the large companies would be blindly signing literally everybody who made music so it could control them
Intelligent musicians are now turning the labels and their thieving contracts down. I believe this may explain the dearth of much listenable RIAA music this century; the bands with talent realise they have no need of the majors. I know at least one local guy who told two major labels to go fuck themselves, and I'm sure for every Joe Frew there's a thousand more non-idiots out there.
Your history is a bit weak, young fellow. They came out first on LPs and 45s long before those godoffal eight tracks were ever foisted on a non-technical populace.
Eight tracks didn't become popular until just before 1970. "The Rolling Stones is the debut album by The Rolling Stones, released in the UK in April 1964."
Granted, the eight track tape was invented the same year, but they never got popular untile around 1970.
I was twelve when the Rolling tones came out. I never saw an eight track until maybe 1968 or 9. As the wiki article says, "8-track recorders had gained popularity by the early 1970s."
But once you buy from a digital store there is no reason ever buy the same content again.
There's no reason for me to buy a digital version of my old LPs either. I just sample the LP, burn it to CD, and rip that. Funny thing is, whenever someone mentions how good my car stereo sounds it's usually when I'm playing a CD that started life as an LP.
I'm waiting for the service that remembers all of the content I buy and lets me use it anytime I want.
I have it. It's buying CDs and LPs. When the CD starts skipping in the car it's time to duplicate it. Meanwhile the CDs have been ripped to MP3 and stored on the computer.
So, for now I'll stick with buying my digital tracks off of Amazon DRM free
With CD, cassette, and LP there's no need to worry about DRM. The link above about ripping from vinyl works for CD too, and will overcome any DRM the idiots at the record companies can come up with.
Personally, I don't give a flying fig about music or edgy new content models, nor am I "excited" about the possibility of create, edit, and share my own music
Well, I personally don't give a flying frog about 3G iPhone or the Asus, so I just don't click those links.
If you don't care about the RIAA then just don't bring those articles up. Many of us care about computer illiterates being sued for "illegal" downloading.
It's not exactly difficult to buy music that people want.
In fact, it is. The labels themselves claim that the reason mucis prices are so high is because for every winner in the top 100 there are a hundred money losing losers.
In fact, they try to do just what you say they do, and they fail miserably at it. They're usually way late; take rap, for example. Rap was around in the late 1970s, but none of the artists were recording.
I always thought that the main problem the RIAA had with downloaders was their reluctance to perform the first part of that process
Then you thought wrong. For every major label artist there are a thousand local bands, these days all of whom have CDs full of original music and quite a few (my friend Joe Frew, for example) who have told the labels to go fuck themselves when they were flashed one of the insulting contracts they wave in musicians' faces.
RIAA, they do still act as a filter, keeping some of the crap down
Crap like John Lee Hooker, Little Walter, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, none of whom got airplay in theur day (let alone whole genres like Raggae, Skla, and punk), while great music like the Backstreet Boys, the Archies ('60s version of the Backstreet Boys on the radio while Zeppelin wasn't), and Britney Spears get airplay?
Where do you get this stupid idea that the RIAA keeps the crap out and lets the good stuff through? It looks like the exact opposite to me.
Oh, that's not what you meant? Then why did you say it?
The Aztec's were not very popular amongst their neighbors
You're probably right, if their stuff was valuable their neighbors would have taken it instead of the Spaniards. The Astecs were probably illiterates who didn't know how, why, or when to use an apostrophe. No wonder they were conquered.
They historically provided, out of economic necessity, whatever music was (subjectively) "the best."
You're wrong.
When I was a teenager I walked into a record store and the most amazing music was playing. Song after song. I asked the sales clerk who it was. "A new band, Led Zeppelin". I bought the album right then and there.
The critics panned them and they never got any airplay; at least until non-critics and non-radio people found them.
My crazy friend Tom Egbert called me up one day after school. "Man, you GOT to hear this album! It ROCKS!" He was right: the Jimi Hendrix Experience's Are You Experienced kicked ass! He never got any airplay, either.
The Yardbirds never got airplay. We all found out about them from the local bands covering their songs. Meanwhile when you turned on the radio you got what they called "bubblegum pop". Yummie yummie yummie I got love in my tummy" - pure dreck, not unlike what you hear on the radio today, very similar to the kind of absolute crap put out by the likes of Britney Spears or the Backstreet Boys.
My oldest daughter is mentally handicapped. She likes the rap they play on the radio. My youngest (just turned 21) otoh is "gifted". She listened to punk and ska - and you didn't hear either of those genres on the radio (and never have outside the college stations).
In short, the major labels and the radio stations they bribe with their cocaine payola never had a fucking clue what young people want, and still don't.
to the radio in your car suddenly becomes like a Google search for not-crap, every time you try to use it.
It's like that now, and always has been. Thank God and technology for CD changers.
Sometimes, Britney will do.
No, Britney will NOT do. Britney is a talentless bimbo. John Lee Hooker will do (he never got airplay either). Led Zeppelin will do. Tchaikovsky will do. Merl Haggard will do. Bob Marley will do. The Pietasters will do. The Dead Kennedys will do.
Britney spears will NOT do. The Backstreet Boys will NOT do.
You would have loved The Archies. Sorry dude but you have no musical taste whatever.
Dr Crusher: A horse walks into a bar. The bartender says "why the long face?"
Funnyer - the horse says "my head hurts, I just walked into a bar" (that one comes from some slashdot guy)
Whereas the visage of a dead Sony BMG, dead RIAA, Dead DRM and all of us laughing at their funerals as their cocaine-soaked executives weep is absolutely hilarious.
It seems that the 21st century uselessness of this 21st century phenomena is becoming apparent to all. Bye bye buggy whip manufacturers, we won't miss you. At least the buggy whip manufacturers didn't sue their best customers like the "big four" and their sock puppet the MAFIAA do.
But the one thing that makes the ringtones have any value at all is the song behind the ringtone, or rather, the famousness of the song behind the ring tone.
If the labels ever lose their monopoly on radio airplay they'll finally get the death we've all been waiting for. Unfortunately we're going to need ONE non-college radio station to get the ball rolling, like KSHE started FM rock radio.
You can see now why they wanted internet radio dead, having all those usarious fees heaped on it.
Is a higher tax rate fair for people who have greater incomes and pay more dollars taxes relative to the standard deductions?
If there were no such things as deductions and everyone paid the same percentage, that would be fair. But it will never be that way.
Is it fair to reward workers who take a modest risk the same as capital investors who take much larger risks?
Risk? Capital investors don't know the meaning of the word! A logger or a construction worker is risking his life (and thank God I'm in a safe job). Are you going to tell me he's facing a lower risk than an investor?
Is it fair that people make different salaries and that some investments return greater results than others?
It is as long as the opportunities are equal. That said, I think CEO salaries are WAY too high.
is it fair to make shareholders pay the same income tax rate as employees if the company takes a loss one year?
I'm more of a social libertarian than a socialist. I think someone ought to have the right to screw his life up any way he wishes, but at the same time I don't want to see people starving, or living in the street (unless they want to), or dying of diseases that are easily cured.
Part of the high cost of health care in the US is that those without health care won't get it when it's relatively cheap, but get the most expensive health care there is - the emergency room at the last minute. And then after running up huge bills they die anyway because they didn't get care in time.
If I didn't have insurance I'd go blind in my left eye; I'll be getting a vitrectomy probably next week. I shudder to think what would happen if I was unemployed, or working for an employer that didn't offer health insurance.
A travelling salesman calls his wife excitedly. "Honey you won't believe what just happened!"
"What happened?"
"Well, you know how my anscestry makes it so I can't grow a beard? Well, I just now stopped in Beardstown and went in a bar for a drink, and everyone was wearing a beard. They told me if I spend the night here I'll have a beard in the morning!"
She was skeptical, but told him to book a room. The next morning he calls her excitedly "Honey! It's true! I grew a beard, and it only took one night!"
She replies "Well, tonight go stay in Petersburg, OK?"
No, mark me down as someone who values work over hustling. I'm not for high taxes on anyone, but the company's owners (its stockholders if it's a corporation) should pay at least as much of a percentage of their income as its employees, whether the income is profits (dividends) or sale of assets.
Should I mark you down as someone who's against fairness then?
If they're kooks then I certainly want to hear their views! Because right now I'm unbdecided whether to vote Green or Libertarian come the election this year. I'm certainly not going to vote Republican or Democrat, as both parties want me in jail.
Slashdot Mirror
There are lots of us in here, and some of us disagree with some of the others.
Well, anybody who disagrees with me is a doodyhead.
the large companies would be blindly signing literally everybody who made music so it could control them
Intelligent musicians are now turning the labels and their thieving contracts down. I believe this may explain the dearth of much listenable RIAA music this century; the bands with talent realise they have no need of the majors. I know at least one local guy who told two major labels to go fuck themselves, and I'm sure for every Joe Frew there's a thousand more non-idiots out there.
Your history is a bit weak, young fellow. They came out first on LPs and 45s long before those godoffal eight tracks were ever foisted on a non-technical populace.
Eight tracks didn't become popular until just before 1970. "The Rolling Stones is the debut album by The Rolling Stones, released in the UK in April 1964."
Granted, the eight track tape was invented the same year, but they never got popular untile around 1970.
I was twelve when the Rolling tones came out. I never saw an eight track until maybe 1968 or 9. As the wiki article says, "8-track recorders had gained popularity by the early 1970s."
But once you buy from a digital store there is no reason ever buy the same content again.
There's no reason for me to buy a digital version of my old LPs either. I just sample the LP, burn it to CD, and rip that. Funny thing is, whenever someone mentions how good my car stereo sounds it's usually when I'm playing a CD that started life as an LP.
I'm waiting for the service that remembers all of the content I buy and lets me use it anytime I want.
I have it. It's buying CDs and LPs. When the CD starts skipping in the car it's time to duplicate it. Meanwhile the CDs have been ripped to MP3 and stored on the computer.
So, for now I'll stick with buying my digital tracks off of Amazon DRM free
With CD, cassette, and LP there's no need to worry about DRM. The link above about ripping from vinyl works for CD too, and will overcome any DRM the idiots at the record companies can come up with.
-mcgrew
Personally, I don't give a flying fig about music or edgy new content models, nor am I "excited" about the possibility of create, edit, and share my own music
Well, I personally don't give a flying frog about 3G iPhone or the Asus, so I just don't click those links.
If you don't care about the RIAA then just don't bring those articles up. Many of us care about computer illiterates being sued for "illegal" downloading.
It's not exactly difficult to buy music that people want.
In fact, it is. The labels themselves claim that the reason mucis prices are so high is because for every winner in the top 100 there are a hundred money losing losers.
In fact, they try to do just what you say they do, and they fail miserably at it. They're usually way late; take rap, for example. Rap was around in the late 1970s, but none of the artists were recording.
I always thought that the main problem the RIAA had with downloaders was their reluctance to perform the first part of that process
Then you thought wrong. For every major label artist there are a thousand local bands, these days all of whom have CDs full of original music and quite a few (my friend Joe Frew, for example) who have told the labels to go fuck themselves when they were flashed one of the insulting contracts they wave in musicians' faces.
RIAA, they do still act as a filter, keeping some of the crap down
Crap like John Lee Hooker, Little Walter, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, none of whom got airplay in theur day (let alone whole genres like Raggae, Skla, and punk), while great music like the Backstreet Boys, the Archies ('60s version of the Backstreet Boys on the radio while Zeppelin wasn't), and Britney Spears get airplay?
Where do you get this stupid idea that the RIAA keeps the crap out and lets the good stuff through? It looks like the exact opposite to me.
Takes the Aztec's for example.
Can't, the Spaniards already took it.
Oh, that's not what you meant? Then why did you say it?
The Aztec's were not very popular amongst their neighbors
You're probably right, if their stuff was valuable their neighbors would have taken it instead of the Spaniards. The Astecs were probably illiterates who didn't know how, why, or when to use an apostrophe. No wonder they were conquered.
heres to your vanishing jobs, to the jobs of blacksmiths, to the jobs of chimney sweeps
Hate to break this to you but blacksmiths and chimney sweeps are still around and useful, unlike the RIAA.
Information wants to be free :)
Information wants to be paid for. >:(
When information isn't free, neither are you.
They historically provided, out of economic necessity, whatever music was (subjectively) "the best."
You're wrong.
When I was a teenager I walked into a record store and the most amazing music was playing. Song after song. I asked the sales clerk who it was. "A new band, Led Zeppelin". I bought the album right then and there.
The critics panned them and they never got any airplay; at least until non-critics and non-radio people found them.
My crazy friend Tom Egbert called me up one day after school. "Man, you GOT to hear this album! It ROCKS!" He was right: the Jimi Hendrix Experience's Are You Experienced kicked ass! He never got any airplay, either.
The Yardbirds never got airplay. We all found out about them from the local bands covering their songs. Meanwhile when you turned on the radio you got what they called "bubblegum pop". Yummie yummie yummie I got love in my tummy" - pure dreck, not unlike what you hear on the radio today, very similar to the kind of absolute crap put out by the likes of Britney Spears or the Backstreet Boys.
My oldest daughter is mentally handicapped. She likes the rap they play on the radio. My youngest (just turned 21) otoh is "gifted". She listened to punk and ska - and you didn't hear either of those genres on the radio (and never have outside the college stations).
In short, the major labels and the radio stations they bribe with their cocaine payola never had a fucking clue what young people want, and still don't.
to the radio in your car suddenly becomes like a Google search for not-crap, every time you try to use it.
It's like that now, and always has been. Thank God and technology for CD changers.
Sometimes, Britney will do.
No, Britney will NOT do. Britney is a talentless bimbo. John Lee Hooker will do (he never got airplay either). Led Zeppelin will do. Tchaikovsky will do. Merl Haggard will do. Bob Marley will do. The Pietasters will do. The Dead Kennedys will do.
Britney spears will NOT do. The Backstreet Boys will NOT do.
You would have loved The Archies. Sorry dude but you have no musical taste whatever.
Slightly? No, this is "slightly" funny.
Dr Crusher: A horse walks into a bar. The bartender says "why the long face?"
Funnyer - the horse says "my head hurts, I just walked into a bar" (that one comes from some slashdot guy)
Whereas the visage of a dead Sony BMG, dead RIAA, Dead DRM and all of us laughing at their funerals as their cocaine-soaked executives weep is absolutely hilarious.
It seems that the 21st century uselessness of this 21st century phenomena is becoming apparent to all. Bye bye buggy whip manufacturers, we won't miss you. At least the buggy whip manufacturers didn't sue their best customers like the "big four" and their sock puppet the MAFIAA do.
-mcgrew
But the one thing that makes the ringtones have any value at all is the song behind the ringtone, or rather, the famousness of the song behind the ring tone.
If the labels ever lose their monopoly on radio airplay they'll finally get the death we've all been waiting for. Unfortunately we're going to need ONE non-college radio station to get the ball rolling, like KSHE started FM rock radio.
You can see now why they wanted internet radio dead, having all those usarious fees heaped on it.
nothing to see here.. move along
"Pay no atention to the man behind the curtain".
Hi mr. record company executive, you got some good coke today I see.
Is a higher tax rate fair for people who have greater incomes and pay more dollars taxes relative to the standard deductions?
If there were no such things as deductions and everyone paid the same percentage, that would be fair. But it will never be that way.
Is it fair to reward workers who take a modest risk the same as capital investors who take much larger risks?
Risk? Capital investors don't know the meaning of the word! A logger or a construction worker is risking his life (and thank God I'm in a safe job). Are you going to tell me he's facing a lower risk than an investor?
Is it fair that people make different salaries and that some investments return greater results than others?
It is as long as the opportunities are equal. That said, I think CEO salaries are WAY too high.
is it fair to make shareholders pay the same income tax rate as employees if the company takes a loss one year?
If there's no profit there should be no tax.
I'm more of a social libertarian than a socialist. I think someone ought to have the right to screw his life up any way he wishes, but at the same time I don't want to see people starving, or living in the street (unless they want to), or dying of diseases that are easily cured.
Part of the high cost of health care in the US is that those without health care won't get it when it's relatively cheap, but get the most expensive health care there is - the emergency room at the last minute. And then after running up huge bills they die anyway because they didn't get care in time.
If I didn't have insurance I'd go blind in my left eye; I'll be getting a vitrectomy probably next week. I shudder to think what would happen if I was unemployed, or working for an employer that didn't offer health insurance.
acknowledging this does not imply "the government should do it."
:-)
Then who should?
Twenty years is a very long time, especially where those drugs' development was subsidized by our tax dollars
Well, if it's subsidized by tax dollars I think it shoud be in the public domain. Why should I get a patent on something you paid for?
Further, however, the government often EXTENDS those patent terms arbitrarily
Well, I agree they shouldn't.
You'll never get elected, then.
Phew, I was worried!
I see you've read my journals ;)
At least I hope there is an easy way to turn the *features* off.
I'd rather be able to remove features I don't want entirely, and do so without much hassle.
Think of the politicians! Think of the gadflies!
Won't somebody think of the busybodies?
Local Springfield IL joke (Google Maps is your friend)
A travelling salesman calls his wife excitedly. "Honey you won't believe what just happened!"
"What happened?"
"Well, you know how my anscestry makes it so I can't grow a beard? Well, I just now stopped in Beardstown and went in a bar for a drink, and everyone was wearing a beard. They told me if I spend the night here I'll have a beard in the morning!"
She was skeptical, but told him to book a room. The next morning he calls her excitedly "Honey! It's true! I grew a beard, and it only took one night!"
She replies "Well, tonight go stay in Petersburg, OK?"
Until now, I just thought the AwesomeBar was what Chuck Norris ate for breakfast!
No, it's where I go to drink.
You only read my journals at work? =(
(Caution: Link is NSFW)
No, mark me down as someone who values work over hustling. I'm not for high taxes on anyone, but the company's owners (its stockholders if it's a corporation) should pay at least as much of a percentage of their income as its employees, whether the income is profits (dividends) or sale of assets.
Should I mark you down as someone who's against fairness then?
If they're kooks then I certainly want to hear their views! Because right now I'm unbdecided whether to vote Green or Libertarian come the election this year. I'm certainly not going to vote Republican or Democrat, as both parties want me in jail.