It's pretty far fetched to claim that using twitter gives twitter a monopoly over public schools. Definitely some problems with implementing a plan like mine, but in a world where media (and most things we deem important) follow us via technology, public schools ought to take advantage and alter their approaches to learning accordingly. Sitting in class and reading a standardized book isn't going to engage a generation of instantly accessible, mobile information obsessed learners.
And the ACT is administered by a non-profit corporation. Not that there aren't flaws in our college system, but many colleges do accept the ACT over the SAT now.
Why not, instead of running away from technology, embrace it as a way to make subjects seem more relevant to a tech-obsessed culture? How about requiring teachers to run a twitter account for their respective disciplines, and update those pages with current events related to the subjects being taught? And then require students to follow those pages?
I really hope you don't take the time to reply to this. This is so riddled with errors it's stunning that somebody would even bother to post it. Tell me what sort of music you listen to instead, or do I have to buy the Techdirt "mike comes to speak" package?
Obviously the music industry is making a ton of money through that plan that Price critiques, as has been discussed on this blog frequently. Only problem is that the artists never see any money!
Maybe you've covered this elsewhere, but what sort of genres do you listen too, Mike?
And maybe I'll check out Tunecore...
"These lawsuits weren't just a money pit. They were an economic disaster. And don't buy the argument that this was the cost of "educating" people not to file share. If that were the case, then file sharing wouldn't still keep increasing."
While I don't doubt that the lawsuits have been ineffective, the fact that file sharing has increased does not conclusively prove the law suits to be a waste of time. It's entirely possible that the law suits reduced the growth of file sharing, but without some real numbers its hard to know. Very few companies can make a business model based on suing people anyway (outside of law firms, of course, who clearly made a killing running these lawsuits).
To contribute something a bit more meaningful though, the real problem with the RIAA's approach is that they aren't changing the culture that surrounds file sharing. These lawsuits are always mentioned to me by people from a generation that doesn't file share anyway... never by the under-30 crowd that makes up the majority of file-sharers. So even if these lawsuits do have some sort of "educational" (/intimidation) value, they are only being noticed by the people who didn't file share in the first place.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by danto10.
The actress should sue Kim for tortious interference.
Re:
Ever seen Rocky Horror Picture Show? The Room? Any of the other classic available-on-dvd-but-still-plays-to-packed-audiences movies?
Re: Re: Why not...
It's pretty far fetched to claim that using twitter gives twitter a monopoly over public schools. Definitely some problems with implementing a plan like mine, but in a world where media (and most things we deem important) follow us via technology, public schools ought to take advantage and alter their approaches to learning accordingly. Sitting in class and reading a standardized book isn't going to engage a generation of instantly accessible, mobile information obsessed learners.
And the ACT is administered by a non-profit corporation. Not that there aren't flaws in our college system, but many colleges do accept the ACT over the SAT now.
Why not...
Why not, instead of running away from technology, embrace it as a way to make subjects seem more relevant to a tech-obsessed culture? How about requiring teachers to run a twitter account for their respective disciplines, and update those pages with current events related to the subjects being taught? And then require students to follow those pages?
Re: Re: Re:
I really hope you don't take the time to reply to this. This is so riddled with errors it's stunning that somebody would even bother to post it. Tell me what sort of music you listen to instead, or do I have to buy the Techdirt "mike comes to speak" package?
Price is bitter
Obviously the music industry is making a ton of money through that plan that Price critiques, as has been discussed on this blog frequently. Only problem is that the artists never see any money!
Maybe you've covered this elsewhere, but what sort of genres do you listen too, Mike?
And maybe I'll check out Tunecore...
Slight Logical Flaw Here
"These lawsuits weren't just a money pit. They were an economic disaster. And don't buy the argument that this was the cost of "educating" people not to file share. If that were the case, then file sharing wouldn't still keep increasing."
While I don't doubt that the lawsuits have been ineffective, the fact that file sharing has increased does not conclusively prove the law suits to be a waste of time. It's entirely possible that the law suits reduced the growth of file sharing, but without some real numbers its hard to know. Very few companies can make a business model based on suing people anyway (outside of law firms, of course, who clearly made a killing running these lawsuits).
To contribute something a bit more meaningful though, the real problem with the RIAA's approach is that they aren't changing the culture that surrounds file sharing. These lawsuits are always mentioned to me by people from a generation that doesn't file share anyway... never by the under-30 crowd that makes up the majority of file-sharers. So even if these lawsuits do have some sort of "educational" (/intimidation) value, they are only being noticed by the people who didn't file share in the first place.