We know absolutely zero about the music business, economics, consumer purchases, consumer income, income priority, adaptive practices, and culture.
Just like everyone else in our corporate circles. However we must inflate and make up idiotic scenarios in an attempt to rationalize ripping off musicians, consumers, and killing competition.
Everyone knows this, but we douchebag's[sic] constant lies here means it must constantly be reiterated to perpetuate our existence.
So far you have not successfully argued against anything in this thread. And you have not disrupted it either, the intelligent discussions will simply flow around you, leaving you behind.
That works the other way around. Why don't you do some research - it's easy - watch youtube videos on the reality of the labels. There are LOTS of insiders telling you the truth, start with Frank Zappa:
There are tonnes of explanations of the labels leeching. At least those you claim leech (which they do not) do not charge artists or steal their copyrights!
You can argue they ignore the right to copy, but that's the corporate owned site of CNet who promoted Limewire.
Like anything, programs have "good" and "bad" uses and we don't seem to ban guns or cars or planes because they could be used to kill people or collapse buildings.
There are a lot of legitimate uses of filesharing, but competition (software, music, movies) scares the BSA members, labels, studios.
That's market interference to uphold monopolies. When the mob did it, it was illegal. Now it's normal? Yeah, whatever buddy.
Comments on YouTube were pretty harsh. I wonder if the artists performing in the video and recording/writing the song will take them with a grain of salt, instead of dismissing outright? Probably not, but one could hope.
Criticism is important and if you are serious about your craft, you'll at least listen.
Are they advertising? Are they just praying people buy?
I was having an email exchange with my fav artist (which of course blew my mind) regarding such things where he said the same thing, anecdotal address book of now unemployed people.
My question is, what are they doing to stand out? What are they doing to provide a reason to buy? When the sales numbers fall, was it new releases? Or just older stuff that most people might be sampling for free?
Has their fanbase grown or shrunk (fanbase == people interested, not necessarily paying fans)? How's their pricing? Have they been active on social networks? Have they tried bundling stuff? Not just freakin' tshirts. To be honest, forget tshirts, make dress shirts with the artist's logo on it, small but professional.
Then offer interaction/connection - reading chapters with fans on a G+ Hangout or something similar. Tickets are awarded to paying fans via lottery.
Not all of it works, but giving up is the only way you truly fail.
Plus there's a LOT of competition now, anyone, even me with my piss-poor grammar, can write a book and release it! If I am good at marketing it, that's competition.
Ah so the Palestinians are guilty and the Israelis are innocent of any wrong doings throughout history.
Gotcha.
Israel response has been excessive. And given the sanctions they impose and the methods of doing so, it is understandable the Palestinians would be angry.
Neither is innocent and neither should react as they do. But killing them is not the answer either!
Why someone does something is very relevant when attempting from preventing a repeat.
Mistakes do happen and when it happens to your kid, you won't feel the same. You won't think "mistakes happen, it's worth the risk" and I don't buy that possibility speculation. Just because you do not see a firearm does not mean the carrying protector will not have their hand on their own when confronting a suspect. And a suspect could be anyone. Have you seen some of the reactions of security guards? Or police? It's the fear I mentioned. That's what will lead to a mistake.
How is the argument I presented not a good one? The premises I provided were specific to the discussion of whether armed defenses in this situation is appropriate. In this case, it isn't. In the case of a military base, that goes without saying that you'd expect people to be armed. You're also seeing restricted area signs all over, another indication that you can expect to find an armed defense.
Do you want schools to be similar? It's very similar to the airports, wow, are they ever safe now! /sarcasm. They are a security nightmare. Back to your story, so the kid doesn't enter the school, he just shoots from outside. Next you'll want armed guards on the perimeter? Maybe a fence too?
Do you see the slippery slope here?
It IS far better and not that difficult to identify mentally ill. You honestly think there were no signs for Adam? How about the two boys bullied? How about Amanda from BC? The people around them should have known the signs. Adam's mother knew he had problems. That's a sign to get him help.
True you can't protect always and you won't catch them all, but not all mentally ill snap and kill people either. And not all armed guards will catch everyone that enters a school intent on causing harm.
So which do you feel is the better option? Try to help people or build fences and guards? Or is there some balance that can be achieved?
There is NO such thing as 100% safe! Your kids could be run over crossing the street by someone who couldn't get a gun but could get a car. NOTE: This does not imply banning cars! Just an example of inherent safety issues.
I just don't feel comfortable putting my kids into a prison-like school. I'd feel better if they hired profilers, maybe some kids could get the help they need.
Teachers were terrified. Several students were listening to Appetite for Destruction, clearly aimed at generating terroists. SWAT was called in to address the issue.
According to unnamed sources quite familiar with the situation "the students were walking through the halls quietly singing 'Welcome to the Jungle' which immediately drew the attention of our principal, John Hendricks. He immediately hit the terrorist alarm, you know the blinking green light? And we all ran to our rooms, put on our kevlar vests and hid under our desks, like the duck-and-cover instructional video our teacher showed us."
Principal Hendricks only had to say "if it were not for the quick response of our tactical volunteer team, smashing the iPod to pieces, placing a black bag over the students' heads after tackling them to the floor, we'd all be dead! At least that's what we feared would happen. Thankfully the SWAT team arrived just a moment later, along with the bomb squad and fire department, to inspect the students' belongings."
When asked why they would listen to such obvious terrorist training material, not to mention banned material containing the word "gun" (despite the counter pleasant word "rose"), the students were quoted saying "You're in the jungle baby, you're gonna die." Immediately after the students were regagged, dressed in orange jumpsuits, and rehooded.
The police spokesperson is quoted saying the parents of these two criminals-in-the-making are currently on their way to Cuba and will be questioned upon their arrival.
Thankfully the NRA got their way and no one was hurt. Who knew what was acceptable and popular just 25 years ago would suddenly become banned. No overraction, it's all just to keep us safe! Thankfully someone is watching out for us.
... back to my Anne Murray cassette (as the CD's were banned last week because of piracy).
Acts of terrorism don't need to be repeated in their entirety for the fear to be continually spread. Just because the pilots are armed and no planes have been flown into buildings doesn't mean there is a direct causal relationship.
The point was not to kill people but to spread fear. If they wanted to kill large numbers of people they could have done things quite differently.
Point being, you can arm the teachers and janitors and those who want to kill themselves and take others with them will come up with a different plan. Then the concerned public with react to that and the next attack will be different.
It's a game of catchup and it does NOT address the root cause. Addressing the root cause will go farther in making things safer than arming teachers or volunteers.
Are there many attacks by Palestinian's on school children?
In such a case I would prefer to not apply a band-aide and instead figure out why Palestinian's are attacking in the first place (though such things would require and admission of fault on behalf of Israeli authorities).
Much like in the US, admission of fault (from the shooter to the people who knew but did nothing to help him) is hard to come by. It's much easier to blame others and stick someone with a firearm in the office "just in case" rather than address the real issue.
And if your trained volunteer shoots an innocent kid, as mistakes happen, what will result from that? I can tell you if it was a Palestinian kid who was shot, nothing would result. I don't see how arming people is really going to help.
Asking a teacher to tackle a would-be shooter is encouraging paranoia. After Columbine people fed that paranoia and spent countless dollars on security. Still didn't address the real problem.
I understand your fear and I don't think the school's policy is the correct answer, agreeing with you, but I don't think a trained volunteer carrying a 9mm is the answer any more than frisking each student that enters the school and keeping the kids behind 20ft fences, guarded with security cameras and snipers.
Sure you dropped the odds of shootings on school grounds, but you didn't address the root cause of the problem.
They had an article/show about them and interviewed the main owner/founder. It's hilarious, he coined the Patent Troll phrase and look what he's doing now!
Sorta like how Hollywood used to be the rebels, against Edison, but now look at them!
On the post: Sony Issues The 'Bob Dylan Copyright Collection Volume' Solely To Extend Copyright On Dylan's Work
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Sony Issues The 'Bob Dylan Copyright Collection Volume' Solely To Extend Copyright On Dylan's Work
Music Biz not for WallStreet
This makes more sense and explains why the industry changed in the 80's and more so in the 90's.
Makes much more sense on why things have changed than "piracy" which is the convenient scapegoat.
On the post: Sony Issues The 'Bob Dylan Copyright Collection Volume' Solely To Extend Copyright On Dylan's Work
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Makes total sense.
On the post: Sony Issues The 'Bob Dylan Copyright Collection Volume' Solely To Extend Copyright On Dylan's Work
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
And nice ad-hominem attack.
So far you have not successfully argued against anything in this thread. And you have not disrupted it either, the intelligent discussions will simply flow around you, leaving you behind.
On the post: Sony Issues The 'Bob Dylan Copyright Collection Volume' Solely To Extend Copyright On Dylan's Work
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Wow, that was intellectually stimulating. I think my 2-month old son has more intelligent things to say than you do!
On the post: Sony Issues The 'Bob Dylan Copyright Collection Volume' Solely To Extend Copyright On Dylan's Work
Re: Re: Re: Re:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZazEM8cgt0
Then some even more inside folks
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsCzcZxSLJA
There are tonnes of explanations of the labels leeching. At least those you claim leech (which they do not) do not charge artists or steal their copyrights!
You can argue they ignore the right to copy, but that's the corporate owned site of CNet who promoted Limewire.
Like anything, programs have "good" and "bad" uses and we don't seem to ban guns or cars or planes because they could be used to kill people or collapse buildings.
There are a lot of legitimate uses of filesharing, but competition (software, music, movies) scares the BSA members, labels, studios.
That's market interference to uphold monopolies. When the mob did it, it was illegal. Now it's normal? Yeah, whatever buddy.
On the post: Sony Issues The 'Bob Dylan Copyright Collection Volume' Solely To Extend Copyright On Dylan's Work
Re: Re:
On the post: Sony Issues The 'Bob Dylan Copyright Collection Volume' Solely To Extend Copyright On Dylan's Work
Re: Re:
How many kids are going to run out to buy this overpriced rarities? How many kids can even relate to Dylan?
On the post: Confusing Value And Price, Choir Demands £3000 Per Download
Re: Video
Criticism is important and if you are serious about your craft, you'll at least listen.
On the post: Quick List Of Successes In Which Copyright Didn't Matter
Re: Re: Re: Re: Tired old examples
I was having an email exchange with my fav artist (which of course blew my mind) regarding such things where he said the same thing, anecdotal address book of now unemployed people.
My question is, what are they doing to stand out? What are they doing to provide a reason to buy? When the sales numbers fall, was it new releases? Or just older stuff that most people might be sampling for free?
Has their fanbase grown or shrunk (fanbase == people interested, not necessarily paying fans)? How's their pricing? Have they been active on social networks? Have they tried bundling stuff? Not just freakin' tshirts. To be honest, forget tshirts, make dress shirts with the artist's logo on it, small but professional.
Then offer interaction/connection - reading chapters with fans on a G+ Hangout or something similar. Tickets are awarded to paying fans via lottery.
Not all of it works, but giving up is the only way you truly fail.
Plus there's a LOT of competition now, anyone, even me with my piss-poor grammar, can write a book and release it! If I am good at marketing it, that's competition.
On the post: NRA: To Protect The 2nd Amendment, We Must Trample The 1st & 4th Amendments
Re: Re: Re:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Israeli%E2%80%93Palestinian_conflict
I don't think it's as cut and dry as you make it sound, but it also sounds like you are watching Fox News.
On the post: NRA: To Protect The 2nd Amendment, We Must Trample The 1st & 4th Amendments
Re: Re: Re:
Gotcha.
Israel response has been excessive. And given the sanctions they impose and the methods of doing so, it is understandable the Palestinians would be angry.
Neither is innocent and neither should react as they do. But killing them is not the answer either!
On the post: NRA: To Protect The 2nd Amendment, We Must Trample The 1st & 4th Amendments
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: NRA: To Protect The 2nd Amendment, We Must Trample The 1st & 4th Amendments
Re: It was an "Accident"
There's a list of crashes and causes.
On the post: NRA: To Protect The 2nd Amendment, We Must Trample The 1st & 4th Amendments
Re: Re: Re:
Why someone does something is very relevant when attempting from preventing a repeat.
Mistakes do happen and when it happens to your kid, you won't feel the same. You won't think "mistakes happen, it's worth the risk" and I don't buy that possibility speculation. Just because you do not see a firearm does not mean the carrying protector will not have their hand on their own when confronting a suspect. And a suspect could be anyone. Have you seen some of the reactions of security guards? Or police? It's the fear I mentioned. That's what will lead to a mistake.
How is the argument I presented not a good one? The premises I provided were specific to the discussion of whether armed defenses in this situation is appropriate. In this case, it isn't. In the case of a military base, that goes without saying that you'd expect people to be armed. You're also seeing restricted area signs all over, another indication that you can expect to find an armed defense.
Do you want schools to be similar? It's very similar to the airports, wow, are they ever safe now! /sarcasm. They are a security nightmare. Back to your story, so the kid doesn't enter the school, he just shoots from outside. Next you'll want armed guards on the perimeter? Maybe a fence too?
Do you see the slippery slope here?
It IS far better and not that difficult to identify mentally ill. You honestly think there were no signs for Adam? How about the two boys bullied? How about Amanda from BC? The people around them should have known the signs. Adam's mother knew he had problems. That's a sign to get him help.
True you can't protect always and you won't catch them all, but not all mentally ill snap and kill people either. And not all armed guards will catch everyone that enters a school intent on causing harm.
So which do you feel is the better option? Try to help people or build fences and guards? Or is there some balance that can be achieved?
There is NO such thing as 100% safe! Your kids could be run over crossing the street by someone who couldn't get a gun but could get a car. NOTE: This does not imply banning cars! Just an example of inherent safety issues.
I just don't feel comfortable putting my kids into a prison-like school. I'd feel better if they hired profilers, maybe some kids could get the help they need.
On the post: NRA: To Protect The 2nd Amendment, We Must Trample The 1st & 4th Amendments
Overreaction continues
Thankfully the NRA got their way and no one was hurt. Who knew what was acceptable and popular just 25 years ago would suddenly become banned. No overraction, it's all just to keep us safe! Thankfully someone is watching out for us.
... back to my Anne Murray cassette (as the CD's were banned last week because of piracy).
On the post: NRA: To Protect The 2nd Amendment, We Must Trample The 1st & 4th Amendments
Re: Re: Really good research techdirt
On the post: NRA: To Protect The 2nd Amendment, We Must Trample The 1st & 4th Amendments
Re: NRA proposal
The point was not to kill people but to spread fear. If they wanted to kill large numbers of people they could have done things quite differently.
Point being, you can arm the teachers and janitors and those who want to kill themselves and take others with them will come up with a different plan. Then the concerned public with react to that and the next attack will be different.
It's a game of catchup and it does NOT address the root cause. Addressing the root cause will go farther in making things safer than arming teachers or volunteers.
Maybe it's time to look at some stats on plane attacks?
http://www.planecrashinfo.com/cause.htm
The hijackings/attacks are not measuring up to the fear being pumped at you.
On the post: NRA: To Protect The 2nd Amendment, We Must Trample The 1st & 4th Amendments
Re:
In such a case I would prefer to not apply a band-aide and instead figure out why Palestinian's are attacking in the first place (though such things would require and admission of fault on behalf of Israeli authorities).
Much like in the US, admission of fault (from the shooter to the people who knew but did nothing to help him) is hard to come by. It's much easier to blame others and stick someone with a firearm in the office "just in case" rather than address the real issue.
And if your trained volunteer shoots an innocent kid, as mistakes happen, what will result from that? I can tell you if it was a Palestinian kid who was shot, nothing would result. I don't see how arming people is really going to help.
Asking a teacher to tackle a would-be shooter is encouraging paranoia. After Columbine people fed that paranoia and spent countless dollars on security. Still didn't address the real problem.
I understand your fear and I don't think the school's policy is the correct answer, agreeing with you, but I don't think a trained volunteer carrying a 9mm is the answer any more than frisking each student that enters the school and keeping the kids behind 20ft fences, guarded with security cameras and snipers.
Sure you dropped the odds of shootings on school grounds, but you didn't address the root cause of the problem.
On the post: Intellectual Ventures: Don't Mind Our 2000 Shell Companies, That's Totally Normal
This American Life
Sorta like how Hollywood used to be the rebels, against Edison, but now look at them!
Next >>