he called people who are being idiots 'idiots' which is entirely apropos...I love slashdot and when I read what posts get up-modded sometimes I get really pissed and start formulating conspiracy theories involving Dice Media & the English Royal Family...
but I digress in this post as I often do in actual conversation...
It was the deeper point, *NOT THE LANGUAGE* that was a positive contribution to the discussion...I object to the notion that *any* strong or harsh language is by default considered a 'slur'
it's ok to use bombastic language sparringly...sometimes the situation calls for it
Could you answer this part of my origninal post? It's a question I posed...since you seem so intent on pedantically and patronizingly answering all my questions, I'm fairly surprised you missed it:
When something like the humble Voyager 1 probe can continue giving usable data for such a long time, it should cause us to ask, why haven't our other missions been as successful?
The US has abdicated any role of spending any money apparently (see sequester), and corporations are living quarter to quarter.
Corporations living quarter to quarter??? You are dead wrong.
The big 'conquistador' corporations (btw my vision is not a fucking 'conquistador' vision) that exploit resources are the ones with the BIGGEST INCREASE IN PROFITS of all companies that are profitable over the last 10-20 years.
But fsk all that...
'wont be profitable' is a ridiculous argument because everything about going into space causes us to create new technology that can be used in consumer goods
one word: velcro
just extrapolate from there...or not...from your attitude it seems you'd be the one harranging 'It's too dangerous...we shouldn't do it' no matter what the plan...
The Voyager program has helped us define what the "solar system" actually is.
XKCD is great but I'm with you on this...Voyager's data *literally* defined the solar system for us (i'm sure Randall Munroe is up on this and appropriately stoked)
IMHO there is a greater point here about space exploration.
What *is* space exploration? When something like the humble Voyager 1 probe can continue giving usable data for such a long time, it should cause us to ask, why haven't our other missions been as successful?
The Mars rovers are another example. When you consider the scale and complexity of their task, the rovers comparatively performed on par with Voyager 1.
You might say, "We can't plan for what it does after the mission is over, that's kind of the point of having a defined *mission plan*" and to that I say 'hogwash'
It is my firm belief that humans should be taking vacations on Luna *now* and soon stepping foot on Mars. We could do it.
Why aren't we?
I see the same answer in both questions I posed. The best way I can say it is 'operational space research'...
I'm not dogging the Hubble or satellites made to find WIMPS or w/e...I think that it is more a failure of VISION.
Everything we do in space should be based around the notion of iterative progression. Each mission serves a primary function but also has a *secondary* function which is to provide the basis for the **NEXT STEP OUT**
We've been chasing our tails for 20+ years with most of our NASA projects. Don't get me started on the Shuttle and ISS. I won't get into it b/c I get huge downmods every time...
I'm unclear what statement of mine you're trying to contradict and in what way
that's because they don't know what they are talking about;)
GP is confusing pass/key interface with a signal intercept.
I'd wager GP got their understanding from Wired articles and TED talks, b/c most of the cutting-edge-ooh-shiny-'quantum' literature on cryptography involves 'man-in-the-middle' attacks where anyone can intercept the signal (in this example, the whole world would have to be able to look over your shoulder as you type your iphone password for the his analogy to work)
entering a password onto an iPhone is not a 'man-in-the-middle' scenario...(now, theoretically a person could use a man-in-the-middle attack to, say, snif your IP traffic via your mobile browser which is different than circumventing password access, but this attack in this scenario would require cracking the encryption of the signal).
for one single instance, a good and proper user generated password with a direct interface to the device (not transmitted externally) is theoretically practically uncrackable, especially if you have say 3 chances to guess, and the # of characters is long enough
so why need fingerprint technology if 99.999999% of phones are secure under the conditions I described above?
1. those conditions don't happen very often in real life
2. marketing
3. platform for expansion across all devices
That's what's going on here....it's about marketing and weening users over to a new system for corporate profit
In marketing and TED talks, Apple can say this fingerprint shit is 'more secure' but that's **only if the user was an idiot before hand...**
the content of his message was a productive addition to the discussion that's all that matters
that's the point of anonymity
I wouldn't bother posting this, except that your ridiculous kind of bullshit posturing and insistence on privacy-invading log-in's are the same *bullshit* that underlies this move by facebook.com to get rid of Social Fixer.
Social Fixer was a threat to facebook.com's business model simple as that. It's written into their IPO in the section that describes threats to company revenue. They say that legislation or other rules or policies that give users control over their data is a threat to their revenue.
Sure we all know that's how they work, but don't you see how having it in a **legally binding contract** creates a certainty of a type of behavior that none of them can now control?
due to their IPO it is a **mathmatical certainty** that facebook.com INC will do this as a matter of Standard Operating Procedure.
Every 'Social Fixer' in the world should expect this.
as to parent, you need to completely reverse your understanding of anonymity and human interaction
His 1-10 ranking of task difficulty & how he correlates it with task analysis is reductive and omits several behaviors in work that demonstrate competence.
Lets assume you *can* assign some sort of 1-10 number on the 'difficultly' of a task.
If it requires a 7 why have someone who can do more?
Intelligent people work smarter *and* harder. They find ways to automate time consuming tasks where lesser workers just put their head down and do it individually.
They find ways to overlap work.
They have better habits, including consistency, attention to detail, communicating actively, etc.
This 'Ask Slashdot' is dumb...you want capable people in every position, and to have a plan to let them grown within your company.
heh, not being sarcastic you've been a good sport w/ your responses;)
but this:
And he [Kurt]said, "Well, basically everything." And **at that point I knew that there was something going on** other than them actually being dissatisfied. Like **somebody had put a bug in their ear** about something. Kurt might have been in a vulnerable state at that point - I don't know if his drug use kicked back in or **if he started to fear for his pension or whatever**, I have no idea what happened - but as soon as he said that I realised that there was something up
ok...and this is the close of the matter...
everything between the **_** that I added above is TOTAL FICTION and nothing more than Albini's very biased opinion!
Kurt wanted to fucking **re-do** the album...that is humiliating to egotistical person like Albini...
In that same passage, Albini says Kurt was 'sheepish' in that conversation...exactly! he was getting ready to tell Albini that they were going to remix his album...
Albini couldn't take it...so he fucking INVENTED A NARRATIVE that puts him as the 'level headed punk purist'
that's it...he should be glad Nirvana kept quiet about his douchebaggery...
it's well known that the label 'didn't like' the first listen of the In Utero demos...that's it...that's all...that does not justify or in any way prove you right...
you didn't provide 'history' you typed some words in a box...if you want to challenge the accepted narrative you need *evidence*
see, Krist Novocelic lives next door to my cousin down near the Gorge in Southern Washington and Krist told my friend this, personally:
Yeah, Kurt wanted Albini because he knew he would record it how we wanted. He had a reputation as a being kind of a sexist dick, he even had a band called Rapeman. Anyway, Albini was great for recording but couldn't keep his ego out of the whole process after...he kept acting like he was 'protecting' us from the label but they weren't going to force us to do anything. They told us what they thought but after the meeting that was it and we really could still do what we wanted...yeah...fuck we tried not to talk bad about Albini in the press but he just brought it on himself...I had to call him personally to get him to give up the masters
he still couldn't believe the labels were forcing us to do everything....
they want it...that's where they want to take it...
Google Glass is here. Brain wave sensors are still barbaric but getting cheaper every day. I think they can have about 8 different inputs via 'thought'
There is absolutely no reason Google Glass won't be able to do operations like 'take photo'->'share photo via facebook' through thought interface...like...today...someone may even have done it already in a lab
Then, they can just capture your **brain waves** as metadata along with your photo.
user brain wave mapping is a legitimate 'social media' application *right now*...
it's cool! but we just have to hold tight to our rights!
>error: that fingerprint has been used for this account before, please use a fingerprint that is different from the last 3 fingerprints used for this account
Albini wasn't some shiny knight in white armor protecting Nirvana from the *evil* record label! That is a fiction!
But you say Albini interfered and overstepped his bounds? Yeah, I understand you might feel that way...if you were working for the record company!!
And as your evidence, you present some *fucking dumb* quotation from some Jack Edino who has *absolutely* nothing to do with the band.
You're inventing a narrative to justify your actions retroactively.
You can't trip and fall over your own shoelaces and then afterwards pretend you did it on purpose....
Nirvana was getting pulled in *all* directions but from interviews there is ABSOLUTELY ZERO evidence in the historical record, besides from what you Albini have said and done, to indicate there was a significant disagreement between the band and their label about the album.
Just accept it.
Look, I love that you have nice recording shit and let humble indie and punk bands use it for cheap...but that doesn't make you some DIY punk godfather...that's normal shit that we all do.
Also, I love that you have a consistent sound in your engineering work.
Keep the good stuff and just get rid of this shit about how you fucking saved Nirvana from the evil record companies!
They wanted the masters b/c they wanted to adjust the sound...Nirvana wanted to...not the label...Nirvana....you can't process that b/c it punctures your little fiction-bubble of this big controversy
Hello Mr. Steve Albini AC...I am not trolling...I'm making informed analysis of a music production worker and his best known work. I *do* however accuse you of trolling the whole music industry...
If you want more proof of what you did, go to this comment:
I linked to it in the post you replied to, but from the text of your response it seems you didn't look at it.
I *do* think there is plenty of evidence from your own interviews to surmise that you were angry that you didn't take points, and that you basically just overturned the board game when it was clear you weren't going to come out as "mr awesome scene guy"...
Working with Nirvana pushed you and showed your failings...you didn't learn a thing from it...
(ps...I *really* think Albini himself may have written this...if not sorry)
Albini hates being called an Engineer. He prefers the term "recordist".
perfect...absolutely perfect...of course he wants to be a called a "recordist" ha!
He's got a killer mic collection, however, and will pretty much record anyone who will pay him to record their band.
yep...I agree there ain't nothing wrong with that...Nirvana probably chose him for just that reason...I certainly love everything about In Utero's sound and his skills in studio were def a big part of it
While you are speaking English to your counterpart who speaks both English and a local language - he/she is telling the other people in the room how ignorant you are
what? i never advocated being monolinguistic...I used to teach Korean to Americans in Korea just for this purpose...you're way off
**my point** was that in a research lab of Moroccans, Aussies, French, Chinese, Japanese, Indian, and Argentinian researchers the common language is **English** and will be for at least the next 100 years
I speak Spanish and Korean, woop de damn doo! It doesn't mean shit when I'm in a work group with a Japanese, Tunisian, and French person.
**They all speak English.**
When those nationalities working in a lab all by default speak Chinese, then maybe you'll have some sort of point to make...but don't hold your breath this century
technically, yes you are "right" that when asked in an interview with a tech magazine, Albini answered as you say...
however, parent is right...Albini is biased by his own expertise...
And his studio went bankrupt... AFTER In Utero...usually people can live for the rest of their lives on residuals from a work that successful...
So the theory that he's pimping 'analog' because of an investment in analog equipment and resistance (or financial inability) to change actually has quite a bit of merit.
Sure, his opinion is noteworthy...but as we note it, we can also disregard it without disregarding his artistic work...
The whole reason he is even asked about this stuff is his connection to Nirvana...and he only worked on one national release album after In Utero...that has to tell you something
Albini is not a trustworthy opinion on this stuff...
He is a disciplined **studio engineer** but he only worked on *one* national release album after In Utero...because he's actually kind of a douchenozzle...
He's the bad kind of luddite audiophile...the guy who understand waveforms and shit but really just likes to thrown around their expertise b/c it gives them social power...they always hear things that are 'obvious' that no one hears adn they love it...
Also, this caught my eye in your comment:
You remind me of a 19 year old classmate in college who questioned the professor's knowledge of the subject, who told the kid "Son, I've forgotten more than you ever learned."
and *you* remind me of the old, lazy tenure Prof. who teaches a course on tech business but can't check his own email...
that scenario you present is a common trope of human behavior...just as often that 19 yr old college classmate drops out and starts their own company...
in my experience teaching HCI at WSU-Vancouver I never encountered a scenario like you describe...sure I had 'know it all's' who like to hear themselves be smart...but my job as an educator is to focus that into productive work...
a good prof doesn't need to bring out credentials to sit a sophomoric undergrad down
he kept the In Utero masters from the label until Krist Novoselic called him personally...Abili's contrarian attitude is well documented in the music industry...he's kind of a 'troll' on the industry, flying the flag of 'scene purity' but really just being a douchenozzle who like the sound of his own voice
about your wikipedia info, it is interesting to note that Albini didn't work with any national artists after Nirvana's In Utero (heh...one exception...Bush's Razorblade Suitcase which makes sense)
Albini got alot of milage out of speechifying about 'punk rock purity' and whatnot, but if you read further in the wiki you'll note the story about how he sat on the In Utero masters and even gave an interview where he said he thought the label was interfering too much and the album would never get released
IMHO he was secretly pissed he opted for a flat fee for In Utero instead of points (which would be in the $Millions now) and so just decided to fuck shit up and flip the board over...all the while yammering about 'not selling out'
where he gets into the controversy a bit...still never cops to what he did completely...
he's a weird egg...he genuinely a good sound engineer, which is all Nirvana needed for In Utero...but he seems like the kind of guy that would just sink a team working on a project...
and I don't trust advice from people like this on technology...they are way too biased by their own expertise!
yeah for sure...Chinese might be a great language to use to push yourself b/c it is so idiomatic
I'd even go as far to say that learning an idiomatic language or sign language might be very good sort of 'cross training' for a techie, especially coders
for me, writing code is like the exact opposite of learning an idiomatic language...
I have tried to pick up on how Arabic and Thai work in written form lately, and I learned Korean (which is the worlds most modern and easiest to learn language) and I feel it has improved my reading speed and visual dexterity greatly...
Learning weird languages teaches you to scan a document quickly in new ways...very good for coding I think!
Slashdot Mirror
hey thanks for the reply
I believe you when you say this:
but here's the thing...GP did not
he called people who are being idiots 'idiots' which is entirely apropos...I love slashdot and when I read what posts get up-modded sometimes I get really pissed and start formulating conspiracy theories involving Dice Media & the English Royal Family...
but I digress in this post as I often do in actual conversation...
It was the deeper point, *NOT THE LANGUAGE* that was a positive contribution to the discussion...I object to the notion that *any* strong or harsh language is by default considered a 'slur'
it's ok to use bombastic language sparringly...sometimes the situation calls for it
Could you answer this part of my origninal post? It's a question I posed...since you seem so intent on pedantically and patronizingly answering all my questions, I'm fairly surprised you missed it:
I guess you could say my Curiosity is piqued...
sorry, meant to link to this article but i didn't tag link:
"Corporate profits hit record as wages get squeezed"
http://money.cnn.com/2012/12/03/news/economy/record-corporate-profits/index.html
Corporations living quarter to quarter??? You are dead wrong.
The big 'conquistador' corporations (btw my vision is not a fucking 'conquistador' vision) that exploit resources are the ones with the BIGGEST INCREASE IN PROFITS of all companies that are profitable over the last 10-20 years.
But fsk all that...
'wont be profitable' is a ridiculous argument because everything about going into space causes us to create new technology that can be used in consumer goods
one word: velcro
just extrapolate from there...or not...from your attitude it seems you'd be the one harranging 'It's too dangerous...we shouldn't do it' no matter what the plan...
XKCD is great but I'm with you on this...Voyager's data *literally* defined the solar system for us (i'm sure Randall Munroe is up on this and appropriately stoked)
IMHO there is a greater point here about space exploration.
What *is* space exploration? When something like the humble Voyager 1 probe can continue giving usable data for such a long time, it should cause us to ask, why haven't our other missions been as successful?
The Mars rovers are another example. When you consider the scale and complexity of their task, the rovers comparatively performed on par with Voyager 1.
You might say, "We can't plan for what it does after the mission is over, that's kind of the point of having a defined *mission plan*" and to that I say 'hogwash'
It is my firm belief that humans should be taking vacations on Luna *now* and soon stepping foot on Mars. We could do it.
Why aren't we?
I see the same answer in both questions I posed. The best way I can say it is 'operational space research'...
I'm not dogging the Hubble or satellites made to find WIMPS or w/e...I think that it is more a failure of VISION.
Everything we do in space should be based around the notion of iterative progression. Each mission serves a primary function but also has a *secondary* function which is to provide the basis for the **NEXT STEP OUT**
We've been chasing our tails for 20+ years with most of our NASA projects. Don't get me started on the Shuttle and ISS. I won't get into it b/c I get huge downmods every time...
No...my criticism is systemic.
NASA is a tool. Are we using it to its fullest?
Voyager 1's quiet incessant pinging tells me 'no'
that's because they don't know what they are talking about ;)
GP is confusing pass/key interface with a signal intercept.
I'd wager GP got their understanding from Wired articles and TED talks, b/c most of the cutting-edge-ooh-shiny-'quantum' literature on cryptography involves 'man-in-the-middle' attacks where anyone can intercept the signal (in this example, the whole world would have to be able to look over your shoulder as you type your iphone password for the his analogy to work)
entering a password onto an iPhone is not a 'man-in-the-middle' scenario...(now, theoretically a person could use a man-in-the-middle attack to, say, snif your IP traffic via your mobile browser which is different than circumventing password access, but this attack in this scenario would require cracking the encryption of the signal).
for one single instance, a good and proper user generated password with a direct interface to the device (not transmitted externally) is theoretically practically uncrackable, especially if you have say 3 chances to guess, and the # of characters is long enough
so why need fingerprint technology if 99.999999% of phones are secure under the conditions I described above?
1. those conditions don't happen very often in real life
2. marketing
3. platform for expansion across all devices
That's what's going on here....it's about marketing and weening users over to a new system for corporate profit
In marketing and TED talks, Apple can say this fingerprint shit is 'more secure' but that's **only if the user was an idiot before hand...**
Is there some new kind of weed that makes the smoker think they're a cryptographer?
No.
a 'hash' isn't some sort of inviolable crypto-packet...it's a string of numbers that correlate to the graph from the scan of the fingerprint
hash away!
whatever hash function you use is completely crackable
using a fingerprint is, from a Claude Shannon type perspective is exactly the same as using a 'password'
fingerprints are harder to copy, lose, or steal and impossible to 'forget'
that's the benefit from a user's perspective
in that sense fingerprint ID is 'more secure' but it's not on the system side...it's on the human side of the equation...
who cares?
the content of his message was a productive addition to the discussion that's all that matters
that's the point of anonymity
I wouldn't bother posting this, except that your ridiculous kind of bullshit posturing and insistence on privacy-invading log-in's are the same *bullshit* that underlies this move by facebook.com to get rid of Social Fixer.
Social Fixer was a threat to facebook.com's business model simple as that. It's written into their IPO in the section that describes threats to company revenue. They say that legislation or other rules or policies that give users control over their data is a threat to their revenue.
Sure we all know that's how they work, but don't you see how having it in a **legally binding contract** creates a certainty of a type of behavior that none of them can now control?
due to their IPO it is a **mathmatical certainty** that facebook.com INC will do this as a matter of Standard Operating Procedure.
Every 'Social Fixer' in the world should expect this.
as to parent, you need to completely reverse your understanding of anonymity and human interaction
yeah me too
agree...I actually hate the notion as well...it's ridiculously reductive
I could imagine using codes to assign value to tasks however.
His 1-10 ranking of task difficulty & how he correlates it with task analysis is reductive and omits several behaviors in work that demonstrate competence.
Lets assume you *can* assign some sort of 1-10 number on the 'difficultly' of a task.
If it requires a 7 why have someone who can do more?
Intelligent people work smarter *and* harder. They find ways to automate time consuming tasks where lesser workers just put their head down and do it individually.
They find ways to overlap work.
They have better habits, including consistency, attention to detail, communicating actively, etc.
This 'Ask Slashdot' is dumb...you want capable people in every position, and to have a plan to let them grown within your company.
heh, not being sarcastic you've been a good sport w/ your responses ;)
but this:
ok...and this is the close of the matter...
everything between the **_** that I added above is TOTAL FICTION and nothing more than Albini's very biased opinion!
Kurt wanted to fucking **re-do** the album...that is humiliating to egotistical person like Albini...
In that same passage, Albini says Kurt was 'sheepish' in that conversation...exactly! he was getting ready to tell Albini that they were going to remix his album...
Albini couldn't take it...so he fucking INVENTED A NARRATIVE that puts him as the 'level headed punk purist'
that's it...he should be glad Nirvana kept quiet about his douchebaggery...
provide links...
it's well known that the label 'didn't like' the first listen of the In Utero demos...that's it...that's all...that does not justify or in any way prove you right...
you didn't provide 'history' you typed some words in a box...if you want to challenge the accepted narrative you need *evidence*
see, Krist Novocelic lives next door to my cousin down near the Gorge in Southern Washington and Krist told my friend this, personally:
re: Google Glass Facebook integration
they want it...that's where they want to take it...
Google Glass is here. Brain wave sensors are still barbaric but getting cheaper every day. I think they can have about 8 different inputs via 'thought'
There is absolutely no reason Google Glass won't be able to do operations like 'take photo'->'share photo via facebook' through thought interface...like...today...someone may even have done it already in a lab
Then, they can just capture your **brain waves** as metadata along with your photo.
user brain wave mapping is a legitimate 'social media' application *right now*...
it's cool! but we just have to hold tight to our rights!
>error: that fingerprint has been used for this account before, please use a fingerprint that is different from the last 3 fingerprints used for this account
Albini wasn't some shiny knight in white armor protecting Nirvana from the *evil* record label! That is a fiction!
And as your evidence, you present some *fucking dumb* quotation from some Jack Edino who has *absolutely* nothing to do with the band.
You're inventing a narrative to justify your actions retroactively.
You can't trip and fall over your own shoelaces and then afterwards pretend you did it on purpose....
Nirvana was getting pulled in *all* directions but from interviews there is ABSOLUTELY ZERO evidence in the historical record, besides from what you Albini have said and done, to indicate there was a significant disagreement between the band and their label about the album.
Just accept it.
Look, I love that you have nice recording shit and let humble indie and punk bands use it for cheap...but that doesn't make you some DIY punk godfather...that's normal shit that we all do.
Also, I love that you have a consistent sound in your engineering work.
Keep the good stuff and just get rid of this shit about how you fucking saved Nirvana from the evil record companies!
They wanted the masters b/c they wanted to adjust the sound...Nirvana wanted to...not the label...Nirvana....you can't process that b/c it punctures your little fiction-bubble of this big controversy
Just let it the fuck go
one obviously way worse than the other...
both inserted themselves into Nirvana's business b/c of their own ego
If Albini is the uber-purist and only cares about the music why did he insert himself into Nirvana's relations with their people?
His own ego...IMHO he couldn't process the cognitive dissonance of having his bullshit quasi-scene theories put to the test with a *real* band
His little 'meh I only take a flat fee b/c I'm a purist'
He's obviously the type that does w/e the fuck they want and retroactively cast themselves as the 'level-headed good guy'
He interfered...he butted in and caused problems where there was none all through In Utero's release
the situation...in a self-aggrandizing, 'look-at-how-punk-rock-I-am' egotistical way...
Albini can't be both of these things you say simultaneously
and
So is he 'just about the recording' or is he the kind that inserts himself into non-existent 'big label battles'?
If Albini was a pure engineer, why why why did he ever, ever ever have any involvement with dealings between the Band and *their* people?
He's a curmudgeon...and got way involved in dealings that were not his business
Hello Mr. Steve Albini AC...I am not trolling...I'm making informed analysis of a music production worker and his best known work. I *do* however accuse you of trolling the whole music industry...
If you want more proof of what you did, go to this comment:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4182985&cid=44792099
I linked to it in the post you replied to, but from the text of your response it seems you didn't look at it.
I *do* think there is plenty of evidence from your own interviews to surmise that you were angry that you didn't take points, and that you basically just overturned the board game when it was clear you weren't going to come out as "mr awesome scene guy"...
Working with Nirvana pushed you and showed your failings...you didn't learn a thing from it...
(ps...I *really* think Albini himself may have written this...if not sorry)
perfect...absolutely perfect...of course he wants to be a called a "recordist" ha!
yep...I agree there ain't nothing wrong with that...Nirvana probably chose him for just that reason...I certainly love everything about In Utero's sound and his skills in studio were def a big part of it
right I agree...it should be evaluated...
and disregarded...that's your problem...
the state of the art is digital...his statements are 'contrarian' as TFA admits itself
**the burden of proof is on him and you**
and it is foolish not to look at other reasons than the explicitly stated reasons for his opinion
what the fsk are you talking about?
what? i never advocated being monolinguistic...I used to teach Korean to Americans in Korea just for this purpose...you're way off
**my point** was that in a research lab of Moroccans, Aussies, French, Chinese, Japanese, Indian, and Argentinian researchers the common language is **English** and will be for at least the next 100 years
I speak Spanish and Korean, woop de damn doo! It doesn't mean shit when I'm in a work group with a Japanese, Tunisian, and French person.
**They all speak English.**
When those nationalities working in a lab all by default speak Chinese, then maybe you'll have some sort of point to make...but don't hold your breath this century
technically, yes you are "right" that when asked in an interview with a tech magazine, Albini answered as you say...
however, parent is right...Albini is biased by his own expertise...
And his studio went bankrupt... AFTER In Utero...usually people can live for the rest of their lives on residuals from a work that successful...
So the theory that he's pimping 'analog' because of an investment in analog equipment and resistance (or financial inability) to change actually has quite a bit of merit.
Sure, his opinion is noteworthy...but as we note it, we can also disregard it without disregarding his artistic work...
The whole reason he is even asked about this stuff is his connection to Nirvana...and he only worked on one national release album after In Utero...that has to tell you something
Albini is not a trustworthy opinion on this stuff...
He is a disciplined **studio engineer** but he only worked on *one* national release album after In Utero...because he's actually kind of a douchenozzle...
Here's a post from another thread that gets into detail that I wrote...
The point is, I don't trust technical opinions from people who can't see beyond their own expertise...
Here's a recent interview he gave: http://vishkhanna.com/2013/08/16/ep-24-steve-albini/
He's the bad kind of luddite audiophile...the guy who understand waveforms and shit but really just likes to thrown around their expertise b/c it gives them social power...they always hear things that are 'obvious' that no one hears adn they love it...
Also, this caught my eye in your comment:
and *you* remind me of the old, lazy tenure Prof. who teaches a course on tech business but can't check his own email...
that scenario you present is a common trope of human behavior...just as often that 19 yr old college classmate drops out and starts their own company...
in my experience teaching HCI at WSU-Vancouver I never encountered a scenario like you describe...sure I had 'know it all's' who like to hear themselves be smart...but my job as an educator is to focus that into productive work...
a good prof doesn't need to bring out credentials to sit a sophomoric undergrad down
he kept the In Utero masters from the label until Krist Novoselic called him personally ...Abili's contrarian attitude is well documented in the music industry...he's kind of a 'troll' on the industry, flying the flag of 'scene purity' but really just being a douchenozzle who like the sound of his own voice
about your wikipedia info, it is interesting to note that Albini didn't work with any national artists after Nirvana's In Utero (heh...one exception...Bush's Razorblade Suitcase which makes sense)
Albini got alot of milage out of speechifying about 'punk rock purity' and whatnot, but if you read further in the wiki you'll note the story about how he sat on the In Utero masters and even gave an interview where he said he thought the label was interfering too much and the album would never get released
IMHO he was secretly pissed he opted for a flat fee for In Utero instead of points (which would be in the $Millions now) and so just decided to fuck shit up and flip the board over...all the while yammering about 'not selling out'
Albini gives an recent interview here: http://vishkhanna.com/2013/08/16/ep-24-steve-albini/
where he gets into the controversy a bit...still never cops to what he did completely...
he's a weird egg...he genuinely a good sound engineer, which is all Nirvana needed for In Utero...but he seems like the kind of guy that would just sink a team working on a project...
and I don't trust advice from people like this on technology...they are way too biased by their own expertise!
yeah for sure...Chinese might be a great language to use to push yourself b/c it is so idiomatic
I'd even go as far to say that learning an idiomatic language or sign language might be very good sort of 'cross training' for a techie, especially coders
for me, writing code is like the exact opposite of learning an idiomatic language...
I have tried to pick up on how Arabic and Thai work in written form lately, and I learned Korean (which is the worlds most modern and easiest to learn language) and I feel it has improved my reading speed and visual dexterity greatly...
Learning weird languages teaches you to scan a document quickly in new ways...very good for coding I think!