exactly. The quote from Trudeau "Colbert-like TV would be OK, too, except you have to be brilliant." is really telling.
Why, exactly, should the public have to accept anything less? If you're not good enough to stand out and draw an audience, maybe you aren't good enough to cut the mustard and need a new line of work.
A physical good can never, by definition, be infinite. But making things at home with a turnkey system reduces the scarcity of something to low enough that it might behave as if its infinite.
If I can get a plan for making something, all I need is the materials. I would pay for the materials and the cost of running the 3D printer, but not for distribution of the finished product etc.
I remember toy machines at the zoo 20 years ago that would create a hot plastic mold of an animal for you on the spot. 3D printers are nothing more than scaling this down to something you can do in your home. So now the scarcity is lowered, so the value of the item goes down closer to the cost of materials rather than inflated because you can only get it at the zoo (or whatever store you'd buy the thing from).
It's funny, without Fans there isn't a music 'industry' at all.
Saying the fans are at fault because technology is changing the environment is short sited and pretty one sided.
My favorite way to describe things is that computers and the internet are going to take music back to the 17th century.
In that a musician made money by playing *live*. There were no recordings, there were no copies, there was no radio, nothing. Just live music.
When technology created the ability to store and copy music for later use, the music industry as we know it was born.
Today, as Mike frequently shows, the value of that music 'copy' is now approaching zero. The ability for musicians to 'print money' is going away. The cost of making a CD is pennies, yet sold for $15. That's 1000% markup. It won't last now that infinite copies can be made for even cheaper and distributed with no cost.
So musicians will need to adapt to use this 'free copy and distribution system' to drive sales to things that aren't infinite and lacking in value; i.e. concert tickets, t-shirts, meet & greets with the band, etc. The Grateful Dead showed this decades ago. It works.
We likely won't see the likes of the multitude of super groups again, but we will see lots more bands making live music since steady income can be earned when your advertising budget is literally nothing; and of course your music is desirable.
That's assuming the 'aide' is allowed to open the 'football'. Conceivable that while he is tasked with carrying it, he isn't authorized to actually open the case.
That said, why the verification check was just a once a month thing is crazy. Either you wait till the Prez is available, or you come back the next friggin day every day until they are produced.
Yes I'm aware the call sign travels with the President himself.
Assuming one can read a signal from an at altitude aircraft while on the ground, someone standing even a mile away from Andrews AFB could read the signal when the President takes off and relay his possible destination.
The concept of planes broadcasting their routes to any who will listen just smacks of 'non-secure' design...sorta like the internet ;-)
You don't use birthdate, place of birth, or any of the other info for unique system identification.
What would be comparable would be a company not being able to record your phone number when you called them. It's how the system is able to identify the unique nodes on the network.
Or a company not being able to use your address when you send them a letter.
The unique key of a system is quite hard to describe as 'private' information.
You do realize that if GM went out of business, the vast majority of Ford's suppliers would have gone out of business with the loss of GM's orders right?
It's not a simple transfer, Ford wouldn't have straight up bought GM plants and kept them running. The GM workers would have pretty quickly hit the unemployment ranks and stayed there as Ford possibly ramped up production. How many of those people would have to move to find the Ford jobs? More and more costs associated with not doing it, make the short term bailouts worth the money.
I'd say it's safe to say that GM, Chrysler & Ford represent a pretty significant portion of the 'US' auto industry. Yes, Honda, Toyota and others have some manufacturing here, but in comparison me thinks the US companies are far larger in the US.
The 'industry' would have gone on just fine as you say. But the workers in that industry would face massive upheavals that likely cost millions of job losses over the short term.
As others have posted, the US auto companies were victims of largely self inflicted wounds. (I've never purchased a US made vehicle in my 20 years of auto buying experience...mostly due to quality and mpg issues of the US cars)
So it may be nice and well to say GM should have gone the way of the Dodo, but until something else came along to take its place, there was going to be very significant hardship that spread throughout the economy.
If you dispute that, please do so, but saving GM and Chrysler was the right thing to do given the state of the economy as a whole.
Imagine if we hadn't stepped in to 'save' GM and Chrysler? something like 3 million more people out of work and Ford probably dies too since their manufacturers also do GM/Chrysler parts.
And then our last really big manufacturing industry goes completely kaput. We *need* a large manufacturing base for national security.
While 'saving' an industry is generally a bad thing, sometimes its worth it for other tangential reasons.
The difference is that for music and sports, the creation of the product is the scarce item. There are only so many live games and concerts available and that you can possibly go to.
For authors, the creation of the product (the book) isn't a marketable commodity. Unless watching someone write or type becomes something of interest to people...
Mike, the example you give is not a viable one for authors. Just like a cookbook author can sell a grill, a musician can sell their favorite brand of instrument. Those are equatable.
What still hasn't been offered is the author's equivalent of the musical performance.
Unless you can come up with something that compares to that, saying the effects of going to 'free' are similar for authors and musicians seems a bit unfair.
I fully agree with you on 'free' and how new models can work, but like seemingly everybody else, I haven't been able to say how authors can adapt at an even close comparison to the music industry.
@Richard wrote:
"Usually because those who physically possess the original try to physically block you from doing so."
Well my assumption was that since the photographer claiming copyright was able to photograph the original piece which is out of copyright, that anyone should be able to likewise photograph it.
If a photographer spends the time and money to bring images of 'lost' works to the awareness of the public; should he not get something in return?
Conversely, if this is just a photograph of an original work, why can't someone else just photograph the original work and donate it to the public domain?
On the post: The End Of Taking Business Models For Granted
Re: Re: Webcomics that stagnate?
Why, exactly, should the public have to accept anything less? If you're not good enough to stand out and draw an audience, maybe you aren't good enough to cut the mustard and need a new line of work.
On the post: TSA Threatens To Sue Guy For Not Agreeing To Having His Groin Touched By TSA Agents
Re: Tough Call
I never really took it seriously until now. Osama is laughing his sorry arse silly over this kind of stuff.
On the post: Getting Ready For When The Industry Tries To Kill 3D Printers
Re: Re: Re: ' actual "replicators" ', eh?
*Labor* is far and away the biggest construction cost...
With the possible exception the location price, but that's the same either way.
On the post: Getting Ready For When The Industry Tries To Kill 3D Printers
Re: Infinite good?
If I can get a plan for making something, all I need is the materials. I would pay for the materials and the cost of running the 3D printer, but not for distribution of the finished product etc.
I remember toy machines at the zoo 20 years ago that would create a hot plastic mold of an animal for you on the spot. 3D printers are nothing more than scaling this down to something you can do in your home. So now the scarcity is lowered, so the value of the item goes down closer to the cost of materials rather than inflated because you can only get it at the zoo (or whatever store you'd buy the thing from).
On the post: Getting Ready For When The Industry Tries To Kill 3D Printers
Re:
Saying the fans are at fault because technology is changing the environment is short sited and pretty one sided.
My favorite way to describe things is that computers and the internet are going to take music back to the 17th century.
In that a musician made money by playing *live*. There were no recordings, there were no copies, there was no radio, nothing. Just live music.
When technology created the ability to store and copy music for later use, the music industry as we know it was born.
Today, as Mike frequently shows, the value of that music 'copy' is now approaching zero. The ability for musicians to 'print money' is going away. The cost of making a CD is pennies, yet sold for $15. That's 1000% markup. It won't last now that infinite copies can be made for even cheaper and distributed with no cost.
So musicians will need to adapt to use this 'free copy and distribution system' to drive sales to things that aren't infinite and lacking in value; i.e. concert tickets, t-shirts, meet & greets with the band, etc. The Grateful Dead showed this decades ago. It works.
We likely won't see the likes of the multitude of super groups again, but we will see lots more bands making live music since steady income can be earned when your advertising budget is literally nothing; and of course your music is desirable.
On the post: Ink Toner Banned On Passenger Flights, As Security Theater Steps Up A Notch
Re: Re:
On the post: US Lost The Codes For Nuclear Launch For Months
Re: I say this is just a hoax
That said, why the verification check was just a once a month thing is crazy. Either you wait till the Prez is available, or you come back the next friggin day every day until they are produced.
On the post: Plane Finder Phone App Called An 'Aid To Terrorism,' Even If It's Just Using Public Data
Re: Re: Re:
Assuming one can read a signal from an at altitude aircraft while on the ground, someone standing even a mile away from Andrews AFB could read the signal when the President takes off and relay his possible destination.
The concept of planes broadcasting their routes to any who will listen just smacks of 'non-secure' design...sorta like the internet ;-)
On the post: Plane Finder Phone App Called An 'Aid To Terrorism,' Even If It's Just Using Public Data
Re:
On the post: DMCA As Censorship: Citibank Doesn't Want You To Remember What It Said About Obama's Bank Reform Policy
well I suspect a Citibank 'competitor' could reasonably trade 'profitably' on negative Citibank information, no?
On the post: Swiss Supreme Court Says Tracking Online File Sharers Violates Privacy Laws
Re: of course
You don't use birthdate, place of birth, or any of the other info for unique system identification.
What would be comparable would be a company not being able to record your phone number when you called them. It's how the system is able to identify the unique nodes on the network.
Or a company not being able to use your address when you send them a letter.
The unique key of a system is quite hard to describe as 'private' information.
On the post: Should We Be Interested In 'Saving' Any Industry?
Re: Re: Re:
It's not a simple transfer, Ford wouldn't have straight up bought GM plants and kept them running. The GM workers would have pretty quickly hit the unemployment ranks and stayed there as Ford possibly ramped up production. How many of those people would have to move to find the Ford jobs? More and more costs associated with not doing it, make the short term bailouts worth the money.
On the post: Should We Be Interested In 'Saving' Any Industry?
Re: Re: Re:
The 'industry' would have gone on just fine as you say. But the workers in that industry would face massive upheavals that likely cost millions of job losses over the short term.
As others have posted, the US auto companies were victims of largely self inflicted wounds. (I've never purchased a US made vehicle in my 20 years of auto buying experience...mostly due to quality and mpg issues of the US cars)
So it may be nice and well to say GM should have gone the way of the Dodo, but until something else came along to take its place, there was going to be very significant hardship that spread throughout the economy.
If you dispute that, please do so, but saving GM and Chrysler was the right thing to do given the state of the economy as a whole.
On the post: Should We Be Interested In 'Saving' Any Industry?
Re:
And then our last really big manufacturing industry goes completely kaput. We *need* a large manufacturing base for national security.
While 'saving' an industry is generally a bad thing, sometimes its worth it for other tangential reasons.
On the post: Connecting Authors To Tangible Goods They Can Sell?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
For authors, the creation of the product (the book) isn't a marketable commodity. Unless watching someone write or type becomes something of interest to people...
On the post: Connecting Authors To Tangible Goods They Can Sell?
Re: Re:
What still hasn't been offered is the author's equivalent of the musical performance.
Unless you can come up with something that compares to that, saying the effects of going to 'free' are similar for authors and musicians seems a bit unfair.
I fully agree with you on 'free' and how new models can work, but like seemingly everybody else, I haven't been able to say how authors can adapt at an even close comparison to the music industry.
On the post: How Is It That New Copyrights Are Being Claimed On Work Done By An Artist Who Died 70 Years Ago?
Re: Re: Re: Clearly
"Usually because those who physically possess the original try to physically block you from doing so."
Well my assumption was that since the photographer claiming copyright was able to photograph the original piece which is out of copyright, that anyone should be able to likewise photograph it.
On the post: How Is It That New Copyrights Are Being Claimed On Work Done By An Artist Who Died 70 Years Ago?
Re: Clearly
If a photographer spends the time and money to bring images of 'lost' works to the awareness of the public; should he not get something in return?
Conversely, if this is just a photograph of an original work, why can't someone else just photograph the original work and donate it to the public domain?
On the post: BP Photoshopping Goes From Bad To Ridiculously Bad
Re: look at the gauges
Utter BS. If these 'few people' aren't fired for basically lying, you know it was done under direct orders.
On the post: Homeland Security Works For Disney Now? Announces Shut Down Of Movie Sites At Disney
Re: Sarah Palin?
"A popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or, perhaps both."
seems to *perfectly* describe Palin to me.
Next >>