You are saying college is bad? Schools spend alot because a good education isnt cheap, teachers cost alot because teachers must eat too, books arent free unless the students write them,.
You are right colleges are like socialism, whats wrong with socialism?
Whats your ethnicity, sexuality or special interests have to do with college?
Colleges should get increased funding, considering its as important as our military and our military budget isnt shrinking.
Well no I wouldnt say that. In some classes I do learn stuff. I must protect my GPA because school isnt designed for learning, at least community college isnt, you must get a good GPA.
My problem isnt knowledge or gathering it, I have knowledge and I dont really learn in the classroom usually.
What I'm after is a degree, sure if I can learn thats good too. After 4 years of taking classes I know i can pass, I'll be prepared to go to graduate school at Harvard. 4 years wasted? definately not, because knowledge means nothing if you dont have connections and this is what your elite private university provides.
If I face up to it now it could RUIN me and make it so I cannot afford to go to college at all, It can also keep me from getting into an elite school if I screw up now, I mean sure after you've got 10 As and Bs, the occassional C wont mess up your GPA, but when you have only around a dozen As and Bs, that C will totally destroy your GPA.
The GPA is everything when it comes to transfering out of community college, and shouldnt my goal be to get into university first, and then worry about learning once I've established my abilities to the world?
Not everyone by birth is a genius at math, some people must work for YEARS to get the B in math.
"If you can't even get a B in a community college undergraduate math class,"
I'm not a Math person.
"you're not going to make it at Harvard or any truly "ELITE" university, private or not. Sorry."
Thats exactly why I wont major in math or science at Harvard.
"Getting a real education takes work on your part, not simply gaming the system for least effort per credit or slapping the right label on a bogus degree. It's not something other people do to you, it's something you do for yourself."
I am working, but I also know the system is not a very fair system, and the system does not reward hard work, it rewards those who "game" the system. So yeah I could learn math, get a C in math, have a bad GPA and never get into an elite private university, or I can get a good GPA, find some way into an elite university, and then take the math classes when I'm there.
I see no reason why I should take them now and get bad grades now when my grades actually matter when I can get bad grades later. And what you said doesnt make any sense, you act like a person must get a B in every single class they ever took in college, we all know that this is very unlikely as most people are humans who have strengths and weaknesses. I might get a C in Algebra and Calculus, but I'll never have to take those two classes again once I actually go ahead and do it, so for you to tell me that because I cant get a B in calculus that I'll never be able to handle university is pretty ignorant, I mean sure if I were majoring in math and science you'd be right, but I suppose you didnt do a good job looking at the list of possible majors which do not require you take tons of math classes.
Well you see, the point I'm trying to make is, when it comes to getting a job its all about who you know, not what you know and by going to elite private universities you meet the right people who can help you later on in life when you need refrences to take out a loan or you need to start a business and cant get any seed money.
Also it looks better on your resume to have a degree from an elite university, I'm not saying elite universities are the best place for actually learning, alot of the times they arent, but they have infinite resources, they provide contacts in the industry (NOTHING is more important than this!), and it allows for class mobility.
In the current world, and with our current global economy, to compete with 6 billion people, you dont want a degree from random state university, you need a degree from an elite private university.
But don't you think the admissions committe is going to notice the lack of math courses on your transcript?
Yeah they would if you transfered majoring in computer science, but if you transfer majoring in liberal arts or philosophy they dont really care about your math credentials.
A 3.0 GPA may be a minimum standard, but I can assure you that not all 3.0 GPAs are equal. A 3.0 with Intro Calc is going to be more impressive then a 3.0 with "Free Verse for Slackers". This is true even for liberal arts majors.
Oh come on, Calculus is not even a REQUIREMENT for liberal arts degrees, this is like saying a person trying to get a degree in photography needs to take calculus. My field has absolutely nothing to do with calculus and calculus is not a degree requirement.
If you are thinking of going into a technical field, the lack of math would be the kiss of death.
No, what you meant to say is if I wanted a computer science degree lack of math is the kiss of death. The field itself does not care if you know calculus, I've never once seen calculus in the computer industry, the only time i've ever seen calculus used is by people like Keith Packard working on Xfree, Video Game 3d engines, and military sims.
Guess what, 99 percent of all programming has absolutely nothing to do with this, yes if you are a programmer for NASA or working in R&D then you may need to know your calculus, but for 99.9 percent of the population calculus is useless.
I could never handle 4 classes in a semester! When I was taking three classes I doing OK, but running from one assigment to the next without much time for reflection. Two classes a semester is perfect for me (unfortunately most schools require you to take at least 3 to maintain eligibility for financial aid).
I agree 2 classes are perfect, but 4 is required. Believe me if I could take 2 classes I'd have no problem taking math classes, but I'm afraid to take math classes when so much is at stake and so little to gain by taking it. I can always transfer into a 4 year university on liberal arts and then take all the math classes I avoided and change my major later on. Its important that I at least get in the door.
If you will forgive me reapeating my unsolicited advise, I really think you would be better off taking fewer but more challenging courses. If you struggle with math, this is the perfect opportunity to get to know your instructors. Prepare as best you can, show up at all their office hours, and then get them to write letters of recommendation. I know from experience that letters of recommendation carry a lot of weight in admissions at elite private universities.
Well, I could get at least 2 teachers to write a letter of recommendation, but please tell me why I should ruin the best thing I have going for me (my GPA), if I lose my GPA I then have nothing, my highschool record isnt all that great even though I could get plenty of recommendations from highschool teachers (i went to a fucked up public school before I went to a charter school later on)
So you are telling me getting teachers to write letters would be equal to me getting a 3.5+ GPA? I'm focused 100% on my GPA, some teachers were impressed by me and gave me compliments, but I dont know if they'd actually write a letter of recommendation, I suppose I could ask?
I don't think I'll be accepted say say Harvard, even if I had a 4.0 GPA because the percentage of transfer students they accept are ridiculously low on the undergraduate level, however if I were to transfer to a school equally as elite, it would be easy to go to Harvard on the graduate level or even transfer into Harvard on the undergraduate level, I mean if you are coming from an elite school its easier to get into an elite school.
But thanks for the advice, I dont want to take any risks right now thought because Its not just that I fear ruining my GPA, I also know that if I screw up I dont get any federal money, scholarships, etc, so I cant afford in $$ to get a bad grade either.
People go to community college to transfer into a good university and get cheap credits, not get an education.
If they wanted me to focus on an education perhaps they wouldnt make the GPA so damn important.
What is the point of avoiding difficult but important classes simply to preserve your GPA? Are you in school to get an education or to simply achieve some arbitrary GPA? I've been in the position of hiring people for technical positions and I've always been far more impressed by a mediocre GPA in a substantial curriculum then a high GPA in an easy curriculum.
Ok say I do take a few math classes and get a few Cs, well then my GPA goes under 3.0 and I can forget about transfering into a good 4 year university, I can also forget about scholarships and grants which also require a high GPA of above 3.0 or 3.5, I really cannot afford any Cs and I know for a fact that its simply impossible for me to get an A or B in math. I take classes which I know I can/will get an A or B in.
This isnt about the jobs, this is about getting a degree from an elite private university.
I recently returned to school myself, so I do have sympathy with amount of work required to do really well in a course, and I do understand that those planning to continue to a four year school or go on to graduate school need to match minimum requirements, but in my opinion you'll be better served by reducing the number of classes you take in a given term then by trying to ditch the challenging courses.
I never take more than 4 classes per semester, and I never get anything below a B in grades, those are the rules I follow.
Maybe if universities werent so strict and competitive on the GPA issue I could actually focus on learning but right now I have a goal, that goal is to get into Harvard, Tufts, Boston College,Boston University or North Eastern, all which are ELITE private universities which will NOT let you in with a sub 3.0 GPA, you most likely wont get in with a sub 3.5 GPA, so no its not about "learning" right now, its about moving up the ladder, it will be about learning once I get into university, thats when I'll take math clases, get a C or two, and learn something.
Algebra requires you memorize hundreds of formulas, steps, rules, conditions, etc and thats exactly why I cant remember it no matter how many times I learn it.
Its also useless, all the stuff you memorize never applies to anything in the real world.
My mind does not like to remember information which is utterly useless, but some people are better at that than others.
all the formulas and steps are useless information that you memorize so that you can do calculus so that you can know math which you'll never use a day in your life and most likely wont remember 5 years later.
I'm in community college, let me tell you that this wont help, the reason why it wont help is because the goal will still be to get a good grade, pass your tests, and learn the knowledge you need to do this.
Now, if you can find a class which ISNT graded, then yes its a good idea, and I'll take math as long as it doesnt ruin my GPA if I do bad.
Otherwise I'm just going to avoid calculus, and all that crap so I can have a GPA over 3.0.
Now they want to tax us and rob consumers of every last penny. The RIAA is evil, we must boycott them, take their CDs and throw them into the ocean damnit!!!!!
I hate te RIAA and I want to boycott them for life, I dont mind paying for music, but what about indie artists? Forget about the RIAA, how can we allow ARTISTS to get paid?
99% of the files that were on napster were recordings that were owned and therefore promoted by the major labels. All Napster did was step in with a system do redistribute them illegally. Napster didn't need anybody promoting Metallica or Britney Spears because those acts had already been marketed, very effectively, to the general public.
You took that statistic straight from the RIAA. Guess what, its wrong, its more in the line of the mid 80 percentage.
Napster didn't need anybody promoting Metallica or Britney Spears because those acts had already been marketed, very effectively, to the general public.
Yes but I've also found new music via napster which was not promoted in the US, alot of people would rename songs and trick people into downloading their music.
The thing is, you don't need a Snapster, or a P2P pyramid, or anything else along those lines for that to happen. Just start your own record label, one which does not fuck over the artists.
People dont buy records anymore, what good is a record label? Sure you can do this but you still need P2P.
What can a small label (or an Internet distribution scheme) offer a band who wants to become popular? They can make the music available to those who've heard of it, but that's about it. If you want promotion, you will have to pay for it yourself.
Offer free music to get a fanbase, and then sell the music to the fans. You can offer promotions by letting people have free music, you can also promote your music by web radio which you keep ignoring.
A big, evil company can offer radio play,
Anyone can offer radio play over the web. MTV promotion, a chance to play in huge stadiums as an opening act for an already established band, your single shoe-horned into the soundtrack of the latest teen-sex comedy, an invitation to be heard playing a track on the latest pointless "tribute album" to some act that was big 20 years ago, your songs in the background of the latest Mountain Dew commercial. If your lead singer is a good-looking female, she can do ads for cosmetics or something. (Have you seen those hair-color ads with Natalie Imbruglia and Beyonce? Notice how they both get an on-screen credit, in a comercial! This is what corporate marketing schmucks call "synergy.")
Most bands and musicians arent asking to be celebrities.
Now, you are a 20-year old dumbfuck from Portland. You've got a band that sounds pretty good, and local bar-goers are getting into it, but you hardly have enough money for food, let alone promoting your album. You dream of someday playing your music huge crowds and living like Eddie Van Halen. One day, three sales reps call you with three very different offers: 1. An indie label offers to press 2,000 CD's for you, mostly at your expense, paid up front with money from your gigs. They offer no real advertising, but promise to work hard as local promoters. They can even get the head shop on the corner to put it next to the water bongs on the impulse rack! 2.An Internet start-up offers a way to get your stuff on-line, where people will browse over your name without recognition while looking for the latest U2 single, and maybe, just maybe some of them will double-click your MP3 sample to check you out. All your income will come via PayPal, which you have never heard of, at a rate of $0.50 per song. Also no advertising in this deal, but it's an Internet company, with all the prestige that comes with being a.com in 2003! 3. V2 Records wants to sign you to a 5-record deal, and plans to have you opening for The White Stripes next year. They will front you the money to record your album in Jimmy Jam's uber-studio in Minneapolis, and will spend about $2 Million promoting your first single. Okay, guitar-playing kid from Portland, which path will you choose? 3? Thought so.
Yes for now, while 3 is still an option, the problem with 3 is, now people refuse to pay for 3, also big record
Work ethic is not taught in school!I agree with you that things in the work place are going to change, but nothing will replace a good work ethic.,
The parent is supposed to teach work ethic. Its not something taught in a classroom damnit. Sure colleges can offer a class called "work ethics" or whatever, and thats fine, but its not something that should be taught to highschool students, not everyone wants their kids to be taught YOUR work ethics.
Who promoted Napster? Simple. Use the internet to promote music, a musician makes a website and promotes their own music, they pay for advertisements like everyone else, if they are good their songs will be put on web radio (which will replace the offline radio), and word of month will promote them.
The RIAA does promote some artists to success, but then you have other artists which got almost no promotion at all but sold tens of millions of copies.
Look at the Jackson 5, they came along before there were ways to "create" a star, they used their actual talent to promote their music, What about stevie wonder? Hes blind and he managed to sell music on his talent.
Now you have Britney Spears with no talent selling music because the RIAA pours money into a music video. I say we let the internet take over as promotion, eventually there will be streaming music videos on the net to replace the MTV distribution, and I'm sure you could design P2P systems to support streaming music video advertisements. This way a user can click a button and watch random music videos just like MTV.
you could also listen to random music via web radio, college radio etc. You could use google to market your website, and you can use worth of mouth to get people to trade your music around.
Sure its not going to be easy, but musicians would make a shitload more money making 25cent per song than they make from the RIAA (25 cent per CD=15 songs)
But I'll tell you this, if a musician cannot market themselves, let them hire a professional marketer to make their website, create their music video, and work on their Ads. The RIAA is not needed for this, theres plenty of teenagers on the net who know how to make a successful website or market a product, The napster kid sure knew what he was doing.
So Cringely gets to promote his pyramidal scheme TWICE and I cant promote mine ONCE?
Why? Because he is Cringely? That doesnt mean hes the only one with good ideas.
I think my idea is better, I'd like you to give your opinion on my idea so we can know for sure, the only way we can actually do this right is to brainstorm and find the best possible idea.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe everyone is equal. This includes women and minorities.
And under capitalism you have a boss who tells you what you can and cant do. whats your point?
At least under socialism its not a pyramid, everyone is equal to the boss, unlike capitalism where each person has their own worth to the boss.
Your post made absolutely no sense.
You are saying college is bad? Schools spend alot because a good education isnt cheap, teachers cost alot because teachers must eat too, books arent free unless the students write them,.
You are right colleges are like socialism, whats wrong with socialism?
Whats your ethnicity, sexuality or special interests have to do with college?
Colleges should get increased funding, considering its as important as our military and our military budget isnt shrinking.
Well no I wouldnt say that. In some classes I do learn stuff. I must protect my GPA because school isnt designed for learning, at least community college isnt, you must get a good GPA.
My problem isnt knowledge or gathering it, I have knowledge and I dont really learn in the classroom usually.
What I'm after is a degree, sure if I can learn thats good too. After 4 years of taking classes I know i can pass, I'll be prepared to go to graduate school at Harvard. 4 years wasted? definately not, because knowledge means nothing if you dont have connections and this is what your elite private university provides.
If I face up to it now it could RUIN me and make it so I cannot afford to go to college at all, It can also keep me from getting into an elite school if I screw up now, I mean sure after you've got 10 As and Bs, the occassional C wont mess up your GPA, but when you have only around a dozen As and Bs, that C will totally destroy your GPA.
The GPA is everything when it comes to transfering out of community college, and shouldnt my goal be to get into university first, and then worry about learning once I've established my abilities to the world?
Not everyone by birth is a genius at math, some people must work for YEARS to get the B in math.
"If you can't even get a B in a community college undergraduate math class,"
I'm not a Math person.
"you're not going to make it at Harvard or any truly "ELITE" university, private or not. Sorry."
Thats exactly why I wont major in math or science at Harvard.
"Getting a real education takes work on your part, not simply gaming the system for least effort per credit or slapping the right label on a bogus degree. It's not something other people do to you, it's something you do for yourself."
I am working, but I also know the system is not a very fair system, and the system does not reward hard work, it rewards those who "game" the system. So yeah I could learn math, get a C in math, have a bad GPA and never get into an elite private university, or I can get a good GPA, find some way into an elite university, and then take the math classes when I'm there.
I see no reason why I should take them now and get bad grades now when my grades actually matter when I can get bad grades later. And what you said doesnt make any sense, you act like a person must get a B in every single class they ever took in college, we all know that this is very unlikely as most people are humans who have strengths and weaknesses. I might get a C in Algebra and Calculus, but I'll never have to take those two classes again once I actually go ahead and do it, so for you to tell me that because I cant get a B in calculus that I'll never be able to handle university is pretty ignorant, I mean sure if I were majoring in math and science you'd be right, but I suppose you didnt do a good job looking at the list of possible majors which do not require you take tons of math classes.
Well you see, the point I'm trying to make is, when it comes to getting a job its all about who you know, not what you know and by going to elite private universities you meet the right people who can help you later on in life when you need refrences to take out a loan or you need to start a business and cant get any seed money.
Also it looks better on your resume to have a degree from an elite university, I'm not saying elite universities are the best place for actually learning, alot of the times they arent, but they have infinite resources, they provide contacts in the industry (NOTHING is more important than this!), and it allows for class mobility.
In the current world, and with our current global economy, to compete with 6 billion people, you dont want a degree from random state university, you need a degree from an elite private university.
But don't you think the admissions committe is going to notice the lack of math courses on your transcript?
Yeah they would if you transfered majoring in computer science, but if you transfer majoring in liberal arts or philosophy they dont really care about your math credentials.
A 3.0 GPA may be a minimum standard, but I can assure you that not all 3.0 GPAs are equal. A 3.0 with Intro Calc is going to be more impressive then a 3.0 with "Free Verse for Slackers". This is true even for liberal arts majors.
Oh come on, Calculus is not even a REQUIREMENT for liberal arts degrees, this is like saying a person trying to get a degree in photography needs to take calculus. My field has absolutely nothing to do with calculus and calculus is not a degree requirement.
If you are thinking of going into a technical field, the lack of math would be the kiss of death.
No, what you meant to say is if I wanted a computer science degree lack of math is the kiss of death. The field itself does not care if you know calculus, I've never once seen calculus in the computer industry, the only time i've ever seen calculus used is by people like Keith Packard working on Xfree, Video Game 3d engines, and military sims.
Guess what, 99 percent of all programming has absolutely nothing to do with this, yes if you are a programmer for NASA or working in R&D then you may need to know your calculus, but for 99.9 percent of the population calculus is useless.
I could never handle 4 classes in a semester! When I was taking three classes I doing OK, but running from one assigment to the next without much time for reflection. Two classes a semester is perfect for me (unfortunately most schools require you to take at least 3 to maintain eligibility for financial aid).
I agree 2 classes are perfect, but 4 is required. Believe me if I could take 2 classes I'd have no problem taking math classes, but I'm afraid to take math classes when so much is at stake and so little to gain by taking it. I can always transfer into a 4 year university on liberal arts and then take all the math classes I avoided and change my major later on. Its important that I at least get in the door.
If you will forgive me reapeating my unsolicited advise, I really think you would be better off taking fewer but more challenging courses. If you struggle with math, this is the perfect opportunity to get to know your instructors. Prepare as best you can, show up at all their office hours, and then get them to write letters of recommendation. I know from experience that letters of recommendation carry a lot of weight in admissions at elite private universities.
Well, I could get at least 2 teachers to write a letter of recommendation, but please tell me why I should ruin the best thing I have going for me (my GPA), if I lose my GPA I then have nothing, my highschool record isnt all that great even though I could get plenty of recommendations from highschool teachers (i went to a fucked up public school before I went to a charter school later on)
So you are telling me getting teachers to write letters would be equal to me getting a 3.5+ GPA? I'm focused 100% on my GPA, some teachers were impressed by me and gave me compliments, but I dont know if they'd actually write a letter of recommendation, I suppose I could ask?
I don't think I'll be accepted say say Harvard, even if I had a 4.0 GPA because the percentage of transfer students they accept are ridiculously low on the undergraduate level, however if I were to transfer to a school equally as elite, it would be easy to go to Harvard on the graduate level or even transfer into Harvard on the undergraduate level, I mean if you are coming from an elite school its easier to get into an elite school.
But thanks for the advice, I dont want to take any risks right now thought because Its not just that I fear ruining my GPA, I also know that if I screw up I dont get any federal money, scholarships, etc, so I cant afford in $$ to get a bad grade either.
People go to community college to transfer into a good university and get cheap credits, not get an education.
If they wanted me to focus on an education perhaps they wouldnt make the GPA so damn important.
What is the point of avoiding difficult but important classes simply to preserve your GPA? Are you in school to get an education or to simply achieve some arbitrary GPA? I've been in the position of hiring people for technical positions and I've always been far more impressed by a mediocre GPA in a substantial curriculum then a high GPA in an easy curriculum.
Ok say I do take a few math classes and get a few Cs, well then my GPA goes under 3.0 and I can forget about transfering into a good 4 year university, I can also forget about scholarships and grants which also require a high GPA of above 3.0 or 3.5, I really cannot afford any Cs and I know for a fact that its simply impossible for me to get an A or B in math. I take classes which I know I can/will get an A or B in.
This isnt about the jobs, this is about getting a degree from an elite private university.
I recently returned to school myself, so I do have sympathy with amount of work required to do really well in a course, and I do understand that those planning to continue to a four year school or go on to graduate school need to match minimum requirements, but in my opinion you'll be better served by reducing the number of classes you take in a given term then by trying to ditch the challenging courses.
I never take more than 4 classes per semester, and I never get anything below a B in grades, those are the rules I follow.
Maybe if universities werent so strict and competitive on the GPA issue I could actually focus on learning but right now I have a goal, that goal is to get into Harvard, Tufts, Boston College,Boston University or North Eastern, all which are ELITE private universities which will NOT let you in with a sub 3.0 GPA, you most likely wont get in with a sub 3.5 GPA, so no its not about "learning" right now, its about moving up the ladder, it will be about learning once I get into university, thats when I'll take math clases, get a C or two, and learn something.
Algebra requires you memorize hundreds of formulas, steps, rules, conditions, etc and thats exactly why I cant remember it no matter how many times I learn it.
Its also useless, all the stuff you memorize never applies to anything in the real world.
My mind does not like to remember information which is utterly useless, but some people are better at that than others.
all the formulas and steps are useless information that you memorize so that you can do calculus so that you can know math which you'll never use a day in your life and most likely wont remember 5 years later.
30 kids in a highschool classroom, 100 kids in college.
The book is a refrence, but the only way to learn the garbage in the book is to practice.
I find the results of that practice absolutely useless in the real world so I cannot motivate myself to practice.
No thats bullshit, the RIAA says they are members when they actually did not legally sign a contract and therefore dont see a dime from the lawsuits.
The RIAA has claimed many indie labels are RIAA members when they actually arent.
What a wonderful price too, I can really use this book.
Now I must admit my algebra skills on the upper level (linear algebra and upper level algebra) is kinda weak.
Hopefully this book will teach me calculus without forcing me to memorize hundreds of formulas.
I'm in community college, let me tell you that this wont help, the reason why it wont help is because the goal will still be to get a good grade, pass your tests, and learn the knowledge you need to do this.
Now, if you can find a class which ISNT graded, then yes its a good idea, and I'll take math as long as it doesnt ruin my GPA if I do bad.
Otherwise I'm just going to avoid calculus, and all that crap so I can have a GPA over 3.0.
I need something like this as well, my math sucks.
Why dont some of you open source programmer geniuses write some math E-Software?
Pay your taxes you greedy thieves!!
Now they want to tax us and rob consumers of every last penny. The RIAA is evil, we must boycott them, take their CDs and throw them into the ocean damnit!!!!!
Is it fair to do this? What about indie artists who want people to buy their music? Why should the RIAA get to sell music but no one else?
I think this is the RIAA bullying people into paying the tax. Read my journal entry.
I hate te RIAA and I want to boycott them for life, I dont mind paying for music, but what about indie artists? Forget about the RIAA, how can we allow ARTISTS to get paid?
99% of the files that were on napster were recordings that were owned and therefore promoted by the major labels. All Napster did was step in with a system do redistribute them illegally. Napster didn't need anybody promoting Metallica or Britney Spears because those acts had already been marketed, very effectively, to the general public.
.com in 2003!
You took that statistic straight from the RIAA. Guess what, its wrong, its more in the line of the mid 80 percentage.
Napster didn't need anybody promoting Metallica or Britney Spears because those acts had already been marketed, very effectively, to the general public.
Yes but I've also found new music via napster which was not promoted in the US, alot of people would rename songs and trick people into downloading their music.
The thing is, you don't need a Snapster, or a P2P pyramid, or anything else along those lines for that to happen. Just start your own record label, one which does not fuck over the artists.
People dont buy records anymore, what good is a record label? Sure you can do this but you still need P2P.
What can a small label (or an Internet distribution scheme) offer a band who wants to become popular? They can make the music available to those who've heard of it, but that's about it. If you want promotion, you will have to pay for it yourself.
Offer free music to get a fanbase, and then sell the music to the fans. You can offer promotions by letting people have free music, you can also promote your music by web radio which you keep ignoring.
A big, evil company can offer radio play,
Anyone can offer radio play over the web.
MTV promotion, a chance to play in huge stadiums as an opening act for an already established band, your single shoe-horned into the soundtrack of the latest teen-sex comedy, an invitation to be heard playing a track on the latest pointless "tribute album" to some act that was big 20 years ago, your songs in the background of the latest Mountain Dew commercial. If your lead singer is a good-looking female, she can do ads for cosmetics or something. (Have you seen those hair-color ads with Natalie Imbruglia and Beyonce? Notice how they both get an on-screen credit, in a comercial! This is what corporate marketing schmucks call "synergy.")
Most bands and musicians arent asking to be celebrities.
Now, you are a 20-year old dumbfuck from Portland. You've got a band that sounds pretty good, and local bar-goers are getting into it, but you hardly have enough money for food, let alone promoting your album. You dream of someday playing your music huge crowds and living like Eddie Van Halen. One day, three sales reps call you with three very different offers:
1. An indie label offers to press 2,000 CD's for you, mostly at your expense, paid up front with money from your gigs. They offer no real advertising, but promise to work hard as local promoters. They can even get the head shop on the corner to put it next to the water bongs on the impulse rack!
2.An Internet start-up offers a way to get your stuff on-line, where people will browse over your name without recognition while looking for the latest U2 single, and maybe, just maybe some of them will double-click your MP3 sample to check you out. All your income will come via PayPal, which you have never heard of, at a rate of $0.50 per song. Also no advertising in this deal, but it's an Internet company, with all the prestige that comes with being a
3. V2 Records wants to sign you to a 5-record deal, and plans to have you opening for The White Stripes next year. They will front you the money to record your album in Jimmy Jam's uber-studio in Minneapolis, and will spend about $2 Million promoting your first single.
Okay, guitar-playing kid from Portland, which path will you choose? 3? Thought so.
Yes for now, while 3 is still an option, the problem with 3 is, now people refuse to pay for 3, also big record
Well then school isnt about learning, its about working hard.
And in that case not everyone needs school, in fact most people dont.
Work ethic is not taught in school!I agree with you that things in the work place are going to change, but nothing will replace a good work ethic.,
The parent is supposed to teach work ethic. Its not something taught in a classroom damnit. Sure colleges can offer a class called "work ethics" or whatever, and thats fine, but its not something that should be taught to highschool students, not everyone wants their kids to be taught YOUR work ethics.
Who promoted Napster? Simple. Use the internet to promote music, a musician makes a website and promotes their own music, they pay for advertisements like everyone else, if they are good their songs will be put on web radio (which will replace the offline radio), and word of month will promote them.
The RIAA does promote some artists to success, but then you have other artists which got almost no promotion at all but sold tens of millions of copies.
Look at the Jackson 5, they came along before there were ways to "create" a star, they used their actual talent to promote their music, What about stevie wonder? Hes blind and he managed to sell music on his talent.
Now you have Britney Spears with no talent selling music because the RIAA pours money into a music video. I say we let the internet take over as promotion, eventually there will be streaming music videos on the net to replace the MTV distribution, and I'm sure you could design P2P systems to support streaming music video advertisements. This way a user can click a button and watch random music videos just like MTV.
you could also listen to random music via web radio, college radio etc. You could use google to market your website, and you can use worth of mouth to get people to trade your music around.
Sure its not going to be easy, but musicians would make a shitload more money making 25cent per song than they make from the RIAA (25 cent per CD=15 songs)
But I'll tell you this, if a musician cannot market themselves, let them hire a professional marketer to make their website, create their music video, and work on their Ads. The RIAA is not needed for this, theres plenty of teenagers on the net who know how to make a successful website or market a product, The napster kid sure knew what he was doing.
So Cringely gets to promote his pyramidal scheme TWICE and I cant promote mine ONCE?
Why? Because he is Cringely? That doesnt mean hes the only one with good ideas.
I think my idea is better, I'd like you to give your opinion on my idea so we can know for sure, the only way we can actually do this right is to brainstorm and find the best possible idea.