Nowadays the quality you can achieve with home recording equipment is more than enough.
There are several UK artists that during the last year have used the Internet exclusively to gain notoriety. If it was good enough for them it is good enough for anybody else.
Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Wagner. You name it, composed at one time or another by comission.
They got paid first, they produced later.
Even today, there are writers that are perceived as so good, or that have such a novel idea under development, that get paid juicy advances by publishers (midle men after all). I see no reason why somebody like lets say, Salman Rushdie, could not get paid by 50000 people at 1GBP a head in advance in order to write a new novel. Shit writers would fall of favour and eran less if anything, would writers would be always in demand.
Not all calssical music is orchestral classical music.
There are oozes of chamber music orchestras, quartets, duos and soloists that receive no money whatsoever from the state and still make a living from performing.
You are speaking from the perspective of somebody that would seem to have a vested interest in the succcess of DRM.
For millenia "content creators", as you call artists and thinkers, in a very RIAA-MPAA-ish kind of way, had zilch protection against the unaauthorized copy and dissemination of their output, and yet many of them have always found ways to make a living, very handsome at times.
Galileo's works for example were copied all around Europe and translated, more often than not without his consent. He was not a happy bunny, but the popularity of his works earned him a reputation that allowed him to teach in the nascent universities of his time and to be the scientist to the reach and famous. Heck, they even attracted the ire of the Inquisition.
My point is that the only thing that is not reproduceable is the individual himself, ideas (which is what works of art and science essentially are) have this pesky habit to be propagated if they are interesting or useful. For bunnies sakes, that is what makes us human, our capacity to learn and propagate useful knowledge.
Copyright is a completely artificial construct, has no base in how ideas are distributed, and is based in concepts first born around the Industrial Revolution, era in which everything, even ideas, became trinkets that could be traded. If there was no copyright wathsoever artists and scientists would still find ways to earn a living, their reputation would preceed them (notice that in a world without copyright you still keep the right to be recognized as the author of the ideas produced by you).
Lets grant for a moment, for the sake of argument, that copyrights are a necessary construct. Organizations of intermediaries like the Record and Movie industries, authors guilds and unions, have pushed copyright to obscene lengths. What is the rationale to keep compensating a dead person's relatives (or legal entities that somehow manage to get hold of the copyrights) well after their deaths? What is the justification for keep extending creators rights ad nauseam to make them for all practical purposes, indefinite? (and there are some goverments that are even considering charging for using works in the public domain, because if it is public, then it must surely belong to the state, right?).
Enters DRM.
You paint DRM like if was giveth in the 10 commandements by god burning in a bush itself (do not correct me dear/.ers, this is poetic license).
You are wrong. DRM is the construct of the companies that want to keep a monopoly in the distributions channels. If they were interested in the artists and creators at all, they would long time ago have demanded standarization of the DRM methods. If Apple could dump DRM, they would do it in a heartbit, the proof is that it is so simply to get non DMRed music from iTunes stuff that it is not even funny.
What DRM provides is also a means of control of the artists, in a world were everything is DRMed, trying to provide content that isn't may become a competitive disadvantage due to the hassle that may probe to play such content.
As things stand sites like emusic (2nd most popular after iTunes), magnatunes and the individual efforts of artists (musicians, writers, film makers) that distribute their content free of DRM bullshit, proof beyond doubt that DRM is not indispensable for artists and anybody producing ideas.
It may be indispensable for the monopolists, but that does not mean we should assume is a given, specially if it inconvenience us, the consumer.
Europe is littered with towns where there used to be a thriving Jewish population and today there is none.
And since they did not go to the US, the UK or France (the allied powers) I guess the most likely explanation is that they became thin air. And this is not me trying to be funny, just deadly serious.
Have you been to Warsaw? Paris? Rome?
Warsaw for example was leveled. All what you see today is reconstructed. All jews Killed or gone.
For goodness sakes, this is vastly documented. Why do we need to keep discussing this?
And one day the lack of choice will bite you. You can't mpdify the programs you use. You can't fix them. You can't manipulate your own data in a way convenient to you.
The history of IT is loitered of examples of how propietary applications make your life more difficult.
It only shows that if you want freedom you have to get involved and fight for it in your little niche.
Education is what is needed, people in many places and positions of political influence are beggining to get it, people like ESR are throwing all their reputation and credibility away defending the unnecessary.
ESR is calling for compromissing principles for the sake of comfort.
Just a couple of days ago it was found to yet again, trying to work the legal system on their favour and they were, yet again, fined.
You are frankly asking too much when you ask reasonable people to talk about MS in an unimpasionated way.
MS is happy to bend every rule in the book, it has broken the law all around the globe, it is fined, it does not eat humble pie. We know they will do it again.
You are asking us to talk evenheadeadly about a group of people that so far have shown complete contempt for the normal rules of engagement of acpitalistic competition.
Sorry, but you won't have it from me. You'll not get a kind word for MS from me until the day that they issue a public apology and do something to compensate all the people they have screwed up.
Lobby groups target the people that need targetting. Comittees, ministers, or the big man or woman if necessary.
The corrosive consequences of lobbies in Western democracy (but particularly in the US) are so well documented that pretending there is no problem is what looks like a college-dorm-room mindset.
And sorry to be skeptical, but when you look at the current top echeloens in the US government, all former oil industry executives, and you see that the industry that has beneffited the most during their tenure, is precisely the oil industry, any person with even the slightest of curiosity left on his brain would smell something very fishy.
Slashdot Mirror
Recorded music has a track record in which the buyer gets the right to play as many times, whenever he wants, the music he has bought.
All the stuff you are mentioning is not analogous to recorded music.
Honestly, what advantage do one gets compared to buying physical media or even iTunes stuff.
Or stuff in non DRMed music shops (http://www.emusic.com)
You need a guitar, a guy and a good song.
Nowadays the quality you can achieve with home recording equipment is more than enough.
There are several UK artists that during the last year have used the Internet exclusively to gain notoriety. If it was good enough for them it is good enough for anybody else.
For centuries Music was made on comission.
Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Wagner. You name it, composed at one time or another by comission.
They got paid first, they produced later.
Even today, there are writers that are perceived as so good, or that have such a novel idea under development, that get paid juicy advances by publishers (midle men after all). I see no reason why somebody like lets say, Salman Rushdie, could not get paid by 50000 people at 1GBP a head in advance in order to write a new novel. Shit writers would fall of favour and eran less if anything, would writers would be always in demand.
Not all calssical music is orchestral classical music.
There are oozes of chamber music orchestras, quartets, duos and soloists that receive no money whatsoever from the state and still make a living from performing.
I have never found a copy protected classical music CD, and buy many of them, so if somebody was trying, I would have found out.
In the worst cases classical musicians train between 10 and 15 years, not decades.
The naturaly gifted ones, most likely study only 7 or 8 years.
Work experience is never counted as training, you can say the same of any profession.
You can have capable instruments for less than a top notch laptop or gaming computer.
For 1000 GBP you can get an electronic piano with proper weighing, perfectly fine to produce music that is selleable.
You are speaking from the perspective of somebody that would seem to have a vested interest in the succcess of DRM.
/.ers, this is poetic license).
For millenia "content creators", as you call artists and thinkers, in a very RIAA-MPAA-ish kind of way, had zilch protection against the unaauthorized copy and dissemination of their output, and yet many of them have always found ways to make a living, very handsome at times.
Galileo's works for example were copied all around Europe and translated, more often than not without his consent. He was not a happy bunny, but the popularity of his works earned him a reputation that allowed him to teach in the nascent universities of his time and to be the scientist to the reach and famous. Heck, they even attracted the ire of the Inquisition.
My point is that the only thing that is not reproduceable is the individual himself, ideas (which is what works of art and science essentially are) have this pesky habit to be propagated if they are interesting or useful. For bunnies sakes, that is what makes us human, our capacity to learn and propagate useful knowledge.
Copyright is a completely artificial construct, has no base in how ideas are distributed, and is based in concepts first born around the Industrial Revolution, era in which everything, even ideas, became trinkets that could be traded. If there was no copyright wathsoever artists and scientists would still find ways to earn a living, their reputation would preceed them (notice that in a world without copyright you still keep the right to be recognized as the author of the ideas produced by you).
Lets grant for a moment, for the sake of argument, that copyrights are a necessary construct. Organizations of intermediaries like the Record and Movie industries, authors guilds and unions, have pushed copyright to obscene lengths. What is the rationale to keep compensating a dead person's relatives (or legal entities that somehow manage to get hold of the copyrights) well after their deaths? What is the justification for keep extending creators rights ad nauseam to make them for all practical purposes, indefinite? (and there are some goverments that are even considering charging for using works in the public domain, because if it is public, then it must surely belong to the state, right?).
Enters DRM.
You paint DRM like if was giveth in the 10 commandements by god burning in a bush itself (do not correct me dear
You are wrong. DRM is the construct of the companies that want to keep a monopoly in the distributions channels. If they were interested in the artists and creators at all, they would long time ago have demanded standarization of the DRM methods. If Apple could dump DRM, they would do it in a heartbit, the proof is that it is so simply to get non DMRed music from iTunes stuff that it is not even funny.
What DRM provides is also a means of control of the artists, in a world were everything is DRMed, trying to provide content that isn't may become a competitive disadvantage due to the hassle that may probe to play such content.
As things stand sites like emusic (2nd most popular after iTunes), magnatunes and the individual efforts of artists (musicians, writers, film makers) that distribute their content free of DRM bullshit, proof beyond doubt that DRM is not indispensable for artists and anybody producing ideas.
It may be indispensable for the monopolists, but that does not mean we should assume is a given, specially if it inconvenience us, the consumer.
.... to notice that WIndows users are using emacs shortcuts now.
Europe is littered with towns where there used to be a thriving Jewish population and today there is none.
And since they did not go to the US, the UK or France (the allied powers) I guess the most likely explanation is that they became thin air. And this is not me trying to be funny, just deadly serious.
Have you been to Warsaw? Paris? Rome?
Warsaw for example was leveled. All what you see today is reconstructed. All jews Killed or gone.
For goodness sakes, this is vastly documented. Why do we need to keep discussing this?
Scientists have dug up ice cores in glaciers all around the world which have allowed to plot climatic changes globally for thusends of years.
Thousends.
Other studies have looked and tree's growth rings, which allows to study longer periods of time than the ridiculous 50 years you are mentionting.
And one day the lack of choice will bite you. You can't mpdify the programs you use. You can't fix them. You can't manipulate your own data in a way convenient to you.
The history of IT is loitered of examples of how propietary applications make your life more difficult.
By ignoring the situation you are supporting the status quo.
Don't pretend that by doing nothing you are not influencing the outcome.
Names please.
.... that somebody defending coherently his pronciples is considered a failure.
It only shows that if you want freedom you have to get involved and fight for it in your little niche.
Education is what is needed, people in many places and positions of political influence are beggining to get it, people like ESR are throwing all their reputation and credibility away defending the unnecessary.
ESR is calling for compromissing principles for the sake of comfort.
Shame really, he should know better.
Put in card reader.
Connect to Linux machine.
Enjoy.
So all the other server OSes have only 5% marketshare?
You should not trust all what you read, honestly.
... and becoming relevant.
/. id has been duly recorded.
Ignore them at your commercial peril.
Oh yeah, they have good memories also.
Your
Have a good day.
What is next? Earth is flat?
Holocaust did not happen?
Jeez...
Just a couple of days ago it was found to yet again, trying to work the legal system on their favour and they were, yet again, fined.
You are frankly asking too much when you ask reasonable people to talk about MS in an unimpasionated way.
MS is happy to bend every rule in the book, it has broken the law all around the globe, it is fined, it does not eat humble pie. We know they will do it again.
You are asking us to talk evenheadeadly about a group of people that so far have shown complete contempt for the normal rules of engagement of acpitalistic competition.
Sorry, but you won't have it from me. You'll not get a kind word for MS from me until the day that they issue a public apology and do something to compensate all the people they have screwed up.
You parrot about details but can't be bothered to expose them to us. Don't waste your supreme wisdom and smack our common sense.
A tree can perfectly be described as "hierarchy having a plurality of categories, subcategories, and items"
The items are called leaves, subcategories are called branches.
Any student that passed through a class about computational structures will know this.
Lobby groups target the people that need targetting. Comittees, ministers, or the big man or woman if necessary.
The corrosive consequences of lobbies in Western democracy (but particularly in the US) are so well documented that pretending there is no problem is what looks like a college-dorm-room mindset.
And sorry to be skeptical, but when you look at the current top echeloens in the US government, all former oil industry executives, and you see that the industry that has beneffited the most during their tenure, is precisely the oil industry, any person with even the slightest of curiosity left on his brain would smell something very fishy.