are not allowed to enjoy the fruits of your work; you must keep working."
Your example sucks. If we wanted to use your metaphor, this is how the situation would work;
Let's say I do 10 years of pushing out amazing music, and then I retire on 10$M dollars that I've made from sales of my music. 10$M is quite a bit, and would take some doing, but as 'In Rainbows' has proven, it's within the realm of possibility. It's probably around the same magnitude of difficulty that investing in the stock market would take, give or take an order of magnitude. If I make that 10M$, I should be able to retire, just like the stock broker. The only one talking about the state coming to take that money away is you. If you've made enough profit to retire, great! If not? Well, keep working, keep writing music, right?
If you're going to treat music like a business, at least do so consistently, that's all I ask.
I'm sorry, but there are real problems in the world, like genocide, child trafficking, overpopulation and water scarcity; and you're trying to tell us that we should be concerned with the folks who have over 200$million dollars at their disposal and want to waste it on a fucking 2 hour video? They can fend for themselves, thankyouverymuch.
200$ million is probably more than the bottom million people can afford; let's figure a way to fix *their* problems, and then work on trivial matters such as what is on the boob tube on a given friday night, kay?
SoundExchange is not yet law in Canada, and along with myself and RantRadio, Michael Crawford could probably avoid them for the time being. In the long term, though you're probably right.
Slashdot Mirror
We'll talk to you again once your water runs out in 30 years, or oil runs out in 150.
You have some good points(specifically on arms), but I'll bite anyway.
What could possibly be salvageable from, say, hutu culture? What could possibly be worth keeping?
this is addressed elsewhere in the thread, you should check that out.
Wouldn't it just be cheaper to move the entire population of gambia/senegal/guinea-bissau/guinea conakry) to China/Continental USA/Canada/non-kyoto-signatories? Reversing the CO2 trend in the atmosphere is awfully expensive, so it might be cheaper? the people being relocated, if they know what's good for them, will willingly escape the desert as long as there isn't a slaughterhouse ahead of them, the locals would benefit from an immediate surplus of labour.
I mean, if you're already at the point where you're willing to spend your money, effort and capital to help them, why not be serious about it?
Cutting off your balls will usually do as workaround, if you're not man enough for that option...
WTF is this trying to say...
"You weren't compatible, anyway"
You made some good points, and the anonymous poster also kind of touched on this but there is a 3rd path for 'advertising' beyond your 2-point list---metainformation.
/. or reddit like discussion threading, well firstly stuff like StumbleUpon would be all but forced to use Google as a backend, and second everyone would be much better informed on not only every URL, but how people perceive every URL. A huge benefit.
A forum for discussing the content, or in some way giving feedback for a directories, imho, is extremely valuable. I don't need to buy a million shovels, even if they are an exceptionally good deal, because I'm not specialized in shovel distribution. But if I see a well built shovel for a dollar, that lasts longer than 5 years or so, you bet I'd be willing to make a post on a forum linked with the shovel. Same goes for other things--- ncix has forums for each peice of computer equipment that you can buy, consequently the difference between shopping at a place like BestBuy and NCIX is that the latter you're likely to get real feedback, real information that you can use to become informed on a product, whereas the former you're just likely to get suckered in by a salesman. It's not really a directory, but it's information about a directory, usually provided by the users of the directory.
Similarily, I guess, you can provide feedback about #2. reddit, for example, allows you to discuss the banner adds on the site. So you can say the product sucks, for example. This activity is fairly new, expect more from this in the future.
Google kind of does this, but could certainly do a lot more. If there was a 'click here to discuss this URL' on every search result on Google, complete with support for, say, orkut members to log in, ideally with
StumbleUpon, imho, was ahead of it's time, but it's become a bloated peice of garbage. But the idea of a universal discussion based on webpage has yet to truly come to fruition, and in this context, it has yet to truly become the solid 3rd part of 'advertising'.
Who gets to define what is and is not embarrassing? Is it embarrassing to not wear a headscarf? How about talk about masturbation? Sexual thoughts concerning one's mother? The kinds of music you listen to(what if you secretly listen to metallica?)? Your political beliefs? The fact that your life is boring enough that drinking once in a while to excess is a reasonable alternative? Let's go a little deeper; The dopamine level in your brain?
Who gets to define what a "poor decision" is?
Because if the definition of that doesn't take into account the 100s of GB of photo evidence to the contrary, then it shouldn't carry any weight at all.
That list is kind of outdated, and a lot of the steps no longer apply. It really doesn't matter what Heritage Canada and Industry Canada think anymore; the bill is already written. Contact your MP, the Prime Minister, and get others to do the same. The facebook group (*gag*) is probably a good thing to join (*gag*). And not giving the MAFIAA your money is always a good idea. But outside of that, we just need lots of voters, being as public as possible against this.
Canadians tried marching to the hill, once, with a Conservative government, although for different circumstances. Just keep in mind how that turned out: the march was stopped in Regina(where I am), and blood was shed.
reddit?
I definitely get a lot of hits hits from baidu, and a percentage of my outgoing traffic is your stuff.
If it makes you feel any better, there's a good chance people from baidu are wandering around on my site and downloading your stuff(at a whopping ~200B/s, no doubt).
2007 was one of the best years I can remember in a long, long time, for music. You just weren't listening to the right places.
As for the really big name acts:
Nine inch Nails - Year Zero(okay, was mostly a really striking departure from what we expect from music, but isn't that the point?)
Processor - My Industry (not technically big name, but should be -- released at the same time as year zero, so it was easily eclipsed, but it is well worth the download)
Radiohead - In Rainbows
Of course, the really good stuff came from the growing army of independant and smaller bands that don't have exposure, and that you'll be lucky to hear on last.fm, pandora, rantradio, or other icecast/shoutcast internet radio streams. There was a lot of emo stuff, too, although I haven't heard most of it, some of it isn't too bad(Arcade Fire - Neon Bible?), if you can get yourself past the "oh these kids and their emo" point, and dig through the corporate crap. There's also a huge amount of underground hip hop stuff out there, and some of that isn't too bad. Obviously 99% of the current music of crap, but 99% of everything is crap, and has always been crap. The good stuff *is* out there, though.
try ^ d - listen
Nyet to the Neins - Homely Architexture
were released right at the end of 2006, so may as well have been 2007. The latter is pretty damn good.
8 bit peoples toured, and I'm sure there's good stuff still being created there
Alex Gibson - Rockabye Baby!
DJ Earworm was active in 2007
Personally, I was too busy with work & school to do much, although I had some good ideas, and some really raw stuff, but nothing to compare to the above(especially year zero). I have a feeling Michael Crawford was in a similar state, since I don't see anything new on his page.
I would ask the BC HRT: Is your mandate to preserve human rights? Or is it to restrict them?
...why don't you?
"I would oppose both copyright and opposite-to-copyright, supporting only physical property rights in the media that underlie information patterns. They're the only thing that even exists!"
I'm sorry, I'm having a little trouble making out what this post is about, since there's no meaning in it. Since the only thing that exists is physical objects, there doesn't appear to exist any meaning in the above post(or for that matter, this one). Maybe you could try rephrasing?
What part of legitimate user rights, including the right to own your own computer makes one 'want everything for free'? How is desiring the right to treat data in your own thinking apparatus in the most optimal manner, as opposed to being something you're only allowed to have access to if properly licensed by a CRIA panel, and then only through a copyright-fascist filter immature? Or what about freedom from the abuse of copyright law to stifle dissent, weaken democratic institutions and generally cause harm to random members of the general public? Copyright law is anti-technology law, and the Canadian government could very easily make Canada less competitive in anything relating to computer technology through use of the wrong law(although they will probably bank on (relatively inefficient)automotive and (non-sustainable)tarsands to bridge that gap).
There is a lot of room in the Canadian Copyright debate for a pro-copyright stance; one that does not entail jailtime for breaking through DRM to get at public domain content, for example. Or perhaps, legally being able to connect to an internet without a "trusted" computer. Or being able to copy media files for timeshifting and other private or educational use.
All of these things are at stake right now in Canada, although since the Prentice and the CRAP has refused to put forward a bill after almost 6 months of baiting us, it's hard to feel alarmed, this really could come out this week for all we know.
Hell, we're have a shortage of Computer Science students, and it won't be easy to raise our numbers if the student body is afraid of jailtime for seemingly innocuous activity such as listening to a song with C code in it. And yet that's exactly the sort of thing that has happened in places where milder copyright law than the one that was supposed to be put to the floor of The House in Decembre held sway.
That's because the problems you mentioned were unimportant in the large scheme of things. No one is going to care who won the olympics in 2008 just like no one really cares who won the olympics in 1948. But people *will* care if we discover a new fundamental force via particle accelerator, prove P!=NP decisively, or save our species from extinction. And no amount of drugs will subtract away from their importance.
There are important problems to solve *to humanity* and if it takes drugs to solve them, we should start pouring on the drugs. The progress we get from science has long-lasting side effects and can even reduce the net need for drugs.
Would this article read the same (AMD playing catch-up) if Intel didn't sponsor /. so much?
This lawsuit probably won't succeed, but more will undoubtedly follow. I would suggest to either help me mirror wikipedia(admittedly that link is english and english-meta only), or you could alternatively get a complete fresh copy from them, and seed it on bittorrent.
1) People do not choose their BIOS(yet, anyway); so you're going to have an awful lot of people caught when they start having 'Trusted' Bios not allowing them the kind of control over their computer that we now have.
2) You're assuming that your ISP is going to allow you to connect without 'trusted' software running.
TCPA is designed to "secure" whole networks of computers for the trusted computing group, not just your own device(as if *anything* you own is going to actually be your own). Unless you are solidly sure that you'll always be able to connect to a 'non-trusted' network, this is fine. But for the rest of us, this stuff is *not* our friend.
I swear to SERVER that I will under no circumstances even attempt to learn ARC if microsoft gains control of yahoo.
Hey, musician here, I'm probably more going to agree with you than anything on this one(especially since you seem to be with us against this bill, I'll overlook some differences) but;
"It would be like doing 10 years of good investing on the stock market, retiring on $10M dollars only to be told 5 years down the track to hand all your capital gains over because you are not allowed to enjoy the fruits of your work; you must keep working."
Your example sucks. If we wanted to use your metaphor, this is how the situation would work;
Let's say I do 10 years of pushing out amazing music, and then I retire on 10$M dollars that I've made from sales of my music. 10$M is quite a bit, and would take some doing, but as 'In Rainbows' has proven, it's within the realm of possibility. It's probably around the same magnitude of difficulty that investing in the stock market would take, give or take an order of magnitude. If I make that 10M$, I should be able to retire, just like the stock broker. The only one talking about the state coming to take that money away is you. If you've made enough profit to retire, great! If not? Well, keep working, keep writing music, right?
If you're going to treat music like a business, at least do so consistently, that's all I ask.
"You know, those people?"
I'm sorry, but there are real problems in the world, like genocide, child trafficking, overpopulation and water scarcity; and you're trying to tell us that we should be concerned with the folks who have over 200$million dollars at their disposal and want to waste it on a fucking 2 hour video? They can fend for themselves, thankyouverymuch.
200$ million is probably more than the bottom million people can afford; let's figure a way to fix *their* problems, and then work on trivial matters such as what is on the boob tube on a given friday night, kay?
SoundExchange is not yet law in Canada, and along with myself and RantRadio, Michael Crawford could probably avoid them for the time being.
In the long term, though you're probably right.