The new Ben Folds Live album recently came out, and it has a bonus DVD included as well (with GOOD content, not 5 minutes of promo crap), for the same price (about $18) as many other CDs in the store.
And you can bet I was the first one there to buy it! The reason being, the price matches the value. Simple as that.
I'm more than happy to dole out my hard-earned cash (what little there is to be had in college!) AS LONG AS the value matches the price.
Music is addicting, possibly moreso than any drug, especially if you're a musician. And all the radio is really doing is pushing stuff out there to get you hooked. So is it really my fault when I get some song stuck in my head, and then download it because I'm unwilling to pay the $18? Value doesn't match the price - maybe killing off the CD single wasn't such a great idea for the industry after all.
this whole recording industry situation has prompted eveyone to play the blame game, but it seems evident to me that it's not possible to single out one single thing as the bad sales turn.
are there people out there downloading music who would have otherwise bought it? yes. but aren't there people out there downloading music that will spur future purchases? yes.
are cdr's used to copy cds? yes. but aren't they used for other purposes as well, and doesn't a percentage of cdr sales go to the riaa? yes.
is the nation going through an econonic downturn on the whole? yes. but aren't other countries' music industries being affected as well? yes.
i'm certainly against the **aa and all for fair use, but i think this situation is much more complicated than most people realize. and i think the best way to figure out what's wrong (if anything), is to conduct more independent (and independently-funded) surveys, especially outside of the united states. we get nowhere by propagating lies/rumors/FUD on either side, so it may be best to get as accurate and truthful a view of the problem as we can, whether we like it or not.
first off, IANADJ, but it seems kind of limited to me. it's cool tech and all, but 20 second loops? you would be better off with a few battle wax records and a regular deck.
or, there's final scratch, which uses timecode records to manipulate audio.. so you could use any old deck to "spin" digital audio.
I'm typing this from a Penn CSE lab which is right down the hall from the room housing some of the remnants of ENIAC. There is a large picture on the wall, in which Betty is featured prominently, and she's been mentioned in almost every undergrad CSE class I've taken here so far.. it's nice to know that her efforts won't go un-noticed by kids like me these days, who grew up in the PC (non-mainframe) age.
As far as I'm aware, there are only two options for a company intending to use a watermarking technology:
1. Embed the watermark in the actual audio (for example, a high-frequency series of hisses throughout the song. this would enable the watermark to be present, more or less, if translated into other audio file formats)
2. Embed the watermark in the file format
Consumers will most likely not stand for the first option, and the second option is worthless after the watermarking scheme is cracked.
BillG!!!!: HEY TAEK MY CASE KTHANX!!!
Supreme Court: No.
BillG!!!!: ??? IM MICROSOFT;/ I CAN DO ANYNTHING!
Supreme Court: No. And stop that.
BillG!!!!: FINE, BUT IAM GOING TO TEH SUPEREMER COURT/
Supreme Court: Good luck, bye bye.
Slashdot Mirror
...GWARdriving
*groan*
I'd rather listen to white noise than the crap they put on the radio these days anyway!
The new Ben Folds Live album recently came out, and it has a bonus DVD included as well (with GOOD content, not 5 minutes of promo crap), for the same price (about $18) as many other CDs in the store.
And you can bet I was the first one there to buy it! The reason being, the price matches the value. Simple as that.
I'm more than happy to dole out my hard-earned cash (what little there is to be had in college!) AS LONG AS the value matches the price.
Music is addicting, possibly moreso than any drug, especially if you're a musician. And all the radio is really doing is pushing stuff out there to get you hooked. So is it really my fault when I get some song stuck in my head, and then download it because I'm unwilling to pay the $18? Value doesn't match the price - maybe killing off the CD single wasn't such a great idea for the industry after all.
this whole recording industry situation has prompted eveyone to play the blame game, but it seems evident to me that it's not possible to single out one single thing as the bad sales turn.
are there people out there downloading music who would have otherwise bought it? yes.
but aren't there people out there downloading music that will spur future purchases? yes.
are cdr's used to copy cds? yes.
but aren't they used for other purposes as well, and doesn't a percentage of cdr sales go to the riaa? yes.
is the nation going through an econonic downturn on the whole? yes.
but aren't other countries' music industries being affected as well? yes.
i'm certainly against the **aa and all for fair use, but i think this situation is much more complicated than most people realize. and i think the best way to figure out what's wrong (if anything), is to conduct more independent (and independently-funded) surveys, especially outside of the united states. we get nowhere by propagating lies/rumors/FUD on either side, so it may be best to get as accurate and truthful a view of the problem as we can, whether we like it or not.
have your interviewee sit down at a machine with a random file of code open in some development ide.
then time how long it takes before IE is fired up to slashdot.
(withdrawal symptoms such as sweating and mouse-finger-twitching often appear first, so these are sometimes good indicators as well)
first off, IANADJ, but it seems kind of limited to me. it's cool tech and all, but 20 second loops? you would be better off with a few battle wax records and a regular deck.
or, there's final scratch, which uses timecode records to manipulate audio.. so you could use any old deck to "spin" digital audio.
still, cool idea.
I'm typing this from a Penn CSE lab which is right down the hall from the room housing some of the remnants of ENIAC. There is a large picture on the wall, in which Betty is featured prominently, and she's been mentioned in almost every undergrad CSE class I've taken here so far.. it's nice to know that her efforts won't go un-noticed by kids like me these days, who grew up in the PC (non-mainframe) age.
As far as I'm aware, there are only two options for a company intending to use a watermarking technology:
1. Embed the watermark in the actual audio (for example, a high-frequency series of hisses throughout the song. this would enable the watermark to be present, more or less, if translated into other audio file formats)
2. Embed the watermark in the file format
Consumers will most likely not stand for the first option, and the second option is worthless after the watermarking scheme is cracked.
I think the popular notion of "identity theft" (or some mutation thereof) should be as a result of this.
Milliron, unknowingly under surveillance, had his likeness captured, sold, and reprinted as something completely different from his real identity.
Although unlikely in this case, people could stand to lose credibility, respect, etc. etc. from these types of misidentification.
What does Visionics stand to lose? Not much, until some sort of identity abuse legislation is hammered out.
BillG!!!!: HEY TAEK MY CASE KTHANX!!!
Supreme Court: No.
BillG!!!!: ??? IM MICROSOFT;/ I CAN DO ANYNTHING!
Supreme Court: No. And stop that.
BillG!!!!: FINE, BUT IAM GOING TO TEH SUPEREMER COURT/
Supreme Court: Good luck, bye bye.
"We've got the expertise ... we've got real hard-core rocket experts."
"The spaceship's connected to the... ballon, the balloon's connected to the.. wristwatch.." -Dr. Nick
Yeah... I really liked the work he did on Radiohead's OK Computer... just wouldn't be the same without that voice.