If the music industry collapsed tomorrow, barring the initial shockwave, what harm would it do?
I mean, people would continue to create and perform music, and people would continue to listen to it. "Music" does not need a financial incentive to exist--and let me elaborate on that.
First, it is no longer prohibitively expensive for individuals to produce studio-quality music. Awesome, awesome software can be had for mere hundreds of dollars. People spend thousands on hobbies (hello video games)--what's five hundred bucks to a passionate musician?
Second, with P2P, YouTube, etc., distribution--massive distribution, to a mainstream audience--is free.
Now, if some dude wants to quit his day job and make a living off his musical ability, well that's what touring's for. Performing live is real work, that provides a real service, that people can be expected to pay for. Also, there is money to be made producing soundtracks for movies and games, or jingles for commercials, or the Windows XP startup sound.
"Bands" creating "albums" (or 3-minute, 32-bar "singles"), and retiring off the royalties, is not a natural process. It worked for a while, and congrats to those who caught the wave, but music, and the enjoyment thereof, is a natural process, and it will continue with or without pinstripe suits.
Wait, I have an idea. Let's continue the transition from HTML to XML, and give the standards bodies their own namespace (e.g., "std"). Want to mark up an article in a way that's meaningful to search engines? Use std:article. Couldn't be simpler!
I recently became aware of the fact that I am significantly less concerned about terrorism than I am about our (United Statesians') increasingly invasive government. What the hell does that mean?
Well, what about all the people that laughed at the video (especially the various "remixes")? Because that's what this is about, right? It's not the fact that the video was digitized and posted on the Internet, it's the fact that people thought it was funny...much to Ghyslain's dismay. And speaking of Ghyslian's dismay, even Slashdot refers to him as the "Star Wars Kid". I'm sure he appreciates that. So the problem here, really, is people's twisted sense of humor - and its effect on Gyslain. I mean, why should a fat kid wielding a fake light saber and making mouth noises amuse us? Well, to answer an honest question, I think the reason is because, to a certain extent, we can identify with Gyslain. We understand the mouth noises, and when we laugh, we're not laughing at him so much as we're laughing at our collective self for being so silly. It's...it's love. And just so you know, I was picked on relentlessly in jr. high and high school (a different bully every year), and I hated it. High school was hell, but I've grown up a lot since then. I hope Raza's parents buy him a fucking home entertainment system with all that settlement money and he goes on to live a rich and fulfilling life.
Yeah, tell me all about Notepad... I want to be able to use it for simple tasks, because it's light weight and it's built right in to Windows, but Notepad has major issues. Anyone else have that problem where, if you resize the window, the text doesn't wrap correctly? It'll have extra line breaks, sometimes it'll actually double over itself (?!), or your cursor will skip past the end of the document ('cause it turns out there's a bunch of duplicate, invisible text). I've experienced all of these problems and more on different computers with completely different installations of Windows, so it's definitely bad software and not some kind of cosmic radiation er sumthin'. I guess what I'm trying to say is, it just boggles my mind how a software company worth billions can't even handle Notepad. Given their track record, Microsoft will have to work doubly hard to impress me this time around.
I think it is very possible that a human could build a machine that would have the abilities to extend its awareness beyond our own, do you have any reason to doubt this?
I believe that someday we may build machines that are aware. What I do not understand is where awareness comes from. If human beings are nothing more than complex chemical machines, well, how do interactions between electron shells equal consciousness? It's a bit like saying:
(x + y) / z = a piece of cheese
On one half of the equation, you've got a mathematical formula. On the other half, you've got...curdled milk. What's the correlation?! You follow? What I'm sayin' is, chemistry and awareness don't seem to be related (at all), except for the fact that all the conscious beings I've ever met have also been chemical machines. But then, they've also all had teeth. So, is it teeth? Is that where consciousness originates? I'm sorry if I sound a little incoherent, it's just that I have so many more questions than answers.
I'll tell you what I do know: I am aware. I assume you're aware, but I can't possibly know for sure. I wonder if things that I don't normally think of as being aware are aware. Like trees, for example. In any case, I still don't have any idea why we're aware. And everything I know about the brain—about neurons and dendrites and synapses—doesn't begin to explain it for me.
A robotic pet would be much easier to train, because it would have a more intuitive learning system, that works the way a human would think that a pet should learn.
Hm. But isn't one of the more meaningful aspects of life (and of the Universe) that it doesn't always do what we think it should? A pet that behaves in a perfectly predictable way would be...well, boring. Uninspiring. I mean, what if all the things we thought should be were? What if atoms were indivisible little dots of matter as we once suspected? Instead, they have a deeper complexity that we could not've imagined just a couple hundred years ago. And for that they are all the more beautiful.
I want my car to behave in a predictable way because it's a tool that I depend on to get things done. My friends and my pets serve a much greater purpose, and their unpredictability, their individuality, is crucial. Robotic pets are fun toys, but are no replacement for life.
You know, put another way: What if we were all just robots? Not actually aware of ourselves or our surroundings? What would be the point of the Universe with nothing around to experience it? Just a bunch of machines carrying out their preprogrammed destinies, and no one would ever know... Yuck, what a waste.
What does science have to say about awareness? Anything? I mean, isn't awareness kind of a big deal? If we start with the simplest creatures—self-replicating proteins—and procede to bacteria, then insects, then, finally, the most complex creatures that we know of: ourselves—well, at what point does awareness begin? Are there degrees of awareness? Is awareness a function of life, or vice versa?
What I'm getting at is, you say God had to come from something else. I ask, is that consistant with our current understanding of awareness? I don't have any answers myself, but I wonder, how long can science continue to ignore consciousness before it finds its collective self against a brick wall?
Thanks for putting it gently. Part of the reason I have trouble understanding this security stuff is that it's all hypothetical to me. I've been a Windows user since 3.1 (since DOS, really) and I have never had a virus. I don't run virus software, and I only just recently started using a firewall, even though I've been on the Internet since the mid-'90s. Hehe, literally. Common sense is my weapon of choice.
And before anyone says something to the extent, Well how do you know you've never had a virus?—I use Housecall from time to time just to be sure.
My understanding of the situation is that Windows (since NT) incoporates an effective, user-level security system, that's simply not enabled out of the box. So, there's no need to retro-fit security. What is needed is a better default configuration. I have worked on Windows boxes that are at least as locked down as [pick your flavor] Linux, but it took effort on the part of a knowledgeable administrator. Most home users (myself included) are not knowledgeable enough, in part because so much of Windows is so interconnected—i.e. one executable requires specific functionality from maybe a dozen DLLs. I mean, if I knew exactly what I was doing, one of the first things I'd do is make whole sections of the Registry read-only.
My last few mod points expired earlier today, so let me just say that you make all kinds of sense, brotha. I (and plenty of people I know) totally agree with you. Personal responsibility is a wonderful thing—more parents should practice what they been preaching to their kids all along.
Am I the only one in the world who didn't use Napster because I'd already discovered that other service and it was so much freakin' better? Does anyone know what I'm talking about? I can't remember the name of it, but it wasn't iMesh or any of the current P2P networks. No, these guys got shut down shortly before Napster did. They had a really nice client, and all kinds of content, not just MP3s.
If I remember correctly, they cached the files on their servers, so if you had broadband, you got blazing fast download speeds. It had to have been around '99 or 2000, 'cause I was living with my ex at the time. Argh. It frustrates me to no end that I never hear anyone mention it in these Napster discussions. It was the bomb.
Fatal1ty plays _so_ often that he is basically one with the game... he knows every nook and cranny of every map and knows exactly which weapon to use in every situtation... he also has an uncanny ability to predict the behaviour of his foe.
I haven't been phenominally good at a video game since Descent. I'll never understand why 2D FPSes (where you're chained to the ground by gravity) surpassed in popularity the 360 degree, 3-dimensional freedom of the Descent series. Anyhoo, if you ever got your ass handed to you by a guy named "Nexus"... well, that was me.;-)
OK, help me out here. If I undergo gene therapy, and, as a result, every strand of DNA in my body includes some patented sequence of nucleotides, do I become the property of whatever corporation holds the patent? Am I then breaking the law when my cells divide without that corporation's consent? Will I have to pay royalties?
If I'm a farmer, and some genetically altered pollen blows over my crops, does that make me a criminal? Or can I just sue Monsanto for tresspassing?
Maybe the answers are obvious to a lawyer, but not to me. They say ignorance of the law is no excuse, but how can anyone understand such complicated laws? So, help me out here. Anyone?
That last sentence (and the fact that you've been modded up) took the wind right out of me. I hope you were being sarcastic. I hope you understand that there's a difference between copying data and stealing CDs from the local Best Buy. And I hope you understand that there's a difference between A) downloading music for your own personal enjoyment, and B) repackaging and selling that music for a profit--because that's piracy.
"Right" and "wrong" are not arbitrary concepts. They make sense within a given context. So use your freakin' head! I mean, if they could, the RIAA would have you believe that remembering a song without compensating the publisher (er, artist) is criminal behavior. Are you gonna buy that? I'm afraid I already know the answer.
I don't buy a lot of movies (don't watch a lot either), but I'm seriously considering going back to VHS for all future purchases. The only problem I've ever had with VHS cassettes is the tracking. DVDs, however, have inaudible vocal tracks, forced previews, sluggish and/or buggy interfaces, and a host of restrictions on what features you can use and when. Many is the time I've just wanted to WATCH THE FRIGGEN MOVIE, but I can't, because I have to sit through piracy warnings in 8 languages (I'm only slightly exagerating) and obnoxiously long introductions to the MAIN MENU. Ripping, editing, and reburning offending DVDs is one solution, but it's time consuming and, oh yeah, ILLEGAL. Argh!
Next you'll declare that all employees care about, by definition, is their paycheck -- therefore they don't care if their job consists of beating children with baseball bats, as long as it pays the bills.
Ah... This is a little OT, but I doubt most people care (or care to know) where their money's actually coming from. Chances are, whoever you work for, that a portion of your paycheck is made possible by unsavory business practices. And, with the complex web of corporate ownership that we have today,... Well, the amount of time and effort it would take for you to insure that your employer's employer's employer's ethics are in line with your own is more than most of us can spare.
I'm not going to address this issue directly. Instead, let me say that I am surprised--and disappointed--by the number of people (on Slashdot, no less!) who can't see the value of questioning authority. I am sick and tired of watching my rights crumble away while I am more or less powerless to do anything about it. And I say "more or less powerless" for this reason:
For all of you who think that "getting out and voting" is the solution to everything that's wrong with this country, let me ask you one simple question: How do you know that your vote is being counted? I have no proof whatsoever, other than that I handed the nice lady my ballot and she put it in a box. In fact, I have a great deal of *circumstantial* evidence which suggests that my vote is NOT being counted, when all of my friends and family fervently disagree with a piece of proposed legislation, but it becomes law anyway. Even though tens of thousands of people are involved in the tallying process, those tallies eventually converge into a single point, or handful of points--it's not unreasonable to suspect tampering.
My point is that things are happening in this country without the consent of the people who actually own it. Replace "this country" with "your own home" and maybe then it'll start to sink in. Can we expect a corrupt system to be the solution to itself? In order to affect change, we have to step outside the system--outside the box. If that means doing things that people don't like, so motherf*cking be it! Just to be clear, I'm NOT advocating violent revolution (at this point) or infringing upon the rights of others. I AM advocating ruffling feathers. And I appreciate the elegance of Mann's approach: essentially, pointing a gun at the head of the man who's pointing a gun at me asking him, "Is this really the only way?"
Slashdot Mirror
If the music industry collapsed tomorrow, barring the initial shockwave, what harm would it do?
I mean, people would continue to create and perform music, and people would continue to listen to it. "Music" does not need a financial incentive to exist--and let me elaborate on that.
First, it is no longer prohibitively expensive for individuals to produce studio-quality music. Awesome, awesome software can be had for mere hundreds of dollars. People spend thousands on hobbies (hello video games)--what's five hundred bucks to a passionate musician?
Second, with P2P, YouTube, etc., distribution--massive distribution, to a mainstream audience--is free.
Now, if some dude wants to quit his day job and make a living off his musical ability, well that's what touring's for. Performing live is real work, that provides a real service, that people can be expected to pay for. Also, there is money to be made producing soundtracks for movies and games, or jingles for commercials, or the Windows XP startup sound.
"Bands" creating "albums" (or 3-minute, 32-bar "singles"), and retiring off the royalties, is not a natural process. It worked for a while, and congrats to those who caught the wave, but music, and the enjoyment thereof, is a natural process, and it will continue with or without pinstripe suits.
Comments?
Wait, I have an idea. Let's continue the transition from HTML to XML, and give the standards bodies their own namespace (e.g., "std"). Want to mark up an article in a way that's meaningful to search engines? Use std:article. Couldn't be simpler!
I recently became aware of the fact that I am significantly less concerned about terrorism than I am about our (United Statesians') increasingly invasive government. What the hell does that mean?
Well, what about all the people that laughed at the video (especially the various "remixes")? Because that's what this is about, right? It's not the fact that the video was digitized and posted on the Internet, it's the fact that people thought it was funny...much to Ghyslain's dismay. And speaking of Ghyslian's dismay, even Slashdot refers to him as the "Star Wars Kid". I'm sure he appreciates that. So the problem here, really, is people's twisted sense of humor - and its effect on Gyslain. I mean, why should a fat kid wielding a fake light saber and making mouth noises amuse us? Well, to answer an honest question, I think the reason is because, to a certain extent, we can identify with Gyslain. We understand the mouth noises, and when we laugh, we're not laughing at him so much as we're laughing at our collective self for being so silly. It's...it's love. And just so you know, I was picked on relentlessly in jr. high and high school (a different bully every year), and I hated it. High school was hell, but I've grown up a lot since then. I hope Raza's parents buy him a fucking home entertainment system with all that settlement money and he goes on to live a rich and fulfilling life.
Yeah, tell me all about Notepad... I want to be able to use it for simple tasks, because it's light weight and it's built right in to Windows, but Notepad has major issues. Anyone else have that problem where, if you resize the window, the text doesn't wrap correctly? It'll have extra line breaks, sometimes it'll actually double over itself (?!), or your cursor will skip past the end of the document ('cause it turns out there's a bunch of duplicate, invisible text). I've experienced all of these problems and more on different computers with completely different installations of Windows, so it's definitely bad software and not some kind of cosmic radiation er sumthin'. I guess what I'm trying to say is, it just boggles my mind how a software company worth billions can't even handle Notepad. Given their track record, Microsoft will have to work doubly hard to impress me this time around.
I believe that someday we may build machines that are aware. What I do not understand is where awareness comes from. If human beings are nothing more than complex chemical machines, well, how do interactions between electron shells equal consciousness? It's a bit like saying:
On one half of the equation, you've got a mathematical formula. On the other half, you've got...curdled milk. What's the correlation?! You follow? What I'm sayin' is, chemistry and awareness don't seem to be related (at all), except for the fact that all the conscious beings I've ever met have also been chemical machines. But then, they've also all had teeth. So, is it teeth? Is that where consciousness originates? I'm sorry if I sound a little incoherent, it's just that I have so many more questions than answers.
I'll tell you what I do know: I am aware. I assume you're aware, but I can't possibly know for sure. I wonder if things that I don't normally think of as being aware are aware. Like trees, for example. In any case, I still don't have any idea why we're aware. And everything I know about the brain—about neurons and dendrites and synapses—doesn't begin to explain it for me.
Hm. But isn't one of the more meaningful aspects of life (and of the Universe) that it doesn't always do what we think it should? A pet that behaves in a perfectly predictable way would be...well, boring. Uninspiring. I mean, what if all the things we thought should be were? What if atoms were indivisible little dots of matter as we once suspected? Instead, they have a deeper complexity that we could not've imagined just a couple hundred years ago. And for that they are all the more beautiful.
I want my car to behave in a predictable way because it's a tool that I depend on to get things done. My friends and my pets serve a much greater purpose, and their unpredictability, their individuality, is crucial. Robotic pets are fun toys, but are no replacement for life.
You know, put another way: What if we were all just robots? Not actually aware of ourselves or our surroundings? What would be the point of the Universe with nothing around to experience it? Just a bunch of machines carrying out their preprogrammed destinies, and no one would ever know... Yuck, what a waste.
What does science have to say about awareness? Anything? I mean, isn't awareness kind of a big deal? If we start with the simplest creatures—self-replicating proteins—and procede to bacteria, then insects, then, finally, the most complex creatures that we know of: ourselves—well, at what point does awareness begin? Are there degrees of awareness? Is awareness a function of life, or vice versa?
What I'm getting at is, you say God had to come from something else. I ask, is that consistant with our current understanding of awareness? I don't have any answers myself, but I wonder, how long can science continue to ignore consciousness before it finds its collective self against a brick wall?
Food for thought.
Ah, but I wonder which demographic is most appealing to advertisers. After all, smart, rich people don't click on bullshit ads...do they?
Thanks for putting it gently. Part of the reason I have trouble understanding this security stuff is that it's all hypothetical to me. I've been a Windows user since 3.1 (since DOS, really) and I have never had a virus. I don't run virus software, and I only just recently started using a firewall, even though I've been on the Internet since the mid-'90s. Hehe, literally. Common sense is my weapon of choice.
And before anyone says something to the extent, Well how do you know you've never had a virus?—I use Housecall from time to time just to be sure.
My understanding of the situation is that Windows (since NT) incoporates an effective, user-level security system, that's simply not enabled out of the box. So, there's no need to retro-fit security. What is needed is a better default configuration. I have worked on Windows boxes that are at least as locked down as [pick your flavor] Linux, but it took effort on the part of a knowledgeable administrator. Most home users (myself included) are not knowledgeable enough, in part because so much of Windows is so interconnected—i.e. one executable requires specific functionality from maybe a dozen DLLs. I mean, if I knew exactly what I was doing, one of the first things I'd do is make whole sections of the Registry read-only.
My last few mod points expired earlier today, so let me just say that you make all kinds of sense, brotha. I (and plenty of people I know) totally agree with you. Personal responsibility is a wonderful thing—more parents should practice what they been preaching to their kids all along.
Am I the only one in the world who didn't use Napster because I'd already discovered that other service and it was so much freakin' better? Does anyone know what I'm talking about? I can't remember the name of it, but it wasn't iMesh or any of the current P2P networks. No, these guys got shut down shortly before Napster did. They had a really nice client, and all kinds of content, not just MP3s.
If I remember correctly, they cached the files on their servers, so if you had broadband, you got blazing fast download speeds. It had to have been around '99 or 2000, 'cause I was living with my ex at the time. Argh. It frustrates me to no end that I never hear anyone mention it in these Napster discussions. It was the bomb.I haven't been phenominally good at a video game since Descent. I'll never understand why 2D FPSes (where you're chained to the ground by gravity) surpassed in popularity the 360 degree, 3-dimensional freedom of the Descent series. Anyhoo, if you ever got your ass handed to you by a guy named "Nexus" ... well, that was me. ;-)
OK, help me out here. If I undergo gene therapy, and, as a result, every strand of DNA in my body includes some patented sequence of nucleotides, do I become the property of whatever corporation holds the patent? Am I then breaking the law when my cells divide without that corporation's consent? Will I have to pay royalties?
If I'm a farmer, and some genetically altered pollen blows over my crops, does that make me a criminal? Or can I just sue Monsanto for tresspassing?
Maybe the answers are obvious to a lawyer, but not to me. They say ignorance of the law is no excuse, but how can anyone understand such complicated laws? So, help me out here. Anyone?
Heh, and when the money gets tight, guess who'll be the first to go? Cutbacks!
Uh, no, you're not.
That last sentence (and the fact that you've been modded up) took the wind right out of me. I hope you were being sarcastic. I hope you understand that there's a difference between copying data and stealing CDs from the local Best Buy. And I hope you understand that there's a difference between A) downloading music for your own personal enjoyment, and B) repackaging and selling that music for a profit--because that's piracy.
"Right" and "wrong" are not arbitrary concepts. They make sense within a given context. So use your freakin' head! I mean, if they could, the RIAA would have you believe that remembering a song without compensating the publisher (er, artist) is criminal behavior. Are you gonna buy that? I'm afraid I already know the answer.
I don't buy a lot of movies (don't watch a lot either), but I'm seriously considering going back to VHS for all future purchases. The only problem I've ever had with VHS cassettes is the tracking. DVDs, however, have inaudible vocal tracks, forced previews, sluggish and/or buggy interfaces, and a host of restrictions on what features you can use and when. Many is the time I've just wanted to WATCH THE FRIGGEN MOVIE, but I can't, because I have to sit through piracy warnings in 8 languages (I'm only slightly exagerating) and obnoxiously long introductions to the MAIN MENU. Ripping, editing, and reburning offending DVDs is one solution, but it's time consuming and, oh yeah, ILLEGAL. Argh!
Ah... This is a little OT, but I doubt most people care (or care to know) where their money's actually coming from. Chances are, whoever you work for, that a portion of your paycheck is made possible by unsavory business practices. And, with the complex web of corporate ownership that we have today, ... Well, the amount of time and effort it would take for you to insure that your employer's employer's employer's ethics are in line with your own is more than most of us can spare.
Coming soon: "paperless" contracts!
"That's absurd! Nobody in their right mind would--"
No? What if the contents were digitally signed? I mean...doh.
I'm not going to address this issue directly. Instead, let me say that I am surprised--and disappointed--by the number of people (on Slashdot, no less!) who can't see the value of questioning authority. I am sick and tired of watching my rights crumble away while I am more or less powerless to do anything about it. And I say "more or less powerless" for this reason:
For all of you who think that "getting out and voting" is the solution to everything that's wrong with this country, let me ask you one simple question: How do you know that your vote is being counted? I have no proof whatsoever, other than that I handed the nice lady my ballot and she put it in a box. In fact, I have a great deal of *circumstantial* evidence which suggests that my vote is NOT being counted, when all of my friends and family fervently disagree with a piece of proposed legislation, but it becomes law anyway. Even though tens of thousands of people are involved in the tallying process, those tallies eventually converge into a single point, or handful of points--it's not unreasonable to suspect tampering.
My point is that things are happening in this country without the consent of the people who actually own it. Replace "this country" with "your own home" and maybe then it'll start to sink in. Can we expect a corrupt system to be the solution to itself? In order to affect change, we have to step outside the system--outside the box. If that means doing things that people don't like, so motherf*cking be it! Just to be clear, I'm NOT advocating violent revolution (at this point) or infringing upon the rights of others. I AM advocating ruffling feathers. And I appreciate the elegance of Mann's approach: essentially, pointing a gun at the head of the man who's pointing a gun at me asking him, "Is this really the only way?"
More and more people are turning off their televisions everyday. It makes me happy.
No. No... God, no! That's entirely too logical and, therefore, unacceptable.