It drives me nuts that people reason that this is more reprehensible "in light of recent incidents."
If not for the fact that these things do happen, this un-drill would NEVER have taken place.
And honestly, this exercise could provide useful information to the faculty about what to expect if such an event occured and what preparedness training would prove most beneficial. Think of it as a pre-test, as it were.
Unfortunately, the children probably learned a lot as well - like sometimes adults will tell you lies and intentionally scare the shit out of you "for your own good."
ah learning....isn't that what school is all about?
You don't have to be entertained constantly!!! Support your local artists directly!
Wow! This is either a poor juxtaposition of ideas OR you need to move to a town with a better local music scene. (okay...so that was more directed to the parent)
And for the record....all musicians are local to somewhere!
It's not as if you should be required to listen to music created solely in your hometown. It is, however, true that there is an amazing amount of fantastic music in the world produced entirely by folks who are not members of the RIAArmy.
And a lot of it is free....and available to fit diverse tastes.
Of course there is a lot of crap as well.
I, for one, happen to prefer being the judge of quality myself instead of farming that chore out to the music industry "professionals."
I say the RIAA can suck my dick.
I have no affiliation with them...they have done nothing for me.
Everything I have released has either been under a creative commons license, or totally independent...or sold as a work for hire.
The RIAA has not collected a dime on my behalf....and if I find them collecting anything on my internet radio plays I will sue them into oblivion....so help me god.
amen
ps. I'm not really religious...but, ya know....last refuge of a scoundrel and all...
okay okay....mod me "off topic" if you will.
Why does the slashdot community persistently confuse "lose" with "loose"?
This is not meant to be a dig at you, iPaul. It just happened that this was about the fourth time in this thread that I found this switcharoo.
Is it a wishful Freudian thing?
wow! Just what we need.
I guess when the MPAA and RIAA have my account numbers, they can charge me for all those movies I didn't see and CDs I didn't buy last year...thus depriving them of their rightful earnings.
In large part, I agree with you. America has been in desperate need of an alternative to the "two sides of the same coin" party for a long time.
I spent several election cycles fighting the idea that I was "throwing away my vote" by actively supporting a third party candidate. Voting for someone you don't trust or believe in is the definition of throwing away one's vote as far as I am concerned.
But dire times call for desperate measures. Sometimes the devil you know is so bad that you couldn't possibly do worse picking one you don't know.
What I find the most intriguing is the bait and switch of calling for specifics in a platform...only to attack the details of these plans when they are made public. It's a common tactic and the major reason that almost no one in government can actually talk about what they want to do before having the power to move it forward. The concept of good faith bipartisan negotiation is at a nadir.
At this point, each of the two megaparties have but one plank in the platform....win the election by any means. Unfortunately for the Dems, the means by which they try to put forth ideas is often still rooted in the antiquated tradition of debate and discussion. This often makes them appear unfocused and at odds with one another.
The republicans, on the other hand, often take the tack of supporting the party's leadership no matter what - it's a topdown world on the right. And this is IMO why they have been crushing the opposition in the past few cycles. It's also why I'm more likely to vote Dem this year.
You can't run a democracy with an authoritarian regime. And the characteristics that have made the Repubs successful are not what I need bleeding out into the mechanizations of how the country is run.
Can anyone argue that this isn't already happening?
have to wear a fat winter vest-jacket to have a @ on my back, I am totally out.
A complete color change capacity would be great, though.
No more shopping for the perfect tie to match each suit.
Just think about it matching hard enough and....voila!
I for one would like to see a double paper trail. One slip goes in to the ballot box, the other comes home with you.
There could even be one or several websites that could serve as exit polls to verify a significant sample. Of course then your vote could be traced to you...
I, for one, am completely over this partisan bickering. On all levels.
Everyone here should, in theory, be able to fathom the concept that integrity, patriotism and reasoning are NOT assets which belong to any one political party.
I sincerely wish that devotion to ideology would stop blinding folks (on all sides) to the corruption of the power-hungry - a characteristic which also knows no party affiliation!
The real problem here is that Creation Theory is not just the assertion, it's also the foundation of how these folks think you arrive at a hypothesis.
While the theory of evolution allows for evolution in the theory itself, a creationist whips up a statement of "fact" from thin air....
And, in a tangentially related aside: If trying to be like god by eating an apple gets you banished from the garden, why does trying to be like god (Jesus) save your soul? Talk about damned if you do and damned if you don't.....
I guess the scenario I'm envisioning doesn't contend with a robust p2p alternative.
I'm just dreaming of a world where virtually any recorded material is available at a reasonable price and pirating has been eliminated from the mainstream.
I know, I know...it's like physics problems that assume no friction...
I suppose that makes sense as well. I was just looking at from the point of view of the rights holders. If a song is going to have a million downloads whether it costs $.10 or $2 and you're making the profits, which would you choose?
On the other hand...tempting people to buy songs that they might not otherwise with a lower pricepoint would also yield gains that don't exist now.
I think I'm considering a different market for the more obscure offerings than the folks who are going to download the new top 10 no matter what they are. Just a few short years ago, folks would gladly pay retail for an entire CD just to obtain the one hit song. Knowing this, I'd say $3 for the hit alone would still be considered a bargain.
I'm looking at this reduced pricepoint as a way of fighting piracy with economic incentives.
If I could find 20 out of print songs and download them for a dollar, I would not waste the time hunting for illicit copies for free. I would gladly give that kind of money to the labels.
But if it's going to cost $3 a pop...forget it, I'll bide my time and hunt down a friend with the tunes to burn for me.
And I think you may be overestimating the cost of digitizing a tune. It takes literally seconds. Now,of course, the bandwidth would have to be covered byt the consumer cost...but really, not much else.
It's my opinion that every song ever recorded should be available via digital distribution.
The main thing keeping this from happening is that it is virtually impossible to get all the companies that own the majority of rights to recordings to come to an agreement on anything.
Although I have no solution to that particular fiasco, I think a great way to price things would be on with a sliding scale that puts a premium on popularity.
A good part of the revenue from current downloads is from the top couple hundred most popular. Now if the cost of those was pushed up to $2-3, it would allow for download of more obscure tunes for pennies. Thos out-of-print, "unpopular" songs cannot support premium pricing; but, seeing as they are unavailable in stores, (not profitable enough to waste the shelf space) ANY income that they do generate is purely gravy.
Now if a particular song experiences a resurgence based on new attention, this upswing in popularity would be reason enough to bump it into a higher cost bracket. Now maybe it costs $.25 to buy instead of $.05. Prices could be adjusted weekly (or some other increment) with the most popular song costing maybe $3-4 and the least being like $.05.
I think this would be a huge incentive to legally download songs and the owners would make scads more money than they already do. It could also be interesting how playing the market might develop wherein there would be runs on songs to drive up the price, hedging that you could get a song cheaper in a week or two, and all the other fun stuff that comes from dealing in a regulated market.
It could easily be feasible on a "tipping point" system. As soon as that 100th copy is ordered, the lot is pressed and shipped out. Consumers could then provide further advertising by lobbying their contacts to also order the album knowing they would only get theirs when 100 copies have been ordered. In a global market place, 100 copies of a release is nothing...a drop. And yet, knowing all these will be purchased results in zero risk of recoup for the manufacturer/distributer.
Slashdot Mirror
er....well...I guess that would be a problem in this case.
well then...."won't someone please not think of the children?"
If not for the fact that these things do happen, this un-drill would NEVER have taken place.
And honestly, this exercise could provide useful information to the faculty about what to expect if such an event occured and what preparedness training would prove most beneficial. Think of it as a pre-test, as it were.
Unfortunately, the children probably learned a lot as well - like sometimes adults will tell you lies and intentionally scare the shit out of you "for your own good."
ah learning....isn't that what school is all about?
Wow! This is either a poor juxtaposition of ideas OR you need to move to a town with a better local music scene. (okay...so that was more directed to the parent)
And for the record....all musicians are local to somewhere!
It's not as if you should be required to listen to music created solely in your hometown. It is, however, true that there is an amazing amount of fantastic music in the world produced entirely by folks who are not members of the RIAArmy.
And a lot of it is free....and available to fit diverse tastes.
Of course there is a lot of crap as well.
I, for one, happen to prefer being the judge of quality myself instead of farming that chore out to the music industry "professionals."
I say the RIAA can suck my dick.
I have no affiliation with them...they have done nothing for me.
Everything I have released has either been under a creative commons license, or totally independent...or sold as a work for hire.
The RIAA has not collected a dime on my behalf....and if I find them collecting anything on my internet radio plays I will sue them into oblivion....so help me god.
amen
ps. I'm not really religious...but, ya know....last refuge of a scoundrel and all...
Hey...that sounds a lot like how life on Earth started! When are we scheduled to report back, anyway?
You've got it all wrong...it's just a different WOW.
As in, "Wow!...this is nothing like the adverts!"
okay okay....mod me "off topic" if you will.
Why does the slashdot community persistently confuse "lose" with "loose"?
This is not meant to be a dig at you, iPaul. It just happened that this was about the fourth time in this thread that I found this switcharoo.
Is it a wishful Freudian thing?
wow! Just what we need.
I guess when the MPAA and RIAA have my account numbers, they can charge me for all those movies I didn't see and CDs I didn't buy last year...thus depriving them of their rightful earnings.
That's the story he told his wife and dammit, he's sticking to it. :-)
Now THAT is a great band..I wouldn't illegally download their songs. http://www.theheartlessbastards.com/
I spent several election cycles fighting the idea that I was "throwing away my vote" by actively supporting a third party candidate. Voting for someone you don't trust or believe in is the definition of throwing away one's vote as far as I am concerned.
But dire times call for desperate measures. Sometimes the devil you know is so bad that you couldn't possibly do worse picking one you don't know. What I find the most intriguing is the bait and switch of calling for specifics in a platform...only to attack the details of these plans when they are made public. It's a common tactic and the major reason that almost no one in government can actually talk about what they want to do before having the power to move it forward. The concept of good faith bipartisan negotiation is at a nadir.
At this point, each of the two megaparties have but one plank in the platform....win the election by any means. Unfortunately for the Dems, the means by which they try to put forth ideas is often still rooted in the antiquated tradition of debate and discussion. This often makes them appear unfocused and at odds with one another.
The republicans, on the other hand, often take the tack of supporting the party's leadership no matter what - it's a topdown world on the right. And this is IMO why they have been crushing the opposition in the past few cycles. It's also why I'm more likely to vote Dem this year.
You can't run a democracy with an authoritarian regime. And the characteristics that have made the Repubs successful are not what I need bleeding out into the mechanizations of how the country is run.
Can anyone argue that this isn't already happening?
A complete color change capacity would be great, though. No more shopping for the perfect tie to match each suit. Just think about it matching hard enough and ....voila!
There could even be one or several websites that could serve as exit polls to verify a significant sample. Of course then your vote could be traced to you...
Everyone here should, in theory, be able to fathom the concept that integrity, patriotism and reasoning are NOT assets which belong to any one political party.
I sincerely wish that devotion to ideology would stop blinding folks (on all sides) to the corruption of the power-hungry - a characteristic which also knows no party affiliation!
The real problem here is that Creation Theory is not just the assertion, it's also the foundation of how these folks think you arrive at a hypothesis. While the theory of evolution allows for evolution in the theory itself, a creationist whips up a statement of "fact" from thin air.... And, in a tangentially related aside: If trying to be like god by eating an apple gets you banished from the garden, why does trying to be like god (Jesus) save your soul? Talk about damned if you do and damned if you don't.....
I smell a rat.
I have just become a charity!
I guess the scenario I'm envisioning doesn't contend with a robust p2p alternative. I'm just dreaming of a world where virtually any recorded material is available at a reasonable price and pirating has been eliminated from the mainstream.
I know, I know...it's like physics problems that assume no friction...
On the other hand...tempting people to buy songs that they might not otherwise with a lower pricepoint would also yield gains that don't exist now.
I think I'm considering a different market for the more obscure offerings than the folks who are going to download the new top 10 no matter what they are. Just a few short years ago, folks would gladly pay retail for an entire CD just to obtain the one hit song. Knowing this, I'd say $3 for the hit alone would still be considered a bargain.
I'm looking at this reduced pricepoint as a way of fighting piracy with economic incentives. If I could find 20 out of print songs and download them for a dollar, I would not waste the time hunting for illicit copies for free. I would gladly give that kind of money to the labels. But if it's going to cost $3 a pop...forget it, I'll bide my time and hunt down a friend with the tunes to burn for me.
And I think you may be overestimating the cost of digitizing a tune. It takes literally seconds. Now,of course, the bandwidth would have to be covered byt the consumer cost...but really, not much else.
It's my opinion that every song ever recorded should be available via digital distribution. The main thing keeping this from happening is that it is virtually impossible to get all the companies that own the majority of rights to recordings to come to an agreement on anything. Although I have no solution to that particular fiasco, I think a great way to price things would be on with a sliding scale that puts a premium on popularity. A good part of the revenue from current downloads is from the top couple hundred most popular. Now if the cost of those was pushed up to $2-3, it would allow for download of more obscure tunes for pennies. Thos out-of-print, "unpopular" songs cannot support premium pricing; but, seeing as they are unavailable in stores, (not profitable enough to waste the shelf space) ANY income that they do generate is purely gravy. Now if a particular song experiences a resurgence based on new attention, this upswing in popularity would be reason enough to bump it into a higher cost bracket. Now maybe it costs $.25 to buy instead of $.05. Prices could be adjusted weekly (or some other increment) with the most popular song costing maybe $3-4 and the least being like $.05. I think this would be a huge incentive to legally download songs and the owners would make scads more money than they already do. It could also be interesting how playing the market might develop wherein there would be runs on songs to drive up the price, hedging that you could get a song cheaper in a week or two, and all the other fun stuff that comes from dealing in a regulated market.
It could easily be feasible on a "tipping point" system. As soon as that 100th copy is ordered, the lot is pressed and shipped out. Consumers could then provide further advertising by lobbying their contacts to also order the album knowing they would only get theirs when 100 copies have been ordered. In a global market place, 100 copies of a release is nothing...a drop. And yet, knowing all these will be purchased results in zero risk of recoup for the manufacturer/distributer.