If you know anything about the basis of the story presented in "2112", you would know that this song portrays the ruin of a man due to an authoritarian government stripping his freedom from him and those around him.
It's very sad that so many people out there believe that the music industry or other establishments out there "owe" them anything. It's equally sad that so many people believe that corporations are ripping them off.
Remember this point, my misled friend: there are only two groups of people that possess the ability to forcibly remove money from your wallet: criminals, and the government. The music industry is not holding a gun to your head, forcing you to buy their product. However, refuse to pay your taxes or get mugged and see what happens.
Making argument via emotion is irrational at best, and will not get you far in terms of the leraning potential of debate. What it will do is make you dependent upon others to set your life up for you, much like what was described in "2112". If that's what you want, keep letting emotion run your life - do NOT bother to think logically and reason factually. If you convince enough people to follow that belief, you, too could soon be living in a society like that depicted in "2112".
If you want to find out the true basis of the story behind "2112", read "Anthem", by Ayn Rand. This is the book that was directly credited by Mr. Peart as the inspiration for "2112". If you know anything about Ms. Rand, you'd know that she was the founder of the objectivist philiosophy... a philosophy STRONGLY rooted in capitalism and logical reasoning. It's a short read, so it won't tie up too much time.
My opinion is that if the music industry wants to secure their product, it's their responsibility to do so. They shouldn't be relying on the police power of government to make that happen. If they don't choose to secure them, then they have to take whatever loss that results (and there is strong argument that it is a smaller loss than they like to portray). This boils down to a question of profitability... just another business decision. That it involves people who think it is their contitutionally-given right to download mp3's without grief and cost (funny, last time I read The Constitution, I didn't see this anywhere) makes it really no more important to them, regardless of what the media would like you to think.
A parting question: if you're so worried about loss of freedom, why wouldn't you be searching for the real sources of deterioration of your freedom, rather than trying to find it in something truly superfluous?
Slashdot Mirror
You are sorely incorrect, sir.
If you know anything about the basis of the story presented in "2112", you would know that this song portrays the ruin of a man due to an authoritarian government stripping his freedom from him and those around him.
It's very sad that so many people out there believe that the music industry or other establishments out there "owe" them anything. It's equally sad that so many people believe that corporations are ripping them off.
Remember this point, my misled friend: there are only two groups of people that possess the ability to forcibly remove money from your wallet: criminals, and the government. The music industry is not holding a gun to your head, forcing you to buy their product. However, refuse to pay your taxes or get mugged and see what happens.
Making argument via emotion is irrational at best, and will not get you far in terms of the leraning potential of debate. What it will do is make you dependent upon others to set your life up for you, much like what was described in "2112". If that's what you want, keep letting emotion run your life - do NOT bother to think logically and reason factually. If you convince enough people to follow that belief, you, too could soon be living in a society like that depicted in "2112".
If you want to find out the true basis of the story behind "2112", read "Anthem", by Ayn Rand. This is the book that was directly credited by Mr. Peart as the inspiration for "2112". If you know anything about Ms. Rand, you'd know that she was the founder of the objectivist philiosophy... a philosophy STRONGLY rooted in capitalism and logical reasoning. It's a short read, so it won't tie up too much time.
My opinion is that if the music industry wants to secure their product, it's their responsibility to do so. They shouldn't be relying on the police power of government to make that happen. If they don't choose to secure them, then they have to take whatever loss that results (and there is strong argument that it is a smaller loss than they like to portray). This boils down to a question of profitability... just another business decision. That it involves people who think it is their contitutionally-given right to download mp3's without grief and cost (funny, last time I read The Constitution, I didn't see this anywhere) makes it really no more important to them, regardless of what the media would like you to think.
A parting question: if you're so worried about loss of freedom, why wouldn't you be searching for the real sources of deterioration of your freedom, rather than trying to find it in something truly superfluous?
Take care, and good luck,
neo2112ok
objectivist, free-thinker, libertarian, atheist, capitalist
"His mind is not for rent, to any god or government..." -- Neil Peart