Extensively processed music will become a thing of the past.
That's a real shame. I like processed music. It allows musicians to go further than just our current range of instruments. It is unfortunately more expensive to make than some of the tried and true music formulae. I really can't support a distribution model that discourages a large facet of modern music.
How would bands even get a chance to be judged "good" without having any money to make their music? Metallica and Greenday would be able until they retire, because they probably have the money to risk on independent album production, but it relies on money they made on previous distribution systems.
Just think about that statement for a moment. Think about how different almost everything (literally) was back then. Think about people's/society's expectations. Just take a moment to let the stupidity sink in.
Quality over Quantity, isn't that what Wii fanboys say?
What else would you say? It's not like you're going to own every single game out for a single console. What would I care if there were a hundreds of decent games (over the console's lifetime) if I'm only ever going to buy around 20?
You can take it as an example of a problem their own massive oversell created, if it makes you feel any better.
Yeah, gee, I think I'll do that, since that's what your argument boils down to.
The alternative being to accept that overselling bandwidth is a viable business model, that if we were to be guaranteed a certain speed, it would be either significantly lower than the average speeds you're getting now, or considerably more expensive. Once you've accepted that, Bittorrent looks problematic. Perhaps we will just have to deal with slightly higher prices/slightly lower speeds in future?
it's a bit shortsighted to take one positive example and treat it as a working model
Precisely. In fact, we've never had a long term pricing model, which has spread throughout an industry, that allows the customer to choose free as an option. Who knows? After a generation, we may see kids who stop believing that artists are entitled any money, and wouldn't pay a cent for their music. It may well be even sooner. Plenty of people paid money in the hope that this would catch on, but would they continue if it became widespread?
Will the publicists be able to somehow offset the expensive startup costs making music? Or will professional music-making become a luxury for the very rich?
... not to mention relatively clueless about encryption principles. Sorry if the following questions are glaringly obvious.
How does it work? How will it affect my machine if enabled (i.e. will I notice?)? Could an OEM (I hear Microsoft is distributing PCs nowadays) theoretically set up the TPM to lock down a system pre-purchase? What happens when the TPM blocks something/notices a different checksum?
For the record, I agree with you, but the mentality isn't about what these people deserve, it's about efficiency over compassion. The poor don't deserve to die, they just don't deserve to be supported. Sadly, it makes perfect sense.
... read the "scofflaw blogging" link off their front page? Or should that be "scofflaw morbing"? It's ten different different web personas, and ten different ways of saying people feel more empowered when they're anonymous.
Now it's my turn. Who's being shafted in the current model? I was referring to those without decent internet speeds, and those who find online shoppping for anything to be vastly inferior to its more physical cousin. Not to mention those who want original quality CDs, but not at $40-80 each.
I didn't like their distribution model. I'm not a fan of this internet-only distribution model, because if it were to become ubiquitous, the music industry would be shafting a significant number of people. The distribution model also relies on guilt, a fact of which I'm also not a fan. I decided that the best way to subvert that guilt was to pay what they were asking for.
Also, long term profits/concert tickets/publicity/etc. will have to be calculated before evaluating their experiment from a capitalist/profit perspective.
Well, yes, in the same way that an infant might calculate into Muhammad Ali...
I'm not paying for 160kbps [i'm not an audiophile, i'm just not deaf] tracks
Hate to break it to you, but if you not only can genuinely tell the difference between 160kbps mp3s and CDs, but notice it and care enough about it to prevent you from picking music up for free, you are an audiophile.
Radiohead obviously wanted to be compensated for their services (why else would they give users the option to pay what they like instead of just giving it to them for free?). They just didn't want to pressure people into a price they didn't want to pay. So, it's probably fine to pay $0.00, so long as you feel nice and guilty afterwards.
On the other hand, if you start downloading/distributing it via P2P clients, it is still wrong. At least the website encourages people to pay something for the music, whereas P2P gives you no option, and perpetuates the file on the network, thus encouraging others to do the same. All this does is show that if you give a pirate almost exactly what he wants, he still won't give you anything in return.
Fight the man! Just one arrest is a slippery slope into SLAVERY! If you support public safety, you support the TORTURING OF INNOCENT SUSPECTED TERRORISTS! People should be allowed to drive as fast as they want! Anything less is UNAMERICAN should be UNCONSTITUTIONAL!
See? You're not the only person who can blow liberal caution out of scope, proportion, and context.
I don't think we should be expecting companies to boycott business based on human rights records. These people have enough hardships without companies refusing to provide them services based on the actions of their unrepresentative government. It's not fair on the companies or the people.
Slashdot Mirror
How would bands even get a chance to be judged "good" without having any money to make their music? Metallica and Greenday would be able until they retire, because they probably have the money to risk on independent album production, but it relies on money they made on previous distribution systems.
Just think about that statement for a moment. Think about how different almost everything (literally) was back then. Think about people's/society's expectations. Just take a moment to let the stupidity sink in.
Not to mention people hurling random, sexist abuse at you.
That seems a little unscientific. I'm going to wait for the results of properly peer-reviewed experiment data before I make a judgement on that one.
Will the publicists be able to somehow offset the expensive startup costs making music? Or will professional music-making become a luxury for the very rich?
... not to mention relatively clueless about encryption principles. Sorry if the following questions are glaringly obvious.
How does it work? How will it affect my machine if enabled (i.e. will I notice?)? Could an OEM (I hear Microsoft is distributing PCs nowadays) theoretically set up the TPM to lock down a system pre-purchase? What happens when the TPM blocks something/notices a different checksum?
For the record, I agree with you, but the mentality isn't about what these people deserve, it's about efficiency over compassion. The poor don't deserve to die, they just don't deserve to be supported. Sadly, it makes perfect sense.
No, I can't say I do.
Y'know, that office suite, the one that replaces Mircrosoft Office?
Uhhh...
The one that replaced Word?
Word's been replaced?
Anyway, don't you have anything to say to me?
Um, thanks?
You're welcome!
I stared at your comment, chuckling for a good minute. Thank you!
Look at their robots.txt. Apparently bots are allowed to copy (some of) their HTML, just not browsers.
... read the "scofflaw blogging" link off their front page? Or should that be "scofflaw morbing"? It's ten different different web personas, and ten different ways of saying people feel more empowered when they're anonymous.
You're not! Please pretend you never read that!
And certainly stop distributing that info immediately!
Now it's my turn. Who's being shafted in the current model? I was referring to those without decent internet speeds, and those who find online shoppping for anything to be vastly inferior to its more physical cousin. Not to mention those who want original quality CDs, but not at $40-80 each.
I didn't like their distribution model. I'm not a fan of this internet-only distribution model, because if it were to become ubiquitous, the music industry would be shafting a significant number of people. The distribution model also relies on guilt, a fact of which I'm also not a fan. I decided that the best way to subvert that guilt was to pay what they were asking for.
I disagree.
Radiohead obviously wanted to be compensated for their services (why else would they give users the option to pay what they like instead of just giving it to them for free?). They just didn't want to pressure people into a price they didn't want to pay. So, it's probably fine to pay $0.00, so long as you feel nice and guilty afterwards.
On the other hand, if you start downloading/distributing it via P2P clients, it is still wrong. At least the website encourages people to pay something for the music, whereas P2P gives you no option, and perpetuates the file on the network, thus encouraging others to do the same. All this does is show that if you give a pirate almost exactly what he wants, he still won't give you anything in return.
Fight the man! Just one arrest is a slippery slope into SLAVERY! If you support public safety, you support the TORTURING OF INNOCENT SUSPECTED TERRORISTS! People should be allowed to drive as fast as they want! Anything less is UNAMERICAN should be UNCONSTITUTIONAL!
See? You're not the only person who can blow liberal caution out of scope, proportion, and context.
I don't think we should be expecting companies to boycott business based on human rights records. These people have enough hardships without companies refusing to provide them services based on the actions of their unrepresentative government. It's not fair on the companies or the people.
It's funny that the first result from your search is "AppleWorks/ClarisWorks Dies Quietly", which is neither evil nor mysterious. It's just sad.