> ... the techdirt blog constantly attacks our livlihood ...
Warning people of an oncoming tsunami is not attacking their livelihood. Don't shoot the messenger who is also trying to help.
> I spend a lot of time on the phone with these guys. Part
> of the job.
So you'd rather spend time on the phone with bureaucrats rather than connecting with your fans? Do the distributions warrant the time you spend on the phone with ASCAP, etc?
> ... you may in fact be doing more harm than good.
How can a blog be doing more harm than good? Wake up. The monopoly rents are over and the unnecessary middle men are dying. Would you rather make 1% of $20 or 100% of $0.20?
> Many people recommend socialism over capitalism ...
USA is a socialist country; socialist for corporations. 90% of the Fortune 500 have received government subsidies. The pentagon is a subsidy for high-tech and the military is a subsidy for weapons manufacturers. Your grandchildren will be paying for the bailout to financial institutions who bet that poor people could repay $500,000 mortgages.
> If every website in the world banned Googlebot tomorrow,
> google would cease to be relevant within days, and cease
> altogether within weeks. An out of date search engines
> isn't very powerful, is it?
This is the stupidest thing I've read today. Why do you think the internet exploded? Without a useful search engine, the internet is a bunch of floating islands. Remember when all websites had a "useful links" page? Good links were gold. Google destroyed all that, because if you forget the link you just google it and find the page again.
If everyone banned Goggle tomorrow, the internet would collapse.
Gambling is already legal, just not on the internet.
Frankly, it doesn't matter if the US gov decided tomorrow to allow online gaming. The casinos are so far behind sites like Pokerstars, they have no chance.
That is how you prove copying. The chances of two people coming to the same right answer are high. The chances of two people coming to the same wrong answer are small.
> 30 years ago, nobody would have thought of doing this stuff.
What are you talking about? When I was young, I saw way more "for a good time" numbers scrawled on the bathroom door. When I was young, we'd actually get together and prank call people. It was our thing to do on Sundays (until my friend's mom caught us).
Canada's government funded media, CBC, actually has some of the best investigative reporting. I don't think this is bad, as long as there is other media. Corporations and government both have bias and their media show it. Having media funded by both helps with balance.
What are you talking about? What "danger" is there? If people think Perez Hilton is a news source, they will stop thinking that if he's wrong a few times. That is the whole point. Consumers of news have to take responsibility, be skeptical, and research the source.
Political parties are just there to distract you from your government spending your, your kids, your grand-kids money to bail out businesses. But, by all means, keep focusing on what is important.
I can imagine some cases where a legitimate website would want to sue fake websites for trademark infringement. For example, say a CDC spoof site had an article about deadly viral pandemic and people panicked.
The weird thing is models are not supposed to be attractive. Models are walking clothes hangers, therefore they must not detract from the clothes. You can't have women with big breasts or hips (which are truly sexy) modeling clothes because no one would look at the clothes. Add to that the fact that many top designers are gay men, who may not appreciate the female form the way straight men do, and you end up with models who are actually quite disgusting. But for some strange reason, they are thought to be beautiful.
Further, I get annoyed when "society" is blamed for skinny obsessions and anorexic kids. The reality is kids learn those behaviours from their parents.
> Suppose you invite a few friends over for dinner and a
> movie. You buy or rent a movie from the local video store
> and view the film in your home that night. Have you
> violated the copyright law by illegally publicly
> performing the movie? Probably not.
Straight from the link DD provided. I love the "Probably not", like its a grey area. If it was, EVERY SINGLE PERSON would be a criminal, because we've all watched a movie with friends. Stupid MPAA.
I think Ethorad pretty effectively smashed this article apart. I wish more people like him (her?) had even a basic understanding of statistics. This is the one subject that isn't gone into enough depth in grade school.
In any case, the ball is in you court to prove "significant number of those people aren't the same type of people you'd likely find at France Telecom".
The problem is artists aren't comfortable asking for money. That is why they (or their company) hire publicists, who are very very comfortable asking for $1000s to do public appearances, etc. The reality is no one is going to look out for your career except you, and if you don't value yourself enough to ask people to pay, you're going to starve.
RSS
Twitter
Re: (as ChrisB)
Papers make money from advertisers, who pay for more eyeballs. Hence, more circulation = more money. This your first time here?
Re: You guys scare me. (as ChrisB)
> ... how a working musician pays the rent.
Most musicians have a day job.
> ... the techdirt blog constantly attacks our livlihood ...
Warning people of an oncoming tsunami is not attacking their livelihood. Don't shoot the messenger who is also trying to help.
> I spend a lot of time on the phone with these guys. Part
> of the job.
So you'd rather spend time on the phone with bureaucrats rather than connecting with your fans? Do the distributions warrant the time you spend on the phone with ASCAP, etc?
> ... you may in fact be doing more harm than good.
How can a blog be doing more harm than good? Wake up. The monopoly rents are over and the unnecessary middle men are dying. Would you rather make 1% of $20 or 100% of $0.20?
Re: Re: (as ChrisB)
> Many people recommend socialism over capitalism ...
USA is a socialist country; socialist for corporations. 90% of the Fortune 500 have received government subsidies. The pentagon is a subsidy for high-tech and the military is a subsidy for weapons manufacturers. Your grandchildren will be paying for the bailout to financial institutions who bet that poor people could repay $500,000 mortgages.
Re: Re: Re: giggles (as ChrisB)
> It isn't about cutting hamstrings, it's stopping people
> from standing on other people's shoulders and acting like
> they are naturally tall.
Good try, but science/tech has always been that way.
"If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants" - Isaac Newton
Re: (as ChrisB)
> If every website in the world banned Googlebot tomorrow,
> google would cease to be relevant within days, and cease
> altogether within weeks. An out of date search engines
> isn't very powerful, is it?
This is the stupidest thing I've read today. Why do you think the internet exploded? Without a useful search engine, the internet is a bunch of floating islands. Remember when all websites had a "useful links" page? Good links were gold. Google destroyed all that, because if you forget the link you just google it and find the page again.
If everyone banned Goggle tomorrow, the internet would collapse.
Re: (as ChrisB)
Gambling is already legal, just not on the internet.
Frankly, it doesn't matter if the US gov decided tomorrow to allow online gaming. The casinos are so far behind sites like Pokerstars, they have no chance.
Re: Wrong Answer (as ChrisB)
That is how you prove copying. The chances of two people coming to the same right answer are high. The chances of two people coming to the same wrong answer are small.
Re: Re: Revenge is a dish... (as ChrisB)
> 30 years ago, nobody would have thought of doing this stuff.
What are you talking about? When I was young, I saw way more "for a good time" numbers scrawled on the bathroom door. When I was young, we'd actually get together and prank call people. It was our thing to do on Sundays (until my friend's mom caught us).
It is an "urban" myth society is getting ruder.
Re: Oh Canada (as ChrisB)
You mentioned Canada ...
Canada's government funded media, CBC, actually has some of the best investigative reporting. I don't think this is bad, as long as there is other media. Corporations and government both have bias and their media show it. Having media funded by both helps with balance.
Re: (as ChrisB)
> Let naive people get taken, hoping that they will learn?
What is easier? Destroying all germs or inoculating everyone?
Re: Re: Re: (as ChrisB)
What are you talking about? What "danger" is there? If people think Perez Hilton is a news source, they will stop thinking that if he's wrong a few times. That is the whole point. Consumers of news have to take responsibility, be skeptical, and research the source.
Re: Re: balance? (as ChrisB)
Hey, any of you remember those pens you could erase? Man, what ever happened to those.
Re: Re: Re: Re: (as ChrisB)
Political parties are just there to distract you from your government spending your, your kids, your grand-kids money to bail out businesses. But, by all means, keep focusing on what is important.
In some cases ... (as ChrisB)
I can imagine some cases where a legitimate website would want to sue fake websites for trademark infringement. For example, say a CDC spoof site had an article about deadly viral pandemic and people panicked.
Re: Re: Re: (as ChrisB)
You tend to get something for a fee (drivers license, admission to a state park) and the money raised tends to go back to support the service.
You tend to get nothing for taxes (property tax, sales tax) and the money goes into general revenue.
Re: Re: what I want to know is.... (as ChrisB)
The weird thing is models are not supposed to be attractive. Models are walking clothes hangers, therefore they must not detract from the clothes. You can't have women with big breasts or hips (which are truly sexy) modeling clothes because no one would look at the clothes. Add to that the fact that many top designers are gay men, who may not appreciate the female form the way straight men do, and you end up with models who are actually quite disgusting. But for some strange reason, they are thought to be beautiful.
Further, I get annoyed when "society" is blamed for skinny obsessions and anorexic kids. The reality is kids learn those behaviours from their parents.
Re: (as ChrisB)
> Suppose you invite a few friends over for dinner and a
> movie. You buy or rent a movie from the local video store
> and view the film in your home that night. Have you
> violated the copyright law by illegally publicly
> performing the movie? Probably not.
Straight from the link DD provided. I love the "Probably not", like its a grey area. If it was, EVERY SINGLE PERSON would be a criminal, because we've all watched a movie with friends. Stupid MPAA.
Re: Probably in the expected ballpark, but - (as ChrisB)
I think Ethorad pretty effectively smashed this article apart. I wish more people like him (her?) had even a basic understanding of statistics. This is the one subject that isn't gone into enough depth in grade school.
In any case, the ball is in you court to prove "significant number of those people aren't the same type of people you'd likely find at France Telecom".
Re: Re: Why are they emailing such information? (as ChrisB)
What the hell are you talking about? You've just said that email is MORE secure than letter mail. AND it is more secure than fax and phone lines.
Are you drunk?
Re: Tossing two cents into the pool... (as ChrisB)
The problem is artists aren't comfortable asking for money. That is why they (or their company) hire publicists, who are very very comfortable asking for $1000s to do public appearances, etc. The reality is no one is going to look out for your career except you, and if you don't value yourself enough to ask people to pay, you're going to starve.