The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Do music artists fare better in a world with illegal file-sharing? Ribbon Microphones
Old 5th January 2010
  #91
Lives for gear
 
lagavulin16's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dean Roddey View Post
You are completely incorrect. Do you know how much it costs to design a new car? Do you have any idea how the actual world works? Clearly you don't. Even with the very high costs of cars most car companies have trouble staying in business because of the huge costs involved. Do you have the slightest idea how much it costs Intel to come out with a new generation of CPU and set up the manufacturing for it? It's billions of dollars. Do you have any idea how much it costs to design a new commercial airliner?

You are delusional if you think these things would get done if the ability to profit substantailly from them didn't exist.
Well, according to you and many people here, I don't understand how much it costs to record and market an album. I don't understand how much it costs to make a movie. At what point will I stop seeing new albums and movies put out?

Since we're 2-3 centuries in the future, we may have computers with software capable of designing microchips, airliners, and new cars for the cost of Photoshop, not to mention fabrication plants.

Quote:
The amount of software made that way is a faction of a percent of the amount of software out there in the world. You are again delusional if you think this is the answer.
It's getting bigger every year, and the software is getting much more functional. It's only a matter of time before Audacity or Reaper (which is 60 dollars) starts really competing with Logic or Pro Tools. Not to mention the plugin makers.

At what point should we make free software illegal? And why are people even making free software if nothing is accomplished without financial compensation? Linux has been a huge undertaking since the early 90s.
Old 5th January 2010
  #92
Quote:
Originally Posted by lagavulin16 View Post
At what point should we make free software illegal? And why are people even making free software if nothing is accomplished without financial compensation? Linux has been a huge undertaking since the early 90s.
If you actually would research these things, you'd find out that much of the money comes from industry. IBM financies LOTS of supposedly free software, as does Sun and others. It's not really free, they are paying for it from their corporate profits. I spent a couple years working on these projects as an IBM employee. I wrote the Xerces C++ XML parser during that time, which is part of the Apache project.

So I was being paid to write it, as were a lot of other people who were involved in it. So it's not like it was some hippie commune.

Again, you fail to understand that the only way you are going to have people capable of working on that supposedly free software is if they are highly skilled software engineers. The only way they will be highly skilled software engineers is if they do it for a living. They can only do it for a living if they get PAID for it.
Old 5th January 2010
  #93
Gear Guru
 
drBill's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dean Roddey View Post
If you actually would research these things, you'd find out that much of the money comes from industry. IBM financies LOTS of supposedly free software, as does Sun and others. It's not really free, they are paying for it from their corporate profits. I spent a couple years working on these projects as an IBM employee. I wrote the Xerces C++ XML parser during that time, which is part of the Apache project.

So I was being paid to write it, as were a lot of other people who were involved in it. So it's not like it was some hippie commune.

Again, you fail to understand that the only way you are going to have people capable of working on that supposedly free software is if they are highly skilled software engineers. The only way they will be highly skilled software engineers is if they do it for a living. They can only do it for a living if they get PAID for it.
Dean, you just don't get it.

Free you mind.

Everything is free, FREE, FREEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!



Go smoke a joint - you'll feel so much better about giving away everything.


PS - or you can do like I did and put you know who on the ignore list. Reading these threads is so much faster and less stressful. heh heh heh
Old 5th January 2010
  #94
Lives for gear
 
lagavulin16's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dean Roddey View Post
If you actually would research these things, you'd find out that much of the money comes from industry. IBM financies LOTS of supposedly free software, as does Sun and others. It's not really free, they are paying for it from their corporate profits. I spent a couple years working on these projects as an IBM employee. I wrote the Xerces C++ XML parser during that time, which is part of the Apache project.

So I was being paid to write it, as were a lot of other people who were involved in it. So it's not like it was some hippie commune.

Again, you fail to understand that the only way you are going to have people capable of working on that supposedly free software is if they are highly skilled software engineers. The only way they will be highly skilled software engineers is if they do it for a living. They can only do it for a living if they get PAID for it.
Well, sure. Lots of the open source projects are done by people who get paid to code by day, and then code their labor of love by night.

And almost all open source projects start in someone's bedroom. Cases where Sun suddenly opens up Solaris is fairly rare in comparison.

It's only natural for the big companies to get involved when they see a project that can help them.

But the point remains, open source is catching up. In 5-10 years, an open source DAW could be equal or better than Logic/Cubase/Pro-Tools. All without financial incentive.
Old 5th January 2010
  #95
Lives for gear
 
lagavulin16's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by drBill View Post
Dean, you just don't get it.

Free you mind.

Everything is free, FREE, FREEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!



Go smoke a joint - you'll feel so much better about giving away everything.
Well, that's not my point. My point is it can't be stopped. It seems your point is that it needs to be stopped and can be stopped.
Old 5th January 2010
  #96
Lives for gear
 
Lemonsqueezer's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by drBill View Post
Dean, you just don't get it.

Free you mind.

Everything is free, FREE, FREEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!



Go smoke a joint - you'll feel so much better about giving away everything.
Explains why your recent posts have been so lame
Old 5th January 2010
  #97
Quote:
Originally Posted by lagavulin16 View Post
Well, sure. Lots of the open source projects are done by people who get paid to code by day, and then code their labor of love by night.

And almost all open source projects start in someone's bedroom. Cases where Sun suddenly opens up Solaris is fairly rare in comparison.
Well, A) there has to be a day job to have, which cannot exist if all the code is open source and B) a lot of isn't starting in someone's bedroom, it's starting in someone boardroom, like IBM. It's got nothing to do with Sun opening up Solaris. It's more about companies like Sun who want to make money on hardware or IBM which failed as a computer company and became a service company wanting to have more software it can use that it can have influence over.

Quote:
But the point remains, open source is catching up. In 5-10 years, an open source DAW could be equal or better than Logic/Cubase/Pro-Tools. All without financial incentive.
It's not catching up. The amount of open source software (that's actually useful) is absolutely dwarfed by the amount of commercial software. The reason being that it costs a lot of money to not just make good software, but support it. That's why Reaper will never match SONAR or ProTools because you cannot just build the mousetrap. You have to provide support and take legal responsibility for your product, something that open source doesn't do. You cannot do those things unless you have the revenues coming in to pay for it, at which time it becomes commercial software.
Old 5th January 2010
  #98
Piracy - 10 Inconvenient Truths
http://www.ifpi.org/content/section_news/20070531.html
London, 31st May 2007

1. Pirate Bay, one of the flagships of the anti-copyright movement, makes thousands of euros from advertising on its site, while maintaining its anti-establishment “free music” rhetoric.

2. Allofmp3.com, the well-known Russian website, has not been licensed by a single IFPI member, has been disowned by right holder groups worldwide and is facing criminal proceedings in Russia.

3. Organised criminal gangs and even terrorist groups use the sale of counterfeit CDs to raise revenue and launder money.

4. Illegal file-sharers don’t care whether the copyright infringing work they distribute is from a major or independent label.

5. Reduced revenues for record companies mean less money available to take a risk on “underground” artists and more inclination to invest in “bankers” like American Idol stars.

6. ISPs often advertise music as a benefit of signing up to their service, but facilitate the illegal swapping on copyright infringing music on a grand scale.

7. The anti-copyright movement does not create jobs, exports, tax revenues and economic growth – it largely consists of people pontificating on a commercial world about which they know little.

8. Piracy is not caused by poverty. Professor Zhang of Nanjing University found the Chinese citizens who bought pirate products were mainly middle or higher income earners.

9. Most people know it is wrong to file-share copyright infringing material but won't stop till the law makes them, according to a recent study by the Australian anti-piracy group MIPI.

10. P2P networks are not hotbeds for discovering new music. It is popular music that is illegally file-shared most frequently.
Old 5th January 2010
  #99
Lives for gear
 
Lemonsqueezer's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios View Post



7. The anti-copyright movement does not create jobs, exports, tax revenues and economic growth – it largely consists of people pontificating on a commercial world about which they know little.
It doesn't destroy jobs either. But it does create free exposure for the artists. Illegal downloads are not the reason the music industry is failing. The music industry is the reason the music industry is failing.
Old 5th January 2010
  #101
Lives for gear
 
Lemonsqueezer's Avatar
 

Those figures

RIAA Single Sales (Units)

2004

Digital Single download units = 139.4 million

Physical CD Singles units = 3.4 million

Total units = 142.8 million



2005

Digital Single download units = 366.9 million

Physical CD Singles units = 2.8 million

Total units = 369.7 million



2006

Digital Single download units = 586.4 million

Physical CD Singles units = 1.7 million

Total units = 588.1 million



2007

Digital Single download units = 809.9 million

Physical CD Singles units = 2.6 million

Total units = 812.5 million



2008

Digital Single download units = 1033 million

Physical CD Singles units = 0.7 million

Total units = 1033.7 million


Illegal downloads might even being helping the music industry!!
Old 5th January 2010
  #102
IFPI DIGITAL MUSIC REPORT 2009:
KEY STATISTICS

The challenge of unauthorised free music – key figures

• Collating separate studies in 16 countries over a three-year period, IFPI estimates more than 40 billion files were illegally file-shared in 2008, giving a piracy rate of around 95 per cent.

• Overall 16 per cent of internet users in Europe regularly swapped infringing music on file-sharing services in 2008 according to Jupiter Research.

• Online piracy is hitting local repertoire. The number of new albums released in France fell by eight per cent in the first half of 2008, new artist releases tumbled by 30 per cent and the French share of newly-released albums fell from 15 to 10 per cent 2005- 08. In Spain, a sole new local artist featured in the Top 50 album chart to November 2008, down from 10 in 2003.

• In the UK, Jupiter valued the lost to online piracy at £180 million annually, with a cumulative loss of £1.1 billion by 2012 if nothing is done to address the problem.

• Online infringement is becoming a big issue for the film industry. A total of 13.7 million films were distributed on P2P networks in France in May 2008, compared to 12.2 million cinema tickets sold (Equancy and Co and Tera Consultants).

The case for ISP cooperation

• Unlawful file-sharing is driven more by the availability of unauthorised free music than better choice. In the UK, EMR finds that 71 per cent of those file-sharing giving “free music” as their main reason for doing so.

• Research suggests the “graduated response” approach would be effective without large numbers of disconnections. According to EMR, 72 per cent of consumers would stop illegally file-sharing if told to do so by their ISP.

• P2P file-sharing, the vast majority which is unauthorised copyrighted music and film, accounts for up to 80 per cent of traffic on ISP networks (ipoque).
Old 5th January 2010
  #103
Lives for gear
 
Lemonsqueezer's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios View Post
IFPI DIGITAL MUSIC REPORT
• Collating separate studies in 16 countries over a three-year period, IFPI estimates more than 40 billion files were illegally file-shared in 2008, giving a piracy rate of around 95 per cent.
.

We have already discussed this one. Each illegal download does not equal a lost sale. It's that simple. The more the industry focus's on this the less they are focusing on the real issue. This is not good. You are not helping tutt

Quote:
Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios View Post

• P2P file-sharing, the vast majority which is unauthorised copyrighted music and film, accounts for up to 80 per cent of traffic on ISP networks (ipoque).
and yet unit sales of paid music downloads continue to go up

Both singles and albums.
Old 5th January 2010
  #104
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dean Roddey View Post
Again, you fail to understand that the only way you are going to have people capable of working on that supposedly free software is if they are highly skilled software engineers. The only way they will be highly skilled software engineers is if they do it for a living. They can only do it for a living if they get PAID for it.
Yup. I am all for freedoom but until money is no longer a necessity to survive this will only hurt people. So its all free, great, now those who used to get paid to do it now have to find money elsewhere. There are already too many people on the planet and not enough jobs. Prices go up, wages go down, people starve and have to resort to things they don't want to do. Its a bad cycle.

If someone who says FREE, FREE, has some real answers and solutions on how to survive without money then lets hear them, otherwise give me a break. If it was all FREE you would spend all your time cultivating food and building infrastructure and would have no time to do the things you like and get to do nowadays.

The ways to make a living in a creative field are dwindling and if we don't make a change they could be gone forever.

Don't get me wrong, money is the root of all evils, but look at the big picture and tell us how it is going to work otherwise with where we are currently at??
Old 5th January 2010
  #105
Gear Guru
 
drBill's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Id Ridden View Post
Yup. I am all for freedoom but until money is no longer a necessity to survive this will only hurt people. So its all free, great, now those who used to get paid to do it now have to find money elsewhere. There are already too many people on the planet and not enough jobs. Prices go up, wages go down, people starve and have to resort to things they don't want to do. Its a bad cycle.

If someone who says FREE, FREE, has some real answers and solutions on how to survive without money then lets hear them, otherwise give me a break. If it was all FREE you would spend all your time cultivating food and building infrastructure and would have no time to do the things you like and get to do nowadays.

The ways to make a living in a creative field are dwindling and if we don't make a change they could be gone forever.

Don't get me wrong, money is the root of all evils, but look at the big picture and tell us how it is going to work otherwise with where we are currently at??
Great post and good common sense. But I'm sure all those on my ignore list are already typing away, intent on pulverizing you for such a divisive comment. Still, I'll give this post a BIG

Rock on IR!!
Old 5th January 2010
  #106
Something I just noticed is that YouTube doesn't allow 'regular citizens' to report copyright abuse. They only allow the copyright holder to do it. So they force the copyright holder to put forward all the time and effort required to police Youtube, which is great for Youtube of course because they don't have to spend any money doing it. And, if the copyright holder doesn't have time to catch the constant uploads of his or her stuff, then it just gets to stay on Youtube longer and make them more ad revenues. I think that's not very acceptable. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know when someone has illegally uploaded copyrighted material, and a simple flagging mechanism would be appropriate.
Old 6th January 2010
  #107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dean Roddey View Post
Something I just noticed is that YouTube doesn't allow 'regular citizens' to report copyright abuse. They only allow the copyright holder to do it. So they force the copyright holder to put forward all the time and effort required to police Youtube, which is great for Youtube of course because they don't have to spend any money doing it. And, if the copyright holder doesn't have time to catch the constant uploads of his or her stuff, then it just gets to stay on Youtube longer and make them more ad revenues. I think that's not very acceptable. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know when someone has illegally uploaded copyrighted material, and a simple flagging mechanism would be appropriate.
unfortunately that is a function of the DMCA, the law requires that only the copyright holder can make a claim of ownership under penalty of purgery, fines and punishment.

the flipside is this stops a nine year old in ohio from flagging copyrighted material as illegal.

interesting side note is that YouTube is using audio and video fingerprinting and content matching and I've seen "battling bots" each claiming ownership over shared IP such as movie trailers or music videos where than can be multiple owners...

interesting times indeed, but I'll take it over the alternative.
Old 6th January 2010
  #108
Lives for gear
 
lagavulin16's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios View Post
unfortunately that is a function of the DMCA, the law requires that only the copyright holder can make a claim of ownership under penalty of purgery, fines and punishment.

the flipside is this stops a nine year old in ohio from flagging copyrighted material as illegal.

interesting side note is that YouTube is using audio and video fingerprinting and content matching and I've seen "battling bots" each claiming ownership over shared IP such as movie trailers or music videos where than can be multiple owners...

interesting times indeed, but I'll take it over the alternative.
I say, expand the DMCA to let everyone point out copyright infringement on youtube.

But if they get it wrong three times, they lose their internet access. This goes for the copyright holder as well.
Old 6th January 2010
  #109
Quote:
Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios View Post
unfortunately that is a function of the DMCA, the law requires that only the copyright holder can make a claim of ownership under penalty of purgery, fines and punishment.
Sure, claiming ownership I can understand. But this is more about reporting abuse.
Old 6th January 2010
  #110
Lives for gear
 
lagavulin16's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dean Roddey View Post
Sure, claiming ownership I can understand. But this is more about reporting abuse.
What do you think of my idea?

Or if you really care about this, put together a website with email addresses/contact information for all the copyright infringement departments for the media companies. You could even make a firefox plugin that allows you to right click and notify them anytime a youtube video violates copyright.
Old 6th January 2010
  #111
Quote:
Originally Posted by lagavulin16 View Post
What do you think of my idea?

Or if you really care about this, put together a website with email addresses/contact information for all the copyright infringement departments for the media companies. You could even make a firefox plugin that allows you to right click and notify them anytime a youtube video violates copyright.
As usual, I think it's kind of ridiculous. Why on earth would you punish people for trying to do the right thing? The only reason you'd think that is that if you think that trying to do the right thing for someone else not in your best interests, and that could only be the case if you want to benefit from someone else's loss.

I mean, think about it. If there was a $100 fine if you reported what you thought was a crime and it turned out not to be. How many crimes do you think would get reported? A hell of a lot fewer than currently, clearly. Now if your you house got robbed because a guy walking by didn't want to risk a $100 fine, what would you think of that?

This is just another example of what I keep getting so freaked out about. The internet has indoctrinated people so badly that someone would think that such a system makes sense, that trying to help someone else protect themselves is something that you should be punished for. When the absolute worst case is that something gets pulled that people were getting for free anyway, and will likely just reposted soon enough.

A system that sane people might propose would be something more like, when you flag something, you have to select from a list (or enter) who you believe it belongs to. If you don't know, then probably you don't have a business flagging it. If more than, say, 4 flags for the same reported owner shows up, then Youtube would put a temporary hold on it and add it to a searchable database that copyright holders can search. If they find somethign of theirs, they can go look at it and ask that it be enforced or dropped.
Old 6th January 2010
  #112
hey dean -

here's some DMCA info (in case I'm fuzzy on some of it).
DMCA Notification Template - Copyright Law and SEO - McAnerin International Inc.
Old 6th January 2010
  #113
Quote:
Originally Posted by redvelvetstudios View Post
hey dean -

here's some DMCA info (in case I'm fuzzy on some of it).
DMCA Notification Template - Copyright Law and SEO - McAnerin International Inc.
I would have to assume that any private party is free to at least allow its members to notify them about anything it should choose, right?
Old 6th January 2010
  #114
Gear Addict
 
RMJAZZ's Avatar
 

Talking

You know, back in the day.....artists didn't figure on making any money off of record sales. They just worked for the live performance side of it. With all of us being able to sell our own music on a global scale through the internet, that theory is lost. Years ago, it was because the labels screwed the artists, now it's because the public screws us.

The deal is to figure out how to do as many live performances as possible and build your own following. That is how you can make money. My target demographic is still buying cd's (females between 35-50). So I can unload anywhere from 3-100 at each show I do. I don't sell 100 per show often, but it has happened many times. The norm for me is between 5-15 per show, and that number jumps up when I open for well known artists.

So go out and get some gigs!

Rob
Old 6th January 2010
  #115
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Id Ridden View Post
Yup. I am all for freedoom but until money is no longer a necessity to survive this will only hurt people. So its all free, great, now those who used to get paid to do it now have to find money elsewhere. There are already too many people on the planet and not enough jobs. Prices go up, wages go down, people starve and have to resort to things they don't want to do. Its a bad cycle.

If someone who says FREE, FREE, has some real answers and solutions on how to survive without money then lets hear them, otherwise give me a break. If it was all FREE you would spend all your time cultivating food and building infrastructure and would have no time to do the things you like and get to do nowadays.
I'm sorry if I rewind the thread a bit (seems like it's moved on), but the concept of a "free" world and the example of cloning is very interesting.

The theory among futurists (and a few sci-fi writers) is that if scarcity of common goods were to cease due to cloning, the problem would no longer be how to make a living or survive, but what to do with all the free time.

I totally agree that this is 100% irrellevant to the current discussion, but imagine for a second if you could manufacture anything you desire out of common raw materials (carbon etc.) - why would anyone need to do traditional work to sustain themselves?
Instead of working to be able to live, I bet more than enough people would live for their work. Those interested in designing new cloning machines would do so, those interested in music would engage in that.

I do realize some form of compensation mechanism would establish itself, but would it necessarily be money in the form we have today? Not sure. Made it will be fame and attention?

Given the track record of humanity this far, I'm not sure we can transition to a world where people work for the sole benefit of the collective and humanity. But it would be quite awesome if that became a reality.

Now I'll just go write some worthless music.

(BTW, sorry for any spelling/grammar mistakes - I'm a humble Swede. )
Old 6th January 2010
  #116
Jam
Lives for gear
 
Jam's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RMJAZZ View Post
You know, back in the day.....artists didn't figure on making any money off of record sales. They just worked for the live performance side of it. With all of us being able to sell our own music on a global scale through the internet, that theory is lost. Years ago, it was because the labels screwed the artists, now it's because the public screws us.

The deal is to figure out how to do as many live performances as possible and build your own following. That is how you can make money. My target demographic is still buying cd's (females between 35-50). So I can unload anywhere from 3-100 at each show I do. I don't sell 100 per show often, but it has happened many times. The norm for me is between 5-15 per show, and that number jumps up when I open for well known artists.

So go out and get some gigs!

Rob
I think that's great for the guys and gals who have a product to sell ( or sells that way ) but that really isn't everyone. In addition should you ever have the fortune to get the big break, say for example a song on a soundtrack or advert, I'd like to see you get paid fairly for it. This seems particularly appropriate as you've put in the sweat equity.

James
Old 6th January 2010
  #117
Lives for gear
 
lagavulin16's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Foxis View Post
I'm sorry if I rewind the thread a bit (seems like it's moved on), but the concept of a "free" world and the example of cloning is very interesting.

The theory among futurists (and a few sci-fi writers) is that if scarcity of common goods were to cease due to cloning, the problem would no longer be how to make a living or survive, but what to do with all the free time.

I totally agree that this is 100% irrellevant to the current discussion, but imagine for a second if you could manufacture anything you desire out of common raw materials (carbon etc.) - why would anyone need to do traditional work to sustain themselves?
Instead of working to be able to live, I bet more than enough people would live for their work. Those interested in designing new cloning machines would do so, those interested in music would engage in that.

I do realize some form of compensation mechanism would establish itself, but would it necessarily be money in the form we have today? Not sure. Made it will be fame and attention?

Given the track record of humanity this far, I'm not sure we can transition to a world where people work for the sole benefit of the collective and humanity. But it would be quite awesome if that became a reality.

Now I'll just go write some worthless music.

(BTW, sorry for any spelling/grammar mistakes - I'm a humble Swede. )
I agree with you. Dean seems to think that if there is no financial incentive, there would be no innovation. But I think without scarcity we'd live in a wonderful world where people would pursue their interests, including creating new products or improving existing ones.

It's an interesting question because although we aren't there with physical products, we are there with virtual ones. Dean and others seem to think if this continues we'll find a world with no music, no movies, and no books. I think people will still create all three regardless.
Old 6th January 2010
  #118
Quote:
Originally Posted by lagavulin16 View Post
I agree with you. Dean seems to think that if there is no financial incentive, there would be no innovation. But I think without scarcity we'd live in a wonderful world where people would pursue their interests, including creating new products or improving existing ones.

It's an interesting question because although we aren't there with physical products, we are there with virtual ones. Dean and others seem to think if this continues we'll find a world with no music, no movies, and no books. I think people will still create all three regardless.
I think they will create, and I think markets will emerge and status will develop - as is always does. Creation, Markets, Status, Economy. Economies are not limited to "money". And with all this will also emerge a general human sense of FAIRNESS and not stealing - be it property, ideas or songs. FAIRNESS is a basic human understanding... even if it is overridden by greed, another basic human understanding.
Old 6th January 2010
  #119
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Foxis View Post
I'm sorry if I rewind the thread a bit (seems like it's moved on), but the concept of a "free" world and the example of cloning is very interesting.

The theory among futurists (and a few sci-fi writers) is that if scarcity of common goods were to cease due to cloning, the problem would no longer be how to make a living or survive, but what to do with all the free time.

I totally agree that this is 100% irrellevant to the current discussion, but imagine for a second if you could manufacture anything you desire out of common raw materials (carbon etc.) - why would anyone need to do traditional work to sustain themselves?
Instead of working to be able to live, I bet more than enough people would live for their work. Those interested in designing new cloning machines would do so, those interested in music would engage in that.

I do realize some form of compensation mechanism would establish itself, but would it necessarily be money in the form we have today? Not sure. Made it will be fame and attention?

Given the track record of humanity this far, I'm not sure we can transition to a world where people work for the sole benefit of the collective and humanity. But it would be quite awesome if that became a reality.

Now I'll just go write some worthless music.

(BTW, sorry for any spelling/grammar mistakes - I'm a humble Swede. )
Okay prepare yourself for some stuff that will be hard to believe, understand and swallow....

Yeah I hear ya. I am on some out there ish, like some Jetson/Matrix stuff. We and everything are all made up of the same thing so theoretically your desk should be able to be changed into your computer etc. etc. I believe that any element can be changed to another element. Carbon can be made into water etc. etc. etc. Scientists aren't there yet and technology isn't either, at least not as we on this planet know it. That would then make sense that food and necessities could easily be created, cloned, whatever you want to call it.

That being said do you really honestly think that by the time this is possible that a utopian state will have emerged where everyone will be left free to follow whatever their passions may be?

Look at how we constantly give away our freedoms and rights, we are being stripped of anything we had. Nothing can be owned and by that time we will have all been fully educated on how we pissed away any control we used to have essentially making us nothing more then slaves. We are essentially already there but it is getting worse. So it can be cloned and money isn't essential. Great, too bad you are owned by some corporation or bank or rich guy who doesn't give a **** about you making art or doing anything you want to do. Whoops....

Have you seen what some of these uber rich cats do for fun?? You don't want to...some nasty, harsh, no care for life stuff.

Okay, so all that being said we are still here right NOW, and the only way I can get food is 1. Buy it with money 2. Cultivate it myself 3. Steal it 4. Kill someone and eat them 4. Starve to death

Tomorrow is promised to no man therefore thinking of some glorious utopian place where we are all free to follow our passions with no clue how to get there, no idea when it is, and completely ignoring the real facts of today is asinine. My belly is rumbling NOW!!! So, what was that about Money?

Free ain't the way to prosperity....history has shown us manning up and going to War is about the only way in this society, time, place to get anything you want. Cause if you don't you will just be obliterated by those more ruthless then you. You want Peace, they want Power...Pretty tough to kill with too much love, even though that is exactly what the World needs A LOT more of

Anyways how was that for some harsh OT stuff?

Your best bet is to remain completely ignorant and oblivious. If you are plugged in, stay plugged in.

Carry on.
Old 6th January 2010
  #120
Lives for gear
 

http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/index.p.../rza-responds/

This is a little blurb from RZA which should be a little more on topic...Of course as always you need to come to your own conclusions. There is just so much information out there it all needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

Cheers!
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Ben F / So much gear, so little time
0
gsilbers / Downloads, the future - Q+A forum with expert guests from CD Baby, Tunecore and Nimbit
36

Forum Jump
Forum Jump