A little OT, but interesting. The more I get into blues, the more I find myelf saying "hey, that's a Zeppelin song!" Check this out:
You Shook Me, I Can't Quit You Baby- Willie Dixon
Whole Lotta Love- based on Willie Dixon's "You Need Love"
Gallows Pole, In my time of Dying- not sure, but I swear I heard them on some obscure blues CD
When the Levee Breaks- Memphis Minnie
Nobody's Fault but Mine- Blind Willie Johnson
Is this thievery? I don't think Johnson was even credited (someone correct me if I'm wrong). I'd say, no way. Simply covering a song makes it your own. And I for one have no problems with Zeppelin coming to America, homogenizing our music, and feeding it back to us. It's all good.
Thought about it, and you're wrong.
on
Homogenized Music
·
· Score: 2
I'll concede that most of the stuff on college radio sucks. And I'll give it to you that most of the stuff on commercial radio is good (if you define good as "liked by a lot of people." Which is really the only way you can define good, but that's another story). But there's a huge middle ground of really amazing music that you'll never hear on commercial radio. I just posted a short list of my favorite ambient and downtempo works. Specifically, Thievery Corporation and Nightmares on Wax make great records with catchy tunes, any of which could be a hit single. Why aren't they on the radio? They don't have a major label to force their songs into rotation. You'll see linux exposed as a corporate scam before you hear Ani DiFranco's latest album, Reveilling/Reckoning played on a commercial station. Why? It certainly doesn't suck. I've been known to listen to the Reckoning side 3 times a day, and I don't even like her politics. The reason is the same as before. Her label doesn't have the money/power/connections to get them airplay. Theivery and Ani both own their own labels (ESL and Righteous Babe, respectively), and apparently have chosen to give the finger to the major ones. These are the folks you should buy CDs from if you really want to stick it to the RIAA. A drop in sales of a major label can always be blamed on something like the economy or piracy. But a drop in sales, while at the same time, smaller labels see sales soaring? All of the sudden your pirate scapegoats are gone.
Yes, it is the most logical conclusion that what we see on MTV and hear on Clear Channel's stations is the best we can get, if you only compare it to wierd college stuff and crappy indie rock, but it's simply not true. There's a lot of better stuff out there. I listen to it all the time.
I recently heard about how many of the major UK stations broadcast Pete Tong's radio show (on friday evenings), which apparently showcases the best of the cutting-edge dance electronica. From what I understand, he chooses a playlist based solely on his own opinion, and has since become rather respected in the dance community, to where you've really made it if Pete Tong plays your song. What's your experience with this? Is the show good? Any more info?
More great music
on
lowercase music
·
· Score: 3, Informative
As another poster mentioned, be sure to check out the original masters of this stuff: John Cage and Brian Eno. I tend to prefer Cage's piano work (his "In a Landscape" is unbelievable), but Eno's ambient music is some of the best of any kind of music out there. I'm listening to his "Ambient 4: On Land" right now. Others of his to check out are "Discreet Music" and "Atmospheres and Soundscapes." Some more:
Boards of Canada: In a Beautiful Place Out in the Country. This somehow manages to be ambient and melodic at the same time. I never get sick of listening to it. It's a 4-song single, so it should only be 5 or 6 bucks in a store (I got the vinyl for $6, and was pleasantly suprised to find a beautiful marbled light blue record). If you're into this kind of music, you need to buy this right now.
There's a great 3-disc set called "Ohm" which has a huge cross-section of music spanning the history of experimental electronica (for lack of a better term). Some of it is kinda annoying, but some really gets under your skin, in a good way. I sometimes find myself hitting "repeat" on a song that doesn't even have one chord change in the first place.
I don't like it as much as Eno's stuff, but if you're a King Crimson fan, you might want to check out Robert Fripp's "The Gates of Paradise." He experimented with some ambient stuff in "Exposure," and with this album has gone full blown.
I picked up this great german LP at a records store in Minneapolis for $2 called Gas Pop. One of those might be the name of something, I don't know. It's wonderfully anonymous. I later saw it in a store in western Montana (albeit for $17), so chances are good that it wasn't just a, like, 10-record pressing. Very nice to listen to. Wait, there's a URL listed. Apparently the band/guy's name is Gas and the release is Pop.
It isn't quite ambient, but William Orbit's "Pieces in a Modern Style" evokes the same mood. It's basically a bunch of classical pieces that are arranged, performed and programmed by him with in electronic means. It effectively raised the ante for electronic music everywhere. I like his version of Barber's "Adagio for Strings" better than any symphonic version I've heard, and his take on Gorecki's "Piece in the Old Style 3" is likely to sit in your head the whole day. Yet, instead of being annoyed with it, like a jingle, you find that humming the melody actually calms you.
My own music falls right around here. It's somewhere between ambient and downtempo, maybe a cross between William Orbit and Moby. Plus it's open source!
If you haven't gotten into the downtempo scene, now's the time. I've been addicted ever since I heard Thievery Corporation's "Sounds from the Thievery Hi-Fi." Chances are, you've heard it too (tracks have been in a lot of movies), but I get more out of it with every listen. Gorgeously complex drum beats. After the Thievery, get:
Peace Orchestra "Peace Orchestra" when Kruder and Dorfmeister split up, Peter Kruder made this album under the Peace Orchestra moniker. I think it's genius. If you give it a listen, go straight to the song "Shining" and you'll be hooked.
Nightmares on Wax "Carboot Soul" Contrary to the title, this album is the opposite of freaky. It's sort of a cross-over from hip-hop into downtempo, but it's its own thing and can't be pigeonholed. There are a few of the songs where there's a female voice that's either sampled or recorded, but whatever it is, he makes it so that the sound of the voice (and really the sound of every instrument on the album), hmm, let me put it this way: I can't think of anything more pleasant to listen to.
Skip James (Robert Johnson did this too):
"If I send for my baby, and she don't come
All the doctors in Wisconson sure can't help her none"
"I would rather be dead and in some cypress grove
than to have a woman I can't control"
Robert Johnson:
"Me and the Devil was walking side by side
I'm gonna beat my woman until I'm satisfied"
Mississippi John Hurt:
"Some these morning's gonna wake up crazy
gonna grab a gun, kill my baby, nobody's business but mine"
"Frankie shot Albert, shot him two of three times
said 'stand back, I's smoking my gun, let me see my Albert dyin'
He's my man, but he done me wrong"
The list goes on. Granted, these are taken out of context, but so are Eminem's lyrics.
The blues was america's first exclusive music form. Along with it came country, and after it jazz. Today, we have rap. In a way, liking Eminem is being patriotic.
While the blues are simply great tunes with appropriate words, Eminem has the preternatural ability to rhyme almost every goddam word in every line and still make it flow as if he's just talking straight. To really appreciate it, just try it yourself. It's really unbelievable. Just thought I'd add to your point.
Okay, as someone who is trying to make a living from selling digitally-reproducable works (music, see sig), I can be sympathetic to copyright-holders' fears of a loss of sales due to people copying and distributing their goods for free. But what I completely fail to understand is this:
How is making a derivative work anything but a benefit to all parties concerned? Let's say I wrote a song and included a sample of a Benny Goodman song. I wouldn't be taking away from sales of Goodman CDs--who would say "Oh I don't need to buy that CD, I have another CD by someone else with a 4 second sample on it. That's all I need." As a matter of fact, it would boost sales of Goodman CDs. I myself have bought a lot of CDs just on the basis that a bit of a song on it was sampled by an artist I really like. It's really free advertising. The only problem I can see is if I made it seem like Benny Goodman was actually playing along with me, and the song had content that would tarnish his reputation in it. But that would fall under the laws for libel, wouldn't it? Or let's say I wanted to make a movie that featured someone reading an entire Stephen King book out loud? Well maybe that could be construed as copyright infringement, since it would be reproducing the entire work, but if I used just a passage? And I credited King? It's FREE ADVERTISING!
Here's an interesting true example: Raymond Carvers last book of poetry, "A New Path to the Waterfall", included a number of poems that were nothing more than snippets from Chekov (his favorite writer) stories. His removal of these passages from their original context imbued them with an altogether new meaning that wasn't present in the original works. It's really amazing stuff, and it pisses me off that writers of today are only able to do this with works in the public domain? What if Disney retro-extended copyrights so that they covered Chekov works? We'd all be out a damn fine book of poems.
The wierd thing is, I can do all of these things today by buying the rights to a work, which are almost always owned by the publisher, who rarely cares about keeping intact the original artist's reputation (remember the commercials that showed Fred Astaire dancing around with a vacuum cleaner? *shudder*). For example, the movie "From Hell" was a piece of crap compared to the complex genius that is the comic book. But did it tarnish the original author, Alan Moore's reputation? I don't think so. Were there some people who didn't buy the comic book because they saw the movie? I doubt it. I bet that more people bought the comic book since it came out. Plus, no matter how much I didn't like the movie, the world is richer because of it. Its creators should have had to do nothing more than conspicuously display credit to the original authors.
Copyright law today as it relates to creating derivative works has nothing to do with the integrity of the original work and everything to do with making a buck. Long-term copyrights may be preventing the growth of the public domain, but the bit that relates to creating derivative works is preventing the creation of many, many new works, by only allowing those with deep pockets to make those new works. If we want to see sampling as an art form develop to the levels of say, jazz or cubism, the law needs to be rewritten to either a) allow the unauthorized creation of a derivative work, but still force appropriate credit to be given, or b) everything in (a), but also allow the original author, and only the original author--this right must be non-transferrable-- the ability to sue a creator of a derivate work if he feels it tarnishes his reputation, or the integrity of his original work. Under no circumstances should an artist collect any payment from another artist for the permission to use a piece of his work.
/me smacks himself in the head for even getting into this
Perhaps/. needs a new mod item: thoughtbait.
Looked up Occam's razor. From what I understand, it says something like "If you have two explanations for a cause that produce the same result, the simpler one is better." This is well and good for most things; the simpler one is the most likely. But it doesn't help the existence of God thing.
I never said God was a cognizant being. I have no concept of what he is. Something like an idea or an inspiration, maybe. Like in that Salinger story, "Teddy," the boy says "My sister was drinking her milk, and all of the sudden I saw that she was God and the milk was God. I mean, all she was doing was pouring God into God, if you know what I mean."
If God puts souls into embryos that are going to be harvested (he's all-knowing, in most religions)... who is to blame for allowing the soul to be destroyed?
This argument is flawed because it assumes that God a) willfully intervenes for the benefit of mankind, and b) God thinks death and/or suffering is a bad thing. I believe this existence was created with certain rules, many of which are stated as laws of physics, etc. If you sufficiently Know God, you can break them. Christ, for example, could turn water into wine, walk on water, etc. because he understood that everything is merely a manifestation of God. There are Himalyian monks who sleep in the bitter cold with only a flimsy blanket, while a film crew filming them was in high-tech tents and sleeping bags. Were they just tough? I don't think so. They understood that heat and cold are nothing but pieces of information that are part of this reality, which is flimsy at best. This is why I was so impressed with The Matrix.
Sometimes I'm sitting on the porch and I feel overwhelmed with everything. The incomprehensible beauty and complexity of existance. Even things like a dried piece of bird shit, or the terrorist attack on the WTC. Because without these things the world is somehow incomplete. At the same time, I fully support stopping terrorists and cleaning up shit. This is one of the many contradictions that somehow makes it all more true to me. It's during these times when I feel like everything is interconnected, like we're all one being, like waves in the sea, that I feel God the strongest. This is my evidence that He exists. I admit, it's not exactly incontrovertable, but I'm pretty spiritually lacking. I hope one day I'll have the strength to do some serious meditation, and really feel God, but hey, right now I'm too busy rambling on/.
I think that the concept of flamebait wouldn't exist if there weren't so many people sitting around with matches and oily rags.
The thing is, what you've asserted as true is impossible to prove. Maybe there is a gradual build-up of humanity, maybe there isn't. There's no way to tell. I myself believe in souls and God and whatnot. I think it's WAY more plausible than the alternative (oblivion). I mean, say there was a big bang. Well, who lit the fuse? But I'm getting off-topic. Lets say that everyone has a soul and it's put into your body in utero. Even still, there's no way to prove that it isn't gradually put in. There's just no way to know, and if everyone realised that these "facts" were really just opinions (or beliefs), there might be a lot more agreement, probably a lot less violence, and definitely a lot less resentment.
The reason I'm against abortion and stem cell research is that maybe it's okay and maybe it's not, but a human life is just one thing I don't want to fuck with, at any cost.
The military's new FPS is called America's Army, and was showcased just recently at e3. What's really interesting is that apparently it's free! Here's the blurb where I got my info from:
4. Americas Army
Seriously, who better to make a military squad based shooter than the fucking military? This game not only looked good but it had the features to back it up. Finally a game gives you the opportunity to use silent hand commands to communicate with your team. Realistic objectives, weapons, movement, and locations, everything in this game is as real as you can get. Each weapon operates just as it would in real life. Stand to close to a flash back and say good buy to your hearing for while. Shoot to many of your teammates and end up in jail. Try and use a sniper rifle without going prone and watch as your view bobs up and down with your breathing. You also get twenty some odd maps with expansive real world environments and kick ass objectives. Oh and then there's the fact that it's FREE!
Unless I read it wrong (which is possible; it wasn't exactly in plain english), the court held that human life does not begin at a certain point but gradually develops through the trimesters. That sounds kinda wierd, I mean, is it alive or not? I have to admit, the possibility of being half-alive didn't really occur to me. But it definitely sheds new light on the subject.
For the record, my previous understanding was based on a conversation with a lawyer friend of mine. If I had any inclination it might be "nonsense," I wouldn't have posted it. But thanks for the info.
The only issue is whether life begins at conception. If it does, then experiments on a living, unique, human entity is wrong. If it doesn't, then it's not morally wrong
You'd think so, but maybe not. As I understand it, in Roe vs. Wade, both sides agreed that life began at conception, but the court ruled that a woman could not be made to host another human being if she didn't want to (nevermind that 99% of the time, she knew the risks of what might happen when she had sex. I don't have the statistics as to what percentage abortions are from non-consensual sex, but I'd be curious to see them). Anyways, my point with bringing up all this abortion stuff is that believe it or not, some people think there are issues more important than life-or-death ones. It's likely that the legality of growing embryos for research will be decided and redecided with both sides agreeing that they are arguing the fate of living human beings.
That was so cool I had to make a recording of it. If this pisses you off, I'll take it off the site, but what I'd really like to do is make it public domain. Nothing educates the public like a catchy song (one of the many reasons Woody Guthrie was the man). I'd also like to give you proper credit, of course. It could probably stand another take or two, and some more practice, but it's great for a few hours' work. I had to edit the words a bit to make them more singable. Here's my revised version:
Been pirating from the RIAA since I was ten and three, and I don't think I've missed a single MP3, Just this old hard drive's space to lose,
Now, it isn't just the fact that they sued, it's the stupidest thing they ever did, was to claim that their actions protected revenues.
Well, they must o' thought that is quite a joke, And it got a lot of laughs from a' lots of folk, It seems I've downloaded my whole life through.
Hell, I never even thought of it as wrong, cause I'd buy more CDs after hearing more songs, I tell ya, it had nothing to do with their "revenue"
Well, I grew up quick and I grew up l33t, My hacking got hard and my wits got street, I'd roam backdoor to backdoor to hide my name.
But I made a vow to the moon and stars That I'd search the databases and systems far And kill that connection before it got too lame
Well, just finished with a shell I had since July, I kissed my DSL connection goodbye and I battled a round of security with big blue
At an old cybercafe in case they pulled the lud's, There at a table, spewing FUD Sat the dirty, mangy dog that "protected" the RIAA's Revenue
Well, I knew that snake was a lawyer so bad From the way he jumped up and down so mad cause Kazzaa Lite was installed on every PC, it's true
He was big and bent and gray and old, And I looked at him and my blood ran cold And I said: "If you're defending your bands, how come all the money goes to you?"
I was so pissed off I hit him between the eyes And he went down, but to my surprise, He come up with a lawsuit in his hand
But I called right back and marked him the theif, And he forced the conversation into the non-witnessed street Acronym'in and a' cursing, I made my stand
I tell ya, I've stolen identities of tougher men But I really can't remember when, He tricked like a mule, brought out a Pocket PC and filed
Another suit, he said I'd pay for this fuss, He went for his digital pen and initialed first, He stood there lookin' at me and I saw him smile.
And he said: "Son, this world is rough And if an Association is gonna make it, their legal gotta be tough and you know, to keep the Music Monopoly along.
We'll crush independents until they die, we'll overexpose until you buy and from those sales major labels go on strong"
He said: "Now you just fought one hell of a fight And I know you hate me, and you got the right To report me now, and I wouldn't blame you if you do.
But ya ought to thank me, before your case is tried, For the l33t circles, and coding skillz in ya eye Cause I'm the son-of-a-bitch that forces you underground when I yell "Sue.'"
I got all choked up and I threw down my palm And I recognized his crooked law, and I saw that everytime he sue'd it's true.
My skillz improve, and my knack gets better every time I find a P2P that's l33ter, but in the end, even though I think I win, we all still lose
Cause the RIAA has got control over music, congress and America's soul and if you want to download, sample or even use
any music you've bought and paid for, without fail, you'll be fined and put in jail, all in the name of their goddam revenues
I think about him every time I see, a young coder writing stuff that's free, And if I ever have a son, I think I'm gonna teach him...
to fight the corporations from a legal and political standpoint, so he won't need to hack, and support free music with all his back, and maybe after a generation or two
Their greed'll thin, and freedom will win, sampling songs won't be a sin, and we'll have taken and farmed all their grounds to sue.
Note to women of Slashdot: This is why you should never use the men's bathroom.
And what are those things sticking out over the urinals? Even without the monster there, I'd be scared to take a piss. Flushers? Infared sensors? None like I've seen. I don't know about you guys, but I generally don't like anything that close to my dick unless it can make babies or tell me it needs more space.
Oh crap. I don't have the time or the money to get into something else. But maybe I can give up/., and pawn some stuff--paintball sounds like a hell of a lot of fun.
So if I wanted to give it a shot, would you recommend I should get my own gun or use a rental? It sounds like rentals are annoyingly inaccurate, which I'm sure would frustrate me, but I don't want to make a large purchase on something I might only use a couple of times. Are there any entry-level guns that are reliable and accurate? Are places likely to rent these guns? Another thing that always prevented me from trying it out (besides not knowing anyone else who wanted to play) is that I figure I would want to use a single-shot gun, because they're cheaper (I assume), but also because I think it would be more fun shooting carefully rather than just spraying paint around; but I imagine it would be really frustrating to go up against guys with 10 shot/sec guns. Do places do things that require all guns to be an equal level, or is it pretty much "use the best gun you can afford?"
Anyways, thanks for the great treatise. The last time I got such a wonderfully lengthy reply from a simple question was when I asked a fly shop owner about the basics of fly fishing. It turned out he had a masters in entomolgy. He talked my ear off for about half an hour and I was hooked. (Boy, that was the second inadvertant stupid pun in this post) Now I can't wait till the waters clear up...
I don't understand. How do you avoid the "I hit you!" "No, you didn't, that spot was already there!" thing? Do you just shoot people and get the satisfaction when they say ow? Wouldn't they just shoot you back? How does respawning work? I always figured a bunch a people went out and the last person (or last team of people) with no paint on them was the winner.
If you wanted to play paintball, but didn't have any friends who did, this would be a great way to get outside and have some fun. It could also take the paintball/lasertag-style game to the next level. Instead of just shooting each other, you could launch a coordinated attack on the horde of monsters at your school. Buffy expansion pak, anyone? I don't play paintball, but I imagine that it's mostly running around and you only shoot a couple of times. This sounds like you could shoot stuff all over the place.
The obvious problem is looking like a complete idiot in public. But for some of us, that happens anyway, so who cares?
The obvious useful application for this is the military/police force. I can imagine them setting up common scenarios that soldiers/officers would be required to run through on a regular basis. This would almost be like getting real experience, and it would keep everyone in shape, too. Much better than computer simulations where they sit down, or are confined to a room. I wonder if they plan on making a bundle selling this to various enforcement agencies.
I mean, this is pretty cool and all, but there's no reason to start worrying if someone's gonna put words in your mouth anytime soon. First they'd need:
1. a few minutes of footage of you saying stuff that has the full range of mouth movements directly into a camera.
2. an audio recording of you actually saying what it is that they want you to say. It's possible to cut and splice seperate recordings together, but 99% of the time, differences in the sound space would make it obvious that the recording was spliced together.
And then after that, all they'd have is a video of you saying the thing and staring like a zombie into the camera.
It's cool in theory, but I think Hollywood has done a lot better job at achieving better results.
Agreed, except from what I understand (biologists back me up or shoot me down on this), mouths are a sterile environment. Fingers, however, probably have more germs than a space bar.
I also read something a while ago (in I think Scientific American) that kids who eat dirt once in a while (as kids are wont to do) wind up with better immune systems than those who don't. Kinda makes sense--why else would kids have the urge to eat dirt? Then again, kids also get the urge to eat a package of Oreos for breakfast. Stupid kids. Oh well, I'm hungry--time for a Guinness.
Slashdot Mirror
Because by the time a Mac version of the game is released, those expensive video cards will have been low-end for at least a couple years.
...
[Me 3 years from now]: Hey, I just got this cool new game, Doom III !
[Everybody else]:
[Everybody else] (to each other, turning away): C'mon, let's go play Tribes 4.
A little OT, but interesting. The more I get into blues, the more I find myelf saying "hey, that's a Zeppelin song!" Check this out:
You Shook Me, I Can't Quit You Baby- Willie Dixon
Whole Lotta Love- based on Willie Dixon's "You Need Love"
Gallows Pole, In my time of Dying- not sure, but I swear I heard them on some obscure blues CD
When the Levee Breaks- Memphis Minnie
Nobody's Fault but Mine- Blind Willie Johnson
Is this thievery? I don't think Johnson was even credited (someone correct me if I'm wrong). I'd say, no way. Simply covering a song makes it your own. And I for one have no problems with Zeppelin coming to America, homogenizing our music, and feeding it back to us. It's all good.
I'll concede that most of the stuff on college radio sucks. And I'll give it to you that most of the stuff on commercial radio is good (if you define good as "liked by a lot of people." Which is really the only way you can define good, but that's another story). But there's a huge middle ground of really amazing music that you'll never hear on commercial radio. I just posted a short list of my favorite ambient and downtempo works. Specifically, Thievery Corporation and Nightmares on Wax make great records with catchy tunes, any of which could be a hit single. Why aren't they on the radio? They don't have a major label to force their songs into rotation. You'll see linux exposed as a corporate scam before you hear Ani DiFranco's latest album, Reveilling/Reckoning played on a commercial station. Why? It certainly doesn't suck. I've been known to listen to the Reckoning side 3 times a day, and I don't even like her politics. The reason is the same as before. Her label doesn't have the money/power/connections to get them airplay. Theivery and Ani both own their own labels (ESL and Righteous Babe, respectively), and apparently have chosen to give the finger to the major ones. These are the folks you should buy CDs from if you really want to stick it to the RIAA. A drop in sales of a major label can always be blamed on something like the economy or piracy. But a drop in sales, while at the same time, smaller labels see sales soaring? All of the sudden your pirate scapegoats are gone.
Yes, it is the most logical conclusion that what we see on MTV and hear on Clear Channel's stations is the best we can get, if you only compare it to wierd college stuff and crappy indie rock, but it's simply not true. There's a lot of better stuff out there. I listen to it all the time.
I recently heard about how many of the major UK stations broadcast Pete Tong's radio show (on friday evenings), which apparently showcases the best of the cutting-edge dance electronica. From what I understand, he chooses a playlist based solely on his own opinion, and has since become rather respected in the dance community, to where you've really made it if Pete Tong plays your song. What's your experience with this? Is the show good? Any more info?
As another poster mentioned, be sure to check out the original masters of this stuff: John Cage and Brian Eno. I tend to prefer Cage's piano work (his "In a Landscape" is unbelievable), but Eno's ambient music is some of the best of any kind of music out there. I'm listening to his "Ambient 4: On Land" right now. Others of his to check out are "Discreet Music" and "Atmospheres and Soundscapes." Some more:
Boards of Canada: In a Beautiful Place Out in the Country. This somehow manages to be ambient and melodic at the same time. I never get sick of listening to it. It's a 4-song single, so it should only be 5 or 6 bucks in a store (I got the vinyl for $6, and was pleasantly suprised to find a beautiful marbled light blue record). If you're into this kind of music, you need to buy this right now.
There's a great 3-disc set called "Ohm" which has a huge cross-section of music spanning the history of experimental electronica (for lack of a better term). Some of it is kinda annoying, but some really gets under your skin, in a good way. I sometimes find myself hitting "repeat" on a song that doesn't even have one chord change in the first place.
I don't like it as much as Eno's stuff, but if you're a King Crimson fan, you might want to check out Robert Fripp's "The Gates of Paradise." He experimented with some ambient stuff in "Exposure," and with this album has gone full blown.
I picked up this great german LP at a records store in Minneapolis for $2 called Gas Pop. One of those might be the name of something, I don't know. It's wonderfully anonymous. I later saw it in a store in western Montana (albeit for $17), so chances are good that it wasn't just a, like, 10-record pressing. Very nice to listen to. Wait, there's a URL listed. Apparently the band/guy's name is Gas and the release is Pop.
It isn't quite ambient, but William Orbit's "Pieces in a Modern Style" evokes the same mood. It's basically a bunch of classical pieces that are arranged, performed and programmed by him with in electronic means. It effectively raised the ante for electronic music everywhere. I like his version of Barber's "Adagio for Strings" better than any symphonic version I've heard, and his take on Gorecki's "Piece in the Old Style 3" is likely to sit in your head the whole day. Yet, instead of being annoyed with it, like a jingle, you find that humming the melody actually calms you.
My own music falls right around here. It's somewhere between ambient and downtempo, maybe a cross between William Orbit and Moby. Plus it's open source!
If you haven't gotten into the downtempo scene, now's the time. I've been addicted ever since I heard Thievery Corporation's "Sounds from the Thievery Hi-Fi." Chances are, you've heard it too (tracks have been in a lot of movies), but I get more out of it with every listen. Gorgeously complex drum beats. After the Thievery, get:
Peace Orchestra "Peace Orchestra" when Kruder and Dorfmeister split up, Peter Kruder made this album under the Peace Orchestra moniker. I think it's genius. If you give it a listen, go straight to the song "Shining" and you'll be hooked.
Nightmares on Wax "Carboot Soul" Contrary to the title, this album is the opposite of freaky. It's sort of a cross-over from hip-hop into downtempo, but it's its own thing and can't be pigeonholed. There are a few of the songs where there's a female voice that's either sampled or recorded, but whatever it is, he makes it so that the sound of the voice (and really the sound of every instrument on the album), hmm, let me put it this way: I can't think of anything more pleasant to listen to.
An Association Named Sue. Now available in ogg!
[ original post ]
Skip James (Robert Johnson did this too):
"If I send for my baby, and she don't come
All the doctors in Wisconson sure can't help her none"
"I would rather be dead and in some cypress grove
than to have a woman I can't control"
Robert Johnson:
"Me and the Devil was walking side by side
I'm gonna beat my woman until I'm satisfied"
Mississippi John Hurt:
"Some these morning's gonna wake up crazy
gonna grab a gun, kill my baby, nobody's business but mine"
"Frankie shot Albert, shot him two of three times
said 'stand back, I's smoking my gun, let me see my Albert dyin'
He's my man, but he done me wrong"
The list goes on. Granted, these are taken out of context, but so are Eminem's lyrics.
The blues was america's first exclusive music form. Along with it came country, and after it jazz. Today, we have rap. In a way, liking Eminem is being patriotic.
While the blues are simply great tunes with appropriate words, Eminem has the preternatural ability to rhyme almost every goddam word in every line and still make it flow as if he's just talking straight. To really appreciate it, just try it yourself. It's really unbelievable. Just thought I'd add to your point.
Okay, as someone who is trying to make a living from selling digitally-reproducable works (music, see sig), I can be sympathetic to copyright-holders' fears of a loss of sales due to people copying and distributing their goods for free. But what I completely fail to understand is this:
How is making a derivative work anything but a benefit to all parties concerned? Let's say I wrote a song and included a sample of a Benny Goodman song. I wouldn't be taking away from sales of Goodman CDs--who would say "Oh I don't need to buy that CD, I have another CD by someone else with a 4 second sample on it. That's all I need." As a matter of fact, it would boost sales of Goodman CDs. I myself have bought a lot of CDs just on the basis that a bit of a song on it was sampled by an artist I really like. It's really free advertising. The only problem I can see is if I made it seem like Benny Goodman was actually playing along with me, and the song had content that would tarnish his reputation in it. But that would fall under the laws for libel, wouldn't it? Or let's say I wanted to make a movie that featured someone reading an entire Stephen King book out loud? Well maybe that could be construed as copyright infringement, since it would be reproducing the entire work, but if I used just a passage? And I credited King? It's FREE ADVERTISING!
Here's an interesting true example: Raymond Carvers last book of poetry, "A New Path to the Waterfall", included a number of poems that were nothing more than snippets from Chekov (his favorite writer) stories. His removal of these passages from their original context imbued them with an altogether new meaning that wasn't present in the original works. It's really amazing stuff, and it pisses me off that writers of today are only able to do this with works in the public domain? What if Disney retro-extended copyrights so that they covered Chekov works? We'd all be out a damn fine book of poems.
The wierd thing is, I can do all of these things today by buying the rights to a work, which are almost always owned by the publisher, who rarely cares about keeping intact the original artist's reputation (remember the commercials that showed Fred Astaire dancing around with a vacuum cleaner? *shudder*). For example, the movie "From Hell" was a piece of crap compared to the complex genius that is the comic book. But did it tarnish the original author, Alan Moore's reputation? I don't think so. Were there some people who didn't buy the comic book because they saw the movie? I doubt it. I bet that more people bought the comic book since it came out. Plus, no matter how much I didn't like the movie, the world is richer because of it. Its creators should have had to do nothing more than conspicuously display credit to the original authors.
Copyright law today as it relates to creating derivative works has nothing to do with the integrity of the original work and everything to do with making a buck. Long-term copyrights may be preventing the growth of the public domain, but the bit that relates to creating derivative works is preventing the creation of many, many new works, by only allowing those with deep pockets to make those new works. If we want to see sampling as an art form develop to the levels of say, jazz or cubism, the law needs to be rewritten to either a) allow the unauthorized creation of a derivative work, but still force appropriate credit to be given, or b) everything in (a), but also allow the original author, and only the original author--this right must be non-transferrable-- the ability to sue a creator of a derivate work if he feels it tarnishes his reputation, or the integrity of his original work. Under no circumstances should an artist collect any payment from another artist for the permission to use a piece of his work.
/me smacks himself in the head for even getting into this
/. needs a new mod item: thoughtbait.
/.
Perhaps
Looked up Occam's razor. From what I understand, it says something like "If you have two explanations for a cause that produce the same result, the simpler one is better." This is well and good for most things; the simpler one is the most likely. But it doesn't help the existence of God thing.
I never said God was a cognizant being. I have no concept of what he is. Something like an idea or an inspiration, maybe. Like in that Salinger story, "Teddy," the boy says "My sister was drinking her milk, and all of the sudden I saw that she was God and the milk was God. I mean, all she was doing was pouring God into God, if you know what I mean."
If God puts souls into embryos that are going to be harvested (he's all-knowing, in most religions)... who is to blame for allowing the soul to be destroyed?
This argument is flawed because it assumes that God a) willfully intervenes for the benefit of mankind, and b) God thinks death and/or suffering is a bad thing. I believe this existence was created with certain rules, many of which are stated as laws of physics, etc. If you sufficiently Know God, you can break them. Christ, for example, could turn water into wine, walk on water, etc. because he understood that everything is merely a manifestation of God. There are Himalyian monks who sleep in the bitter cold with only a flimsy blanket, while a film crew filming them was in high-tech tents and sleeping bags. Were they just tough? I don't think so. They understood that heat and cold are nothing but pieces of information that are part of this reality, which is flimsy at best. This is why I was so impressed with The Matrix.
Sometimes I'm sitting on the porch and I feel overwhelmed with everything. The incomprehensible beauty and complexity of existance. Even things like a dried piece of bird shit, or the terrorist attack on the WTC. Because without these things the world is somehow incomplete. At the same time, I fully support stopping terrorists and cleaning up shit. This is one of the many contradictions that somehow makes it all more true to me. It's during these times when I feel like everything is interconnected, like we're all one being, like waves in the sea, that I feel God the strongest. This is my evidence that He exists. I admit, it's not exactly incontrovertable, but I'm pretty spiritually lacking. I hope one day I'll have the strength to do some serious meditation, and really feel God, but hey, right now I'm too busy rambling on
I think that the concept of flamebait wouldn't exist if there weren't so many people sitting around with matches and oily rags.
The thing is, what you've asserted as true is impossible to prove. Maybe there is a gradual build-up of humanity, maybe there isn't. There's no way to tell. I myself believe in souls and God and whatnot. I think it's WAY more plausible than the alternative (oblivion). I mean, say there was a big bang. Well, who lit the fuse? But I'm getting off-topic. Lets say that everyone has a soul and it's put into your body in utero. Even still, there's no way to prove that it isn't gradually put in. There's just no way to know, and if everyone realised that these "facts" were really just opinions (or beliefs), there might be a lot more agreement, probably a lot less violence, and definitely a lot less resentment.
The reason I'm against abortion and stem cell research is that maybe it's okay and maybe it's not, but a human life is just one thing I don't want to fuck with, at any cost.
The military's new FPS is called America's Army, and was showcased just recently at e3. What's really interesting is that apparently it's free! Here's the blurb where I got my info from:
4. Americas Army
Seriously, who better to make a military squad based shooter than the fucking military? This game not only looked good but it had the features to back it up. Finally a game gives you the opportunity to use silent hand commands to communicate with your team. Realistic objectives, weapons, movement, and locations, everything in this game is as real as you can get. Each weapon operates just as it would in real life. Stand to close to a flash back and say good buy to your hearing for while. Shoot to many of your teammates and end up in jail. Try and use a sniper rifle without going prone and watch as your view bobs up and down with your breathing. You also get twenty some odd maps with expansive real world environments and kick ass objectives. Oh and then there's the fact that it's FREE!
from Penny Arcade (original article)
Unless I read it wrong (which is possible; it wasn't exactly in plain english), the court held that human life does not begin at a certain point but gradually develops through the trimesters. That sounds kinda wierd, I mean, is it alive or not? I have to admit, the possibility of being half-alive didn't really occur to me. But it definitely sheds new light on the subject.
For the record, my previous understanding was based on a conversation with a lawyer friend of mine. If I had any inclination it might be "nonsense," I wouldn't have posted it. But thanks for the info.
The only issue is whether life begins at conception. If it does, then experiments on a living, unique, human entity is wrong. If it doesn't, then it's not morally wrong
You'd think so, but maybe not. As I understand it, in Roe vs. Wade, both sides agreed that life began at conception, but the court ruled that a woman could not be made to host another human being if she didn't want to (nevermind that 99% of the time, she knew the risks of what might happen when she had sex. I don't have the statistics as to what percentage abortions are from non-consensual sex, but I'd be curious to see them). Anyways, my point with bringing up all this abortion stuff is that believe it or not, some people think there are issues more important than life-or-death ones. It's likely that the legality of growing embryos for research will be decided and redecided with both sides agreeing that they are arguing the fate of living human beings.
That was so cool I had to make a recording of it. If this pisses you off, I'll take it off the site, but what I'd really like to do is make it public domain. Nothing educates the public like a catchy song (one of the many reasons Woody Guthrie was the man). I'd also like to give you proper credit, of course. It could probably stand another take or two, and some more practice, but it's great for a few hours' work. I had to edit the words a bit to make them more singable. Here's my revised version:
Been pirating from the RIAA since I was ten and three, and I don't think I've missed a single MP3, Just this old hard drive's space to lose,
Now, it isn't just the fact that they sued, it's the stupidest thing they ever did, was to claim that their actions protected revenues.
Well, they must o' thought that is quite a joke, And it got a lot of laughs from a' lots of folk, It seems I've downloaded my whole life through.
Hell, I never even thought of it as wrong, cause I'd buy more CDs after hearing more songs, I tell ya, it had nothing to do with their "revenue"
Well, I grew up quick and I grew up l33t, My hacking got hard and my wits got street, I'd roam backdoor to backdoor to hide my name.
But I made a vow to the moon and stars That I'd search the databases and systems far And kill that connection before it got too lame
Well, just finished with a shell I had since July, I kissed my DSL connection goodbye and I battled a round of security with big blue
At an old cybercafe in case they pulled the lud's, There at a table, spewing FUD Sat the dirty, mangy dog that "protected" the RIAA's Revenue
Well, I knew that snake was a lawyer so bad From the way he jumped up and down so mad cause Kazzaa Lite was installed on every PC, it's true
He was big and bent and gray and old, And I looked at him and my blood ran cold And I said: "If you're defending your bands, how come all the money goes to you?"
I was so pissed off I hit him between the eyes And he went down, but to my surprise, He come up with a lawsuit in his hand
But I called right back and marked him the theif, And he forced the conversation into the non-witnessed street Acronym'in and a' cursing, I made my stand
I tell ya, I've stolen identities of tougher men But I really can't remember when, He tricked like a mule, brought out a Pocket PC and filed
Another suit, he said I'd pay for this fuss, He went for his digital pen and initialed first, He stood there lookin' at me and I saw him smile.
And he said: "Son, this world is rough And if an Association is gonna make it, their legal gotta be tough and you know, to keep the Music Monopoly along.
We'll crush independents until they die, we'll overexpose until you buy and from those sales major labels go on strong"
He said: "Now you just fought one hell of a fight And I know you hate me, and you got the right To report me now, and I wouldn't blame you if you do.
But ya ought to thank me, before your case is tried, For the l33t circles, and coding skillz in ya eye Cause I'm the son-of-a-bitch that forces you underground when I yell "Sue.'"
I got all choked up and I threw down my palm And I recognized his crooked law, and I saw that everytime he sue'd it's true.
My skillz improve, and my knack gets better every time I find a P2P that's l33ter, but in the end, even though I think I win, we all still lose
Cause the RIAA has got control over music, congress and America's soul and if you want to download, sample or even use
any music you've bought and paid for, without fail, you'll be fined and put in jail, all in the name of their goddam revenues
I think about him every time I see, a young coder writing stuff that's free, And if I ever have a son, I think I'm gonna teach him...
to fight the corporations from a legal and political standpoint, so he won't need to hack, and support free music with all his back, and maybe after a generation or two
Their greed'll thin, and freedom will win, sampling songs won't be a sin, and we'll have taken and farmed all their grounds to sue.
Note to women of Slashdot: This is why you should never use the men's bathroom.
And what are those things sticking out over the urinals? Even without the monster there, I'd be scared to take a piss. Flushers? Infared sensors? None like I've seen. I don't know about you guys, but I generally don't like anything that close to my dick unless it can make babies or tell me it needs more space.
Oh crap. I don't have the time or the money to get into something else. But maybe I can give up /., and pawn some stuff--paintball sounds like a hell of a lot of fun.
So if I wanted to give it a shot, would you recommend I should get my own gun or use a rental? It sounds like rentals are annoyingly inaccurate, which I'm sure would frustrate me, but I don't want to make a large purchase on something I might only use a couple of times. Are there any entry-level guns that are reliable and accurate? Are places likely to rent these guns? Another thing that always prevented me from trying it out (besides not knowing anyone else who wanted to play) is that I figure I would want to use a single-shot gun, because they're cheaper (I assume), but also because I think it would be more fun shooting carefully rather than just spraying paint around; but I imagine it would be really frustrating to go up against guys with 10 shot/sec guns. Do places do things that require all guns to be an equal level, or is it pretty much "use the best gun you can afford?"
Anyways, thanks for the great treatise. The last time I got such a wonderfully lengthy reply from a simple question was when I asked a fly shop owner about the basics of fly fishing. It turned out he had a masters in entomolgy. He talked my ear off for about half an hour and I was hooked. (Boy, that was the second inadvertant stupid pun in this post) Now I can't wait till the waters clear up...
I don't understand. How do you avoid the "I hit you!" "No, you didn't, that spot was already there!" thing? Do you just shoot people and get the satisfaction when they say ow? Wouldn't they just shoot you back? How does respawning work? I always figured a bunch a people went out and the last person (or last team of people) with no paint on them was the winner.
If you wanted to play paintball, but didn't have any friends who did, this would be a great way to get outside and have some fun. It could also take the paintball/lasertag-style game to the next level. Instead of just shooting each other, you could launch a coordinated attack on the horde of monsters at your school. Buffy expansion pak, anyone? I don't play paintball, but I imagine that it's mostly running around and you only shoot a couple of times. This sounds like you could shoot stuff all over the place.
The obvious problem is looking like a complete idiot in public. But for some of us, that happens anyway, so who cares?
The obvious useful application for this is the military/police force. I can imagine them setting up common scenarios that soldiers/officers would be required to run through on a regular basis. This would almost be like getting real experience, and it would keep everyone in shape, too. Much better than computer simulations where they sit down, or are confined to a room. I wonder if they plan on making a bundle selling this to various enforcement agencies.
I want to be a Corporate Visionary Strategist, so I can prove my mom wrong -- you can get paid for daydreaming all day.
I mean, this is pretty cool and all, but there's no reason to start worrying if someone's gonna put words in your mouth anytime soon. First they'd need:
1. a few minutes of footage of you saying stuff that has the full range of mouth movements directly into a camera.
2. an audio recording of you actually saying what it is that they want you to say. It's possible to cut and splice seperate recordings together, but 99% of the time, differences in the sound space would make it obvious that the recording was spliced together.
And then after that, all they'd have is a video of you saying the thing and staring like a zombie into the camera.
It's cool in theory, but I think Hollywood has done a lot better job at achieving better results.
Mmm, Gummi Venus De Milo...
Agreed, except from what I understand (biologists back me up or shoot me down on this), mouths are a sterile environment. Fingers, however, probably have more germs than a space bar.
I also read something a while ago (in I think Scientific American) that kids who eat dirt once in a while (as kids are wont to do) wind up with better immune systems than those who don't. Kinda makes sense--why else would kids have the urge to eat dirt? Then again, kids also get the urge to eat a package of Oreos for breakfast. Stupid kids. Oh well, I'm hungry--time for a Guinness.
Yeah, I'm sick of the yellow incandescant light. It'll be nice if we can get these bulbs installed everywhere.
My cat's breath smells like cat food.
The light bulb has been a chain onto Humanity, indeed. Much like the automobile, penicillin, the computer, and now that I think of it, fire.
Sam Raimi: All your demographic are belong to us!
Classic. Laughed my ass off.
for the uninitiated: allyourbase.org.
shit, that was funny
42s? I already worship it!