all art that can be digitally reproduced will be done by volunteers as there is no way to professionalize art that can be digitally reproduced.
Actually there is a way to get paid for content. Subscriptions. Quite a few websites sell subscriptions, Salon provides free access to some things but to get full access, legally, you have to subscribe. I know this is Slashdot but look at dating sites. According to ComsumerRankings.com the top 5 dating sites have more than 60,000,000 subscribers.
Use subscriptions for entertainment, we already do. Cable or satellite TV, net access, netflix, and others are subscription based. Using the net it's possible to get a large audience, the problem for small unknown productions is marketing.
As for whether anything like this would work for small independent performers or groups I don't know, at least for actors, musicians, and other performers.
iTunes will only sell you MP3s and all their video offerings are DRMed.
You don't know what you're talking about. Apple sells files in MP3, AIFF, WAV, MPEG-4, AAC and Apple Lossless formats. iTunes also sells DRMless downloads, "At the 2009 Macworld Conference & Expo, it was announced that the iTunes Music Store would be DRM-free, with conversion complete by April 2009."
The cost of duplication is not zero. You pay for your Internet connection, right? The cost is very small, but it is not zero.
You first argue against copyright, but here you're giving reasons why copyrights are good. You want content creators to work for free while others get to benefit. Do you work for pay or do you volunteer?
the world changes. not everyone benefits. deal with it. the consumer is king, and he/ she decides, and you follow what they say, end of story. and what the consumer has decided is that the entire edifice of laws, infrastructure and conglomerates that existed off of the pre-internet media distribution model has been rendered null and void. you are extinct
Tyranny of the masses
now fuck off and die already. your death throes are annoying, dinosaur.
What is your qualification to make that statement?
No I don't have a reference, go look one up yourself.
You're the one making statements as fact, if you want to convince people you have to provide3 evidence to back up your position. Just saying "go look it up yourself" shows either you have no intension of convincing others or you're talking shit, trolling.
Spewing babble from Wikipedia like that just proves how little you know.
I don't know where you are but around here, Minneapolis/St Paul, cable and satellite companies advertise DVRs, "record one show while watching another." On my desk I have an ad from DirecTV, because the cable company keeps on increasing cable fees I may switch to satellite, saying "you can easily set your home DVR to record from any cell phone or computer."
Wherever they're making DVRs illegal I don't want to go to.
the pills cost cents to make, but determining of they are safe costs hundreds of millions of dollars, plus lots of waste on stuff that doesn't pan out.
Bad example. The pharmaceutical industry spend much more on marketing than on research. The pharmaceutical industry doesn't even spend money to develop some drugs. The National Cancer Institute spent $183 million to develop and test the cancer drug Taxol. In 1988-9 Bristol-Myers Squibb(BMS) paid the NCI $43 million for exclusive rights to Taxol, $140 less than taxpayers paid for it. By 2000 BMS was making almost a billion dollars a year on Taxol. One dose of Taxol cost less than a dollar to make but one treatment cost thousands of dollars.
Don't tell me drug companies spend a lot to develop drugs.
I would still download torrents of it instead of paying for cable, because I believe great art should be a labor of love, unsullied by commercial interests:-D
How many movies or recordings have you made and given away as a labor of love? Don't you think your boss wants you to work for the love of it? How much tyme do you spend volunteering? Or is it you want your entertainment free but want be paid for your labor?
And why, praytell, does a major production have to cost $250 million? District 9, one of the most profitable and enjoyable movies of the year, cost a whopping $30 million to make.
Why prey tell spend tens of thousands of dollars buying a computer system when a dime store computer will do? Why spend $30 million when The Blair Witch Project took less than $1 million to make yet grossed almost $250 million? Indepencence Day took $75 million to make but grossed more than $800 million worldwide. Titanic's budget was $200 million and it's revenue was almost $2 billion.
Airplanes fly and get hit by lightning all the time.
Airplanes are not grounded except when they are on the ground too. A space elevator would have to be grounded. Also lightning is suspected in the crash of an Air France flight from Brazil to France. 228 people are dead from that.
They can make conductive and non conductive carbon nanotubes you know.
Do you have a reference for this? Next, how big would it have to be to conduct enough electricity? And what would it's weight/strength ratio be?
A conductor long enough to stretch from the ground to geostationary orbit is also long enough to conduct ionized energy from the ionosphere and magnetosphere to the ground as well.
If a viewer drops the TV subscription & keeps the internet, that's a small loss.
I'm contemplating that now. Currently I have both cable access and TV, but while my access fees have gone down my TV subscription has gone up. From the prices I've seen I can get satellite TV cheaper. I'll check into the details but if satellite is cheaper and the conditions aren't too much of a hassle I'll switch. I can also check into getting DSL as well, I'm one of the lucky few who live in an area with both cable and DSL access.
That might be true if everyone could get DSL, but most people can't. My sister lives close enough to the switch to get DSL but the cables to her home are bad. Nobody on her street can get DSL because of this. Now how many don't live close enough to get DSL? Cable reaches more people. And with DOCSIS 3.0 cable can get speeds of 343.04 (304) Mbit/s downstream and 122.88 (108) Mbit/s upstream. Of course fiber sets the speed record but even fewer people can get it.
what is the ethical reason one should expect to be paid for, say, a movie?
Because it costs money to make the movie. If you don't want to pay don't watch it. At the same tyme copyrights shouldn't be nearly as long as they are. The reasons copyrights exist is to encourage creation of works of art. Artists can't create any more art after they're dead. Heck just having copyrights last until death does nothing to encourage more creations. You encourage more by reducing the length of copyrights not making them longer. The shorter they are the more people will have to create to keep making money.
It still has to support it's own weight, unless you're going to make the whole thing larger increasing the weight even more.
What problem with static electricity?
Have you even seen what lightening, yes static electricity, can do? I was sitting in the bed of a pickup truck once when lightening hit a tree on the side of the road just as we were passing by. We just got a gleams of it then but we went back later and the tree was split. I wouldn't have wanted to be under it.
Yes, but this is more like losing all of Cape Canaveral and Houston whenever a bolt breaks in a Space Shuttle during liftoff.
If Challenger has blown up a minute earlier than it did you may of seen Kennedy seriously damaged. That's right a minute. Instead of blowing up on the pad or withing seconds of launch where it could cause damage, it blew up 73 seconds after liftoff.
I recall that day, I went to class late to watch the launch, being in Orlando as long as the eastern view wasn't blocked we had good views of launches from the Cape. A minute after it went up those of us watching had an unusual sight, a split into a "Y". A bunch of us ran back inside to see what they were saying on TV, about how it exploded. After watching the news for a few minutes a couple of use went to our class, in physics, to announce what happened. What made some in the class angry was when the professor said it would be on TV all day so we should get back to the class subject. If what happened didn't have to do with physics then what did it have to do with? Another physics professor I had would have worked it into the class, perhaps by asking for theories of what went wrong, if there was a physics problem.
With that said, the trick is that the cable doesn't need to be anywhere near a foot in diameter, at least to start.
Could a cable of less than a foot in diameter carry the weight of 23,000 miles of cable? I know it wouldn't need to be it's full thickness right away, only enough to bare twice it's own weight as well as a crawler. Then as a crawler goes up it can bring more cable thus thickening it. Successive crawlers can add more and more cabling. That or crawlers can be lifted into orbit along with the cable which then crawls down the cable adding more. Perhaps have crawlers going up and down.
The whole point of putting the top anchor into geostationary orbit is so it hangs directly overhead without putting stress on the cable.
The upper or space end has to go beyond geostationary orbit. The dock or platform would be in geostationary orbit but a counterweight has to go considerable farther than that.
Energize part of the elevator and use that to power the vehicle, it's a tested and proven method for transportation on the ground and involves a lot less variables and expense.
Yea, that works perfectly fine on the ground where the cables do not have to bare the weight of 23,000 miles of cable. I bet you couldn't lift one end of a 50 mile long cable up in the air and let the bottom dangle off the ground, it'd snap before it ever got that high. But if you did you'd have a hell of a ground for static electricity like lightening.
Not if they make it out of them fancy nano tubes (they already do) and incorporate it into the structure itself (they already can).
And make the whole cable or ribbon conductive? Someone up above mentioned how doing this will electrically connect the atmosphere and space with the ground, like them I wonder what effect this would have. What would lightening do for instance? More than Benjamin Franklin's kite I bet.
It is possible to provide some electricity through the carbon nanotubes themselves, but the conversion rate is not great. Solar power would be nice, but would require huge fins which dramatically increase the weight of the climber. Beamed power solves most issues.
Beam solar power. Some Slashdotters like to talk about satellites beaming solar power to the ground, well why not combine this with the space elevator? Beam power down to a receiving station near the space elevator pad and use it to drive the laser.
IMO tho, nuclear batteries will make this whole debate obsolete.;)
And where will these batteries be? In the payload carrier, where they take up space and weight? I can see it now, the uproar over nuclear materials, people opposed the launch of Cassini with its nuclear generator.
To give you some idea of the scales involved, even traveling at the targetted 5m/sec speed continuously, it would take the climber nearly 3 MONTHS to get to geosynchronous height of approx 35,000 km.
That speed, 5m/sec, is only the start. Once that goal is met then they plan to work on 10m/sec. Also as the cabin, payload carrier, climbs it loses weight and so can go faster.
Slashdot Mirror
all art that can be digitally reproduced will be done by volunteers as there is no way to professionalize art that can be digitally reproduced.
Actually there is a way to get paid for content. Subscriptions. Quite a few websites sell subscriptions, Salon provides free access to some things but to get full access, legally, you have to subscribe. I know this is Slashdot but look at dating sites. According to ComsumerRankings.com the top 5 dating sites have more than 60,000,000 subscribers.
Use subscriptions for entertainment, we already do. Cable or satellite TV, net access, netflix, and others are subscription based. Using the net it's possible to get a large audience, the problem for small unknown productions is marketing.
As for whether anything like this would work for small independent performers or groups I don't know, at least for actors, musicians, and other performers.
Falcon
iTunes will only sell you MP3s and all their video offerings are DRMed.
You don't know what you're talking about. Apple sells files in MP3, AIFF, WAV, MPEG-4, AAC and Apple Lossless formats. iTunes also sells DRMless downloads, "At the 2009 Macworld Conference & Expo, it was announced that the iTunes Music Store would be DRM-free, with conversion complete by April 2009."
FUD
Falcon
The cost of duplication is not zero. You pay for your Internet connection, right? The cost is very small, but it is not zero.
You first argue against copyright, but here you're giving reasons why copyrights are good. You want content creators to work for free while others get to benefit. Do you work for pay or do you volunteer?
Falcon
the world changes. not everyone benefits. deal with it. the consumer is king, and he/ she decides, and you follow what they say, end of story. and what the consumer has decided is that the entire edifice of laws, infrastructure and conglomerates that existed off of the pre-internet media distribution model has been rendered null and void. you are extinct
Tyranny of the masses
now fuck off and die already. your death throes are annoying, dinosaur.
Freeloader. Communism died.
Falcon
Lightning won't be a fucking issue.
What is your qualification to make that statement?
No I don't have a reference, go look one up yourself.
You're the one making statements as fact, if you want to convince people you have to provide3 evidence to back up your position. Just saying "go look it up yourself" shows either you have no intension of convincing others or you're talking shit, trolling.
Spewing babble from Wikipedia like that just proves how little you know.
Trolling
Falcon
legislating DVR's out of existence.
I don't know where you are but around here, Minneapolis/St Paul, cable and satellite companies advertise DVRs, "record one show while watching another." On my desk I have an ad from DirecTV, because the cable company keeps on increasing cable fees I may switch to satellite, saying "you can easily set your home DVR to record from any cell phone or computer."
Wherever they're making DVRs illegal I don't want to go to.
Falcon
the pills cost cents to make, but determining of they are safe costs hundreds of millions of dollars, plus lots of waste on stuff that doesn't pan out.
Bad example. The pharmaceutical industry spend much more on marketing than on research. The pharmaceutical industry doesn't even spend money to develop some drugs. The National Cancer Institute spent $183 million to develop and test the cancer drug Taxol. In 1988-9 Bristol-Myers Squibb(BMS) paid the NCI $43 million for exclusive rights to Taxol, $140 less than taxpayers paid for it. By 2000 BMS was making almost a billion dollars a year on Taxol. One dose of Taxol cost less than a dollar to make but one treatment cost thousands of dollars.
Don't tell me drug companies spend a lot to develop drugs.
Falcon
Too much? If I had the money I'd spend 3 tymes that on vinyl I like. I'd pay $30 for The White Album or $50 for some of Bachman-Turner Overdrive, BTO, records. "Let It Ride", You Ain't Seen Nothing Yet, Takin' Care of Business
Falcon
I would still download torrents of it instead of paying for cable, because I believe great art should be a labor of love, unsullied by commercial interests :-D
How many movies or recordings have you made and given away as a labor of love? Don't you think your boss wants you to work for the love of it? How much tyme do you spend volunteering? Or is it you want your entertainment free but want be paid for your labor?
Falcon
And why, praytell, does a major production have to cost $250 million? District 9, one of the most profitable and enjoyable movies of the year, cost a whopping $30 million to make.
Why prey tell spend tens of thousands of dollars buying a computer system when a dime store computer will do? Why spend $30 million when The Blair Witch Project took less than $1 million to make yet grossed almost $250 million? Indepencence Day took $75 million to make but grossed more than $800 million worldwide. Titanic's budget was $200 million and it's revenue was almost $2 billion.
Falcon
Airplanes fly and get hit by lightning all the time.
Airplanes are not grounded except when they are on the ground too. A space elevator would have to be grounded. Also lightning is suspected in the crash of an Air France flight from Brazil to France. 228 people are dead from that.
They can make conductive and non conductive carbon nanotubes you know.
Do you have a reference for this? Next, how big would it have to be to conduct enough electricity? And what would it's weight/strength ratio be?
A conductor long enough to stretch from the ground to geostationary orbit is also long enough to conduct ionized energy from the ionosphere and magnetosphere to the ground as well.
Falcon
If a viewer drops the TV subscription & keeps the internet, that's a small loss.
I'm contemplating that now. Currently I have both cable access and TV, but while my access fees have gone down my TV subscription has gone up. From the prices I've seen I can get satellite TV cheaper. I'll check into the details but if satellite is cheaper and the conditions aren't too much of a hassle I'll switch. I can also check into getting DSL as well, I'm one of the lucky few who live in an area with both cable and DSL access.
Falcon
That might be true if everyone could get DSL, but most people can't. My sister lives close enough to the switch to get DSL but the cables to her home are bad. Nobody on her street can get DSL because of this. Now how many don't live close enough to get DSL? Cable reaches more people. And with DOCSIS 3.0 cable can get speeds of 343.04 (304) Mbit/s downstream and 122.88 (108) Mbit/s upstream. Of course fiber sets the speed record but even fewer people can get it.
Falcon
what is the ethical reason one should expect to be paid for, say, a movie?
Because it costs money to make the movie. If you don't want to pay don't watch it. At the same tyme copyrights shouldn't be nearly as long as they are. The reasons copyrights exist is to encourage creation of works of art. Artists can't create any more art after they're dead. Heck just having copyrights last until death does nothing to encourage more creations. You encourage more by reducing the length of copyrights not making them longer. The shorter they are the more people will have to create to keep making money.
Falcon
Make the conduit part of the structure.
It still has to support it's own weight, unless you're going to make the whole thing larger increasing the weight even more.
What problem with static electricity?
Have you even seen what lightening, yes static electricity, can do? I was sitting in the bed of a pickup truck once when lightening hit a tree on the side of the road just as we were passing by. We just got a gleams of it then but we went back later and the tree was split. I wouldn't have wanted to be under it.
Falcon
just the conduit.
The conduit still has to run the full length rubber whale.
Falcon
Yes, but this is more like losing all of Cape Canaveral and Houston whenever a bolt breaks in a Space Shuttle during liftoff.
If Challenger has blown up a minute earlier than it did you may of seen Kennedy seriously damaged. That's right a minute. Instead of blowing up on the pad or withing seconds of launch where it could cause damage, it blew up 73 seconds after liftoff.
I recall that day, I went to class late to watch the launch, being in Orlando as long as the eastern view wasn't blocked we had good views of launches from the Cape. A minute after it went up those of us watching had an unusual sight, a split into a "Y". A bunch of us ran back inside to see what they were saying on TV, about how it exploded. After watching the news for a few minutes a couple of use went to our class, in physics, to announce what happened. What made some in the class angry was when the professor said it would be on TV all day so we should get back to the class subject. If what happened didn't have to do with physics then what did it have to do with? Another physics professor I had would have worked it into the class, perhaps by asking for theories of what went wrong, if there was a physics problem.
Falcon
With that said, the trick is that the cable doesn't need to be anywhere near a foot in diameter, at least to start.
Could a cable of less than a foot in diameter carry the weight of 23,000 miles of cable? I know it wouldn't need to be it's full thickness right away, only enough to bare twice it's own weight as well as a crawler. Then as a crawler goes up it can bring more cable thus thickening it. Successive crawlers can add more and more cabling. That or crawlers can be lifted into orbit along with the cable which then crawls down the cable adding more. Perhaps have crawlers going up and down.
Falcon
The whole point of putting the top anchor into geostationary orbit is so it hangs directly overhead without putting stress on the cable.
The upper or space end has to go beyond geostationary orbit. The dock or platform would be in geostationary orbit but a counterweight has to go considerable farther than that.
Falcon
How can they do something that cool, and not make a video of it??
Where's the video??
Here are some vidoes. Warning that first one may make you dizzy.
Falcon
We want to build an unsupported vertical cable 20,000 miles long capable of not only supporting it's own trillion pound weight
No, more than twice as long, however the full weight of the mass does not have to be supported.
but also last forever without maintenance (it could not be repaired)
Crawlers could repair it.
be absolutely foolproof (the consequences of failure would be catastrophic beyond imagining)
Falcon
Energize part of the elevator and use that to power the vehicle, it's a tested and proven method for transportation on the ground and involves a lot less variables and expense.
Yea, that works perfectly fine on the ground where the cables do not have to bare the weight of 23,000 miles of cable. I bet you couldn't lift one end of a 50 mile long cable up in the air and let the bottom dangle off the ground, it'd snap before it ever got that high. But if you did you'd have a hell of a ground for static electricity like lightening.
Falcon
Not if they make it out of them fancy nano tubes (they already do) and incorporate it into the structure itself (they already can).
And make the whole cable or ribbon conductive? Someone up above mentioned how doing this will electrically connect the atmosphere and space with the ground, like them I wonder what effect this would have. What would lightening do for instance? More than Benjamin Franklin's kite I bet.
Falcon
It is possible to provide some electricity through the carbon nanotubes themselves, but the conversion rate is not great. Solar power would be nice, but would require huge fins which dramatically increase the weight of the climber. Beamed power solves most issues.
Beam solar power. Some Slashdotters like to talk about satellites beaming solar power to the ground, well why not combine this with the space elevator? Beam power down to a receiving station near the space elevator pad and use it to drive the laser.
IMO tho, nuclear batteries will make this whole debate obsolete. ;)
And where will these batteries be? In the payload carrier, where they take up space and weight? I can see it now, the uproar over nuclear materials, people opposed the launch of Cassini with its nuclear generator.
Falcon
To give you some idea of the scales involved, even traveling at the targetted 5m/sec speed continuously, it would take the climber nearly 3 MONTHS to get to geosynchronous height of approx 35,000 km.
That speed, 5m/sec, is only the start. Once that goal is met then they plan to work on 10m/sec. Also as the cabin, payload carrier, climbs it loses weight and so can go faster.
Falcon