...but 36,000 km is a long way. The article isn't clear on where you'd unload the payload, but unless you want to expend more fuel achieving geostationary orbit after you've hitched a ride up to LEO, it seems like you'd be going the full 36,000 km.
Now, I understand that the higher you go the less air resistance you encounter (after about 1,000 km it's pretty negligible iirc, though low Earth orbit satellites do encounter minimal air resistance), but even assuming you can average mach 2 (approximately 2,376 km/h--pretty amazing considering that you still have the friction of whatever lifting mechanism they use) that's a trip of just over 15 hours. Now, I've sat in a comfy airliner for twelve hours, and it sucked. And I have a feeling that an airliner ways a wee bit on the heavy side of 20 tons.
So is anyone else seeing the potential problem in terms of commercial use for public space trips, or did I get something wrong? I mean, great view, but hella sore arse.
...but for all those who are not sure, let me clarify.
The content owner - in this case Radio 538 - has the choice to allow cd burning or not; to listen for a week, a month, or forever - whatever they agree to with the artist can be set in the business model.
Okay, firstly I must admit I'm not a musician. But I am an "artist". A writer, to be precise. So I feel I'm in a better position than most to tell you that this kind of thing has nothing to do with the artist. Well, barring all those greedy jerkoffs out there who are generally the ones spewing out second rate shit anyway, with little appreciation for the art they profess to create due to their own lack of any real talent.
Uh, where was I before the rant fever almost dragged me into the pits of madness? Someone who is genuinely good at creating original art, who has this old, mostly-forgotten thing called "talent" (not synonymous with "talent", a word touted a lot by cheesy music shows etc), actually gets a lot more from the act of creating than from the act of peddling their creations for magic fish (money). However, the fact that magic fish will allow them to live a comfortable life, and continue to create, is a useful wee fact and serves to propagate a cycle of sorts, where artist creates, gets magic fish, creates more art.
Now, maybe I'm completely off base because I have no experience in the musical arts and it's possible, I suppose, that somehow musicians are all a pack of narcissistic leeches, but I don't think that a true artist would support the selfish, gluttonous tactics being pushed into use by the industries. On the other hand, the number of true artists out there is questionable. I don't think that pop artists qualify, because they genuinely do not have talent (it waxes and wanes of course, but the average is close to zero)--they're chosen for their looks, to appeal to the shallow (screaming) teenyboppers with rich parents.
However, I have heard mutterings, both on Slashdot and elsewhere, of alternative and lesser-known musicians who really oppose DRM, the RIAA and whatever else. The fact that these musicians are "lesser known" and "alternative" leads me to suspect that they are the ones who actually care about what they do, and have real talent, and are mostly unrecognised for it because...well, the public doesn't generally seem interested in talent.
And now that I've said all that, I have realised that I have absolutely no idea what the point of this post is supposed to be. Perhaps it just got my goat that it is implied that artists are endorsing and profiting from the daylight robbery of previously unquestioned rights, to be replaced with openly audacious tokens that are heavily paid for. Even the artists with no talent don't benefit from that.
I fear the world we are heading towards if someone or something doesn't intervene. It's going to be a world ruled by several large, rich companies, with 1% of the global population earning 99% of the available money, with a few relatively prosperous countries, while everyone else suffers in poverty. And you may be right, I may well be a pessimistic melodramatist.
Note that one can't delete his Slashdot account either. which could actually be the source of some trouble as if he suddenly changes his mind about whichever opinion or way to express it he has, there'd be a way to track his former behaviour if the account he opened was named like him and we know for sure how much we change over the time (maybe from the pro-patent to anti-patent or from the extremist to the moderate).
Except that to create an account on Slashdot, all you're asked for is your username, password, and a valid email address. Only one of those can even be traced back to you, and I know of at least one webmail system that asks you very little more than Slashdot does (and there's no reason not to just duplicate your username into the "Full name" field).
Passport, on the other hand, is slightly more curious about your details, and is used by a lot of people for very real and potentially important things.
Slashdot Mirror
Now, I understand that the higher you go the less air resistance you encounter (after about 1,000 km it's pretty negligible iirc, though low Earth orbit satellites do encounter minimal air resistance), but even assuming you can average mach 2 (approximately 2,376 km/h--pretty amazing considering that you still have the friction of whatever lifting mechanism they use) that's a trip of just over 15 hours. Now, I've sat in a comfy airliner for twelve hours, and it sucked. And I have a feeling that an airliner ways a wee bit on the heavy side of 20 tons.
So is anyone else seeing the potential problem in terms of commercial use for public space trips, or did I get something wrong? I mean, great view, but hella sore arse.
Okay, firstly I must admit I'm not a musician. But I am an "artist". A writer, to be precise. So I feel I'm in a better position than most to tell you that this kind of thing has nothing to do with the artist. Well, barring all those greedy jerkoffs out there who are generally the ones spewing out second rate shit anyway, with little appreciation for the art they profess to create due to their own lack of any real talent.
Uh, where was I before the rant fever almost dragged me into the pits of madness? Someone who is genuinely good at creating original art, who has this old, mostly-forgotten thing called "talent" (not synonymous with "talent", a word touted a lot by cheesy music shows etc), actually gets a lot more from the act of creating than from the act of peddling their creations for magic fish (money). However, the fact that magic fish will allow them to live a comfortable life, and continue to create, is a useful wee fact and serves to propagate a cycle of sorts, where artist creates, gets magic fish, creates more art.
Now, maybe I'm completely off base because I have no experience in the musical arts and it's possible, I suppose, that somehow musicians are all a pack of narcissistic leeches, but I don't think that a true artist would support the selfish, gluttonous tactics being pushed into use by the industries. On the other hand, the number of true artists out there is questionable. I don't think that pop artists qualify, because they genuinely do not have talent (it waxes and wanes of course, but the average is close to zero)--they're chosen for their looks, to appeal to the shallow (screaming) teenyboppers with rich parents.
However, I have heard mutterings, both on Slashdot and elsewhere, of alternative and lesser-known musicians who really oppose DRM, the RIAA and whatever else. The fact that these musicians are "lesser known" and "alternative" leads me to suspect that they are the ones who actually care about what they do, and have real talent, and are mostly unrecognised for it because...well, the public doesn't generally seem interested in talent.
And now that I've said all that, I have realised that I have absolutely no idea what the point of this post is supposed to be. Perhaps it just got my goat that it is implied that artists are endorsing and profiting from the daylight robbery of previously unquestioned rights, to be replaced with openly audacious tokens that are heavily paid for. Even the artists with no talent don't benefit from that.
I fear the world we are heading towards if someone or something doesn't intervene. It's going to be a world ruled by several large, rich companies, with 1% of the global population earning 99% of the available money, with a few relatively prosperous countries, while everyone else suffers in poverty. And you may be right, I may well be a pessimistic melodramatist.
Except that to create an account on Slashdot, all you're asked for is your username, password, and a valid email address. Only one of those can even be traced back to you, and I know of at least one webmail system that asks you very little more than Slashdot does (and there's no reason not to just duplicate your username into the "Full name" field).
Passport, on the other hand, is slightly more curious about your details, and is used by a lot of people for very real and potentially important things.