Its effectively the premium streaming music revenue strategy, but hopefully more distributed without the silos and with everyone getting paid, and not just the top artists.
Hi, my music is on all streaming music platforms so I can offer some insight: My stage name is "Iron Curtain" whose namespace I share with other artists (such as a metal band who sounds like Motörhead, a Russian rap group, and at the top of the heap, a dark-wave outfit with hits in the early 1980's). I am not a "Top Artist" by any stretch of the imagination (at least not compared to my peers). Yet, because I distribute my music over CDBaby to Spotify, Apple Music, Tidal, et al., I can see for myself in the backend how much royalties I receive from each system. Here are some insights:
-I hardly get paid anything from Tidal
-I get paid something from $.38 to $.67 or even more per month from Spotify
-I get paid something like $.19 per month from Amazon Streaming.
-I hardly get paid anything from Apple Music
These are just off the top of my head and strictly from memory, so it may not be 100% accurate. When it hits $10 or over, that's when I get paid from CDbaby. That being said, Streaming at least pays something. And the alternative to streaming for most people is not iTunes or Bandcamp, but piracy. I license all my original music with a creative commons license so that's not a problem, but it's not as if I get paid zilch.
Did you really read the OP? Cutting off comments for a day is very unlikely to seriously harm anyone, no matter how much they depend on the internet.
Not so. It would hurt users of teleconferencing programs such as Zoom and chat platforms such as Discord and Slack. What if hospitals or health clinics rely on said programs?
I do hope you're right and I'm overreacting. However, 2020 has taught me to be as pessimistic as possible.
Mike, I think you should allow Rocky to make a post on this blog/website clearly explaining, differentiating, and delineating the three descriptive terms.
I'd say that's a good idea, but the pandemic has proven how much we actually need the internet to survive. Even a day without it is like cutting off electricity or water for a day, which is definitely a day too much.
If one were to say "Trump was censored yesterday", then the apologists counter with "no he wasn't totally censored because it's still possible to view the tweet, even if you have to do extra work, and you can't like it or RT it".
So you're saying that Trump was censored but he wasn't? Is that Schrödinger's Censorship?
I made a similar point above, that the CASE act was passed in the House overwhelmingly, including by some of the youngest representatives.
I also made the point to bring back the OTA, which Stephen T. Stone correctly pointed out that the Republicans got rid of it because it challenged their authority.
So age (and how long one has been in Washington) may not be the most relevant factors here, and we agree on that.
But I’m open to claims that we may need to open up [Apple's, Google's, and Twitter's] platforms (in different ways as they accomplish different things.).
I agree with this. Cory Doctorow suggested "adversarial interoperability", and Twitter, for all their faults, is actually doing something suggested by Mike Masnick's "Protocols, not Platforms" paper for the Knight First Amendment Institute.
So Twitter is at least doing the right thing in one case; Apple and Google, AFAICT, have not opened themselves up to such a degree (at least not Apple).
Congress needs a reboot and fresh blood on a tragic scale.
It's not just that; they need reps and Senators who understand the internet as well as Sen. Ron Wyden and former SEC Chairman Chris Cox did. CASE in point (pun partially intended): an overwhelming majority of representatives voted to pass the CASE act in the house, even by those I generally agree with (usually a lot). So it's not just "fresh blood", but people who understand the issues as well. Maybe we should bring back the Office of Technology Assessment so congress could make informed decisions again.
If anyone manages to spot a long-sighted and somewhat principled politician, please advise the nearest park ranger. They're on the endangered species list and we suspect they'll have to be carefully bred back into sustainable numbers in captivity. All we've got so far is Bernie.
It raises a question why Gabbard and Nunes ever have to use the courts considering that both are elected fucking representatives!!! Couldn't they use the bully pulpit? Or is that not enough for them?
is why I donate as much money as I can to them (as well as legally upload all I can as well). The Internet Archive is far too valuable a resource to perish.
On the post: Our New Monetization Experiment: Coil & The Web Monetization Protocol
Re: Re:
Hi, my music is on all streaming music platforms so I can offer some insight: My stage name is "Iron Curtain" whose namespace I share with other artists (such as a metal band who sounds like Motörhead, a Russian rap group, and at the top of the heap, a dark-wave outfit with hits in the early 1980's). I am not a "Top Artist" by any stretch of the imagination (at least not compared to my peers). Yet, because I distribute my music over CDBaby to Spotify, Apple Music, Tidal, et al., I can see for myself in the backend how much royalties I receive from each system. Here are some insights:
-I hardly get paid anything from Tidal
-I get paid something from $.38 to $.67 or even more per month from Spotify
-I get paid something like $.19 per month from Amazon Streaming.
-I hardly get paid anything from Apple Music
These are just off the top of my head and strictly from memory, so it may not be 100% accurate. When it hits $10 or over, that's when I get paid from CDbaby. That being said, Streaming at least pays something. And the alternative to streaming for most people is not iTunes or Bandcamp, but piracy. I license all my original music with a creative commons license so that's not a problem, but it's not as if I get paid zilch.
On the post: Donald Trump Now Wants To Repeal Section 230, Which Will Actually Make The Stuff He Complains About Worse
Re: Re: Re: Shhhhh
Koby, at this point, I'm starting to think you're a parody troll.
On the post: Donald Trump Now Wants To Repeal Section 230, Which Will Actually Make The Stuff He Complains About Worse
Re: Re: Re: Repeal 230
Good point! The Twitter account @badsec230takes can keep track of those who have on twitter!
On the post: Stop Pretending The Trump GOP Genuinely Cares About Monopoly Power
Re: Re: Ooops
There, Mr. Masnick. I FTFY. That should be your reply to every single time Koby makes a post on Section 230. It's not like he's gonna learn anything.
On the post: Donald Trump Now Wants To Repeal Section 230, Which Will Actually Make The Stuff He Complains About Worse
Re: Shhhhh
you mean I'll have to click once in order to view your comments?
gasps, dropping monocle in champagne glass
On the post: Donald Trump Now Wants To Repeal Section 230, Which Will Actually Make The Stuff He Complains About Worse
Re: Re: Re: Repeal 230
Not so. It would hurt users of teleconferencing programs such as Zoom and chat platforms such as Discord and Slack. What if hospitals or health clinics rely on said programs?
I do hope you're right and I'm overreacting. However, 2020 has taught me to be as pessimistic as possible.
On the post: Stop Pretending The Trump GOP Genuinely Cares About Monopoly Power
Re: Re: Re: Re: Ooops
Mike, I think you should allow Rocky to make a post on this blog/website clearly explaining, differentiating, and delineating the three descriptive terms.
…Or not. It's your blog.
On the post: Stop Pretending The Trump GOP Genuinely Cares About Monopoly Power
Re: Re:
Tell that to the over 200,000 people who died of COVID-19 on the old, overweight guy's watch.
On the post: Donald Trump Now Wants To Repeal Section 230, Which Will Actually Make The Stuff He Complains About Worse
Re: Repeal 230
I'd say that's a good idea, but the pandemic has proven how much we actually need the internet to survive. Even a day without it is like cutting off electricity or water for a day, which is definitely a day too much.
On the post: Stop Pretending The Trump GOP Genuinely Cares About Monopoly Power
Re: Re: Re: Ooops
So you're saying that Trump was censored but he wasn't? Is that Schrödinger's Censorship?
On the post: Stop Pretending The Trump GOP Genuinely Cares About Monopoly Power
Re:
I made a similar point above, that the CASE act was passed in the House overwhelmingly, including by some of the youngest representatives.
I also made the point to bring back the OTA, which Stephen T. Stone correctly pointed out that the Republicans got rid of it because it challenged their authority.
So age (and how long one has been in Washington) may not be the most relevant factors here, and we agree on that.
On the post: Stop Pretending The Trump GOP Genuinely Cares About Monopoly Power
Re: Re:
Considering the GOP Presidents that followed, it was painfully clear that the GOP (at least their base and funders) saw willful ignorance as virtue.
On the post: Stop Pretending The Trump GOP Genuinely Cares About Monopoly Power
Re: Monopolies of Companies I Like
I agree with this. Cory Doctorow suggested "adversarial interoperability", and Twitter, for all their faults, is actually doing something suggested by Mike Masnick's "Protocols, not Platforms" paper for the Knight First Amendment Institute.
So Twitter is at least doing the right thing in one case; Apple and Google, AFAICT, have not opened themselves up to such a degree (at least not Apple).
On the post: Stop Pretending The Trump GOP Genuinely Cares About Monopoly Power
Re:
I regret that I have but one insigtful vote to give to that comment…
On the post: Stop Pretending The Trump GOP Genuinely Cares About Monopoly Power
Congress needing "fresh blood"
It's not just that; they need reps and Senators who understand the internet as well as Sen. Ron Wyden and former SEC Chairman Chris Cox did. CASE in point (pun partially intended): an overwhelming majority of representatives voted to pass the CASE act in the house, even by those I generally agree with (usually a lot). So it's not just "fresh blood", but people who understand the issues as well. Maybe we should bring back the Office of Technology Assessment so congress could make informed decisions again.
On the post: Nikola's Plan To Combat Its No Good, Very Bad Month Appears To Be Using Copyright To Silence Critics
Re: Re:
Does Ron Wyden count? There are also Democratic Socialists in local and state seats, such as Lee Carter (Virginia House of Delegates), Summer Lee (Pennsylvania House of Representatives), Sara Inammorato (Ibid.), and Julia Salazar (New York State Senate) who are far more principled than their colleagues of the same party (this is not an exhaustive list, BTW). Also, keep in mind that someone who doesn't share your principles could still very well be principled.
On the post: Reps. Gabbard And Gosar Introduce Ridiculous House Companion To Ridiculous Anti-230 Senate Bill From Senator Kennedy
Re: Re: Gabbard and Nunes
Gabbard is right about Snowden and Assange. Otherwise, forget her.
On the post: Reps. Gabbard And Gosar Introduce Ridiculous House Companion To Ridiculous Anti-230 Senate Bill From Senator Kennedy
Gabbard and Nunes
It raises a question why Gabbard and Nunes ever have to use the courts considering that both are elected fucking representatives!!! Couldn't they use the bully pulpit? Or is that not enough for them?
On the post: New Study: Once Again, The Mainstream Media Is A Bigger Problem In Spreading Disinformation Than Social Media
Re: Any article...
While there are definitely Dems spreading lies (Mike Masnick would vouch for me), could you please be specific?
On the post: Open Access Faces Many Problems; Here's One That The Indispensable Internet Archive Is Helping To Solve
Internet Archive under siege
The very facts that
is why I donate as much money as I can to them (as well as legally upload all I can as well). The Internet Archive is far too valuable a resource to perish.
Next >>