Why Does TechDirt Hate Musicians?

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by freetard

And do what? Allow every inane idea the content industry has to disrupt Internet communications to proceed uninhibited? I would have ZERO problems with copyright if copyright could actually be enforced. That is without it's enforcers suggesting things that genuinely disgust me and really should disgust anyone who has any respect what-so-ever for a free society.

Free, buddy - before you continue to post, please actually try to learn something about what you're talking about?

It's pretty obvious that you haven't checked out any of the plethora of links you've been given - you continue to parrot the same nonsense well after every one of you talking points has been answered. I'm beginning to doubt that you're even really reading the posts in the thread - there's no way you could be and still be keeping up with all of us. It's all I can do to keep up with just you.

[initialsBB]

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

It is not possible to use a 3D printer to create complex devices made of multiple materials that contain things like motors or electronic circuitry.

Maybe not, but people who make a living manufacturing rough, blocky looking white plastic shot glasses and mugs should definitely be running scared.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by freetard

So all the people who used MegaUpload legitimately and lost their data, no big deal right?



I don't see any reason why Dropbox is any different from MegaUpload at a technical level. They are both cyberlockers that allow file sharing. I don't feel comfortable with websites being threatened out of existence based on "hunches" about what people use them for or the perceived character of their owners. I don't care if it is a court system that does it, judges aren't infallible and they will gladly become corrupt oppressors if you give them the power to be.

Come on, son - don't kid a kidder.

And if anybody had data on Mega that wasn't backed up they're a fool.

[initialsBB]

Originally Posted by chrisso

Going back to the opening post, 'Why Does Techdirt hate Musicians?', what we have exampled by 'Freetard' is at least someone who doesn't give a s**t about musicians.

Even deeper than that, he's displayed a total ignorance about the topic and seems to have pride in that ignorance. The bottom line for me is that someone who says "I don't value art very much. Especially fine art (painting, sculptures). I find that incredibly boring and have no clue how people could find it interesting." is clearly not an educated person.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by aroundtheworld

John, I've seen you "bash" 3D printing on numerous occasions -- every time it's mentioned in any context on these boards, it seems. I'd say it's almost like you have a vendetta against the concept or the technology, but I can't ascribe any motive that would explain it. From one technologist to another, all I can say is that only a fool would bet against the future.

What's the angle with the denialism, here? We won't see a 3D printer in every household within your lifetime, but I wouldn't bet against it for our grandchildren. Think back 60 years ago to when a computer was as big as a room and filled with vaccuum tubes -- would your grandfather have ever been able to imagine they would now exist in people's pockets, and could communicate to each other from across the world within mere milliseconds? It seems futile to me, to spend effort trying to dampen the inevitable.

Hell, no! I think it's cool as hell! I'd LOVE to have a 3D printer that could make things like guitar knobs and pickup covers, not to mention coffee cups!*

It's just that I've done some pretty extensive reading on the various technologies (there are at least half a dozen different types, each handling a different type of raw material) and I don't have an illusions about their capabilities - now or in the foreseeable future.

What I'm knocking is the technically ignorant kids who read some rah-rah feelgood promo piece about the technology and think that the Star Trek replicator is right around the corner - and think it's another new technology that will threaten IP. Sure, it'll have some slight effect - it'll probably KILL the kitschy tourist shops that sell little statues of the Golden Gate Bridge down at Fisherman's Wharf (Or whatever your local tourist landmark is) but replace industrial production of serious products? No.


* - I have a couple of lathes, drill press, jewelry fabrication gear, lapidary equipment - I love that kind of stuff. If I wasn't putting all my money into some pretty serious studio gear I'd probably have a full CNC milling rig, too. But that means that I make a point of actually learning something about it.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by initialsBB

wow! did you ever meet him?

If I did I was a baby. Got a picture of him and Dad though.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by freetard

So if Google indexes you, that is what makes you a criminal?

Don't be silly.

So if I make a cyberlocker that gives you the option of keeping things "private", I am not longer a "scumbag site"?

Let's put a different way - if you make a cyberlocker that PAYS USERS MONEY for the number of times somebody downloads something and you don't monitor what is being transferred and you fail to take down multiple copies of infringing material even after receiving multiple takedown notices you are a "scumbag site".

[AwwDeOhh]

Originally Posted by freetard

I appreciate that you basically admit that much. The point I made in my first post here stands. This is a fight between people who love the Internet and people who hate it. And I already picked my side.

Ahh.. i see you picked the side of You Hate the Internet.

huh? you say?
Right.
it's precisely because of you and your ilk, that legislation and regulation is needed. If yall could just have expressed a little self-control, and kept things to a minimum, there would be no need.

As it stands, IP isn't going away..
The telephone didn't cause previous laws to dissapear
The telegraph didn't cause previous laws to become obsolete.

In fact, new laws were needed, as there was new ways to commit crimes...
(well.. maybe not for the telegraph)
As it is, the internet is just another communication device, and IP is a HUGE driver of US economics (and i'm sure alot of other industrialized nations..)

http://www.uschamber.com/ip

• America’s IP-intensive industries employ more than 19 million workers—at all educational and skill levels.
• From 2000 to 2007, the annual salary of all workers in IP-intensive industries averaged about 60% more than for similar workers in non-IP-intensive industries.
• IP-intensive industries account for approximately 60% of total U.S. exports—rising from $665 billion in 2000 to $910 billion in 2007.
• In 2008, U.S. intellectual property companies in the manufacturing and nonmanufacturing sectors generated nearly $7.7 trillion in gross output, accounting for 33.1% of total U.S. GDP.

if you think that legislators are going to give that ^ up, so little Johnny can keep getting his free porn, you've got another thing coming.

[AwwDeOhh]

Originally Posted by initialsBB

If you want to find this copyright-free paradise that values science and math over creativity and art, just take a look at China. The irony is that all of that focus on science and engineering doesn't lead to much actual technological innovation in a culture that doesn't value creativity.

There's a reason that IP has been valued for so long. all the way back to 300AD, there was forms of copyright. (forms of copyright, not copyright forms )

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by aroundtheworld

But that's not really what John has always tried to suggest about 3D printing. From what I recall of the position he professes on the matter, politics or copyright hardly even enter into it. He instead claims that it will never happen; that the technology will never advance to the point where it can produce useful or complex items. That what so vexes me about his stance, in combine with the way he rarely misses an opportunity to denigrate it. It's very puzzling to see someone so adamant in his insistence that a technology -- which by all accounts is poised to continue developing unabated -- will languish.

What I'm saying - AS A PERSON WHO HAS BEEN INTIMATELY INVOLVED WITH MECHANICAL AND ELECTRONIC TECHNOLOGIES FOR MY ENTIRE LIFE FROM THE AGE OF 5 YEARS OLD ONWARDS is that on a technical level it's simply not gonna happen in any way remotely close to the way that certain pundits and fantasists are promoting it - like the flying cars of '50s sci-fi or the "jacking in" of William Gibson's first 3 cyberpunk novels. (Disclaimer: Gibson is one of my all time favorite authors.)

People who know and work with technology have some fairly reasonable idea of what's possible and what's a pipe dream.

Can one of you guys please pass the bong this way?

BTW - I'm not denigrating the technology - I'm simply saying that you bloody well don't know what you're talking about.

[John Eppstein]

Originally Posted by initialsBB

Maybe not, but people who make a living manufacturing rough, blocky looking white plastic shot glasses and mugs should definitely be running scared.

Got it in one!

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by initialsBB

The bottom line for me is that someone who says "I don't value art very much. Especially fine art (painting, sculptures). I find that incredibly boring and have no clue how people could find it interesting." is clearly not an educated person.

People also say those kind of things for effect. To seem above the crowd, edgy, controversial (hopefully in a cool way). But I agree with you, whichever way you cut the cake it's dumb, and the kind of pronouncement you look back on with embarrassment, if you do ever educate your self of course.

[AwwDeOhh]

Originally Posted by freetard

Also as nerds, we generally lack social skills and the pretend empathy that most of the human population seems to have. This is a desirable trait to have as a technologist, because our field is based on science and science doesn't care about your feelings. So we are more likely to tell things as we see it, instead of how the receiver wants to hear it.

There is a term for your condition:
Sociopath...

"pretend empathy" ? wow...

Originally Posted by definition of sociopath

• somebody who is regarded as highly antisocial, aggressive, and lacking in empathy

It is a sad sad world, when you have people that need to be told what "Human Rights" are.. but here ya go:
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
Specifically Article 15-c

(c) To benefit from the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.

[ofie]

Originally Posted by rack gear

[url=http://www.techdirt.com/blog/casestudies/articles/20120405/11221818390/perspective-complexities-copyright-creativity-victim-infringement.shtml]
Today I had to get up and go to work to earn my money. I worked back in 2003 also, but nobody is paying me for that work today. Why should they pay you?
###

I haven't read this whole thread only the first post. But come on!! If I rent out my house to you and you payed me rent in 2003, will that be it. Every other business gets payed for their properties whether physical or intellectual property but when it comes to the paying for intellectual property, you hear all sorts of stupid arguments.

[Don Hills]

Originally Posted by chrisso

Except it's not, because it isn't available worldwide.

Then make it available worldwide. (Yes, I know why it isn't. Now make it so.)

[chrisso]

Well i would say two things....
1) Online music, especially retail is crap.
I'm not a fan of iTunes, and Amazon wont sell me mp3's because I'm not an American.
2) Please don't punish me and take my work without paying for it, just because Apple and Amazon can't get it together, and because Spotify doesn't pay enough for it's music to roll the service out anywhere but prime markets.
Musicians are consumers too. Musicians don't have the power to kick Apple up the ass, or sort out the streaming debacle.

[Don Hills]

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

...
As it happens I've done a bit of reading on most of the various 3D printing technologies. The big problem with a "universal" 3D printer is that different technologies are required for different classes of materials and many of those technologies are mutually incompatible within the same device.

Current 3D printing is like a printing press. It's come a long way since Gutenberg but it's essentially a dead end. Electrostatic printing is the way of the future, and it's being used for things never before thought of. So "universal" 3D printing will happen. It'll mean working at the atomic level, not the macro level, so it'll start small. They're already building mechanisms from individual atoms.

[Don Hills]

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

... And if anybody had data on Mega that wasn't backed up they're a fool.

One point of a cloud service is that you can use it as your backup store.

BTW, the current odds are 3 to 1 against Dotcom being extradited before 2014, if at all.

[aroundtheworld]

Originally Posted by AwwDeOhh

There is a term for your condition:
Sociopath...

"pretend empathy" ? wow...

Lack of empathy does not mean someone is a sociopath. A diagnosis of antisocial personality disorder requires a confluence of multiple traits. Even the basic definition you quoted does not apply: note the use of the word "and."

There is a far more likely characterization of the claimed behavior, and hardly deserving of scorn, wouldn't you suppose?

[aroundtheworld]

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

Hell, no! I think it's cool as hell! I'd LOVE to have a 3D printer that could make things like guitar knobs and pickup covers, not to mention coffee cups!*
...
What I'm knocking is the technically ignorant kids who read some rah-rah feelgood promo piece about the technology and think that the Star Trek replicator is right around the corner - and think it's another new technology that will threaten IP.

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

What I'm saying - AS A PERSON WHO HAS BEEN INTIMATELY INVOLVED WITH MECHANICAL AND ELECTRONIC TECHNOLOGIES FOR MY ENTIRE LIFE FROM THE AGE OF 5 YEARS OLD ONWARDS is that on a technical level it's simply not gonna happen in any way remotely close to the way that certain pundits and fantasists are promoting it...
BTW - I'm not denigrating the technology - I'm simply saying that you bloody well don't know what you're talking about.

That seems like a fairer position than the one I attributed to you based on my recollection of what you've said on the subject. As I said earlier in this thread, an era of universal 3D printing is not just-around-the-corner; it's quite likely a long way off. But I have little doubt that the world will eventually see something resembling it. The underlying principles in various forms of the technology are solid, if currently halcyonic.

And all those "ignorant," fantasizing kids who get inspired by the technology? They're the ones who will developing it when they get older. I wouldn't knock youthful passion, myself; it's probably one of the most powerful forces in our world.