Eric C’s Techdirt Profile

squeeb0y

About Eric C




Eric C’s Comments comment rss

  • Nov 4th, 2010 @ 3:02pm

    (untitled comment)

    Woo-hoo! Now I can hear every Bad Brains song in its entirety without paying!

  • Oct 22nd, 2010 @ 12:53pm

    Funding, huh?

    Well, if they need funding to create music, they could just go on tour in the US and charge 70 FREAKIN' DOLLARS for tickets. Perhaps in September and October. Of this year. Hmmmm.....
    (Admittedly, I'm just sad because I couldn't afford to go. If they can sell the tickets, I guess they can charge however much they want. And I know indie bands don't have to follow these rules, but $70 for a ticket is NOT punk rock.)

  • Jan 25th, 2010 @ 12:22pm

    A small correction...

    Josh Freese released his first solo album, "The Notorious One Man Orgy," on Kung Fu Records (owned by his fellow Vandals Joe Escalante and Warren Fitzgerald) in 2000. "Since 1972" is his second solo album.

  • Dec 10th, 2009 @ 10:44am

    Re: MIT's excuse of a victory: DARPA's Red Balloons

    Everything in this post is unbearably stupid. MIT won by bribing? There was a $40,000 reward. If anything, DARPA won by bribing. I read the official rules; they were very loose, and the whole idea was "by any means necessary." They learned exactly what they set out to learn: the quickest way that $40,000 will get you information. Turns out, it isn't Twitter or Wave or Facebook, it's a single, organized hub around which all those other tools can function freely in their own chaotic ways. DARPA knows what the hell they are doing, and if they had wanted things to go a different way, they would have made the rules more strict. The MIT team didn't break the rules or stifle innovation, they simply executed their own idea according to the structure set forth, and theirs ended up being the best way. Simple as that.

  • Dec 3rd, 2009 @ 12:28pm

    Re: Re: Where are you looking?

    "What we need is a "meta" music system that ties all the artists, producers, cd manufacturers, online distributors, promoters, etc together."

    I think that that's part of what made/makes Myspace such a good platform for music. It's something I've used quite a bit. By enabling bands and artists to have "friends" that are other bands that they know or like or are in their scene (particularly filling a large group of "top friends" that show up on their page with these), it really did a great job of networking between bands (as well as some of the behind-the-scenes folks, particularly indie labels and venues). Although pretty much everyone I know personally long ago migrated to Facebook, their tools for musicians are so crappy that I still regularly go to Myspace to look for new bands, check on the ones that I've friended, and look for upcoming shows.

  • Nov 9th, 2009 @ 2:13pm

    Re: Just a collection of underperforming utilities/tools?

    While I wouldn't say that the safety of their users trumps their own safety, the fact is that if they decide to go after What, everyone involved loses. When Oink was shut down, most of their equipment was seized, including information on usernames, e-mail addresses, and of course, since it's a BT tracker, IP addresses. That's a hell of a lot of information for the authorities to have on you, and I would think many users of What would appreciate that sort of diligence toward keeping them away from that situation.

    Also, AFAIK, What has been around for a little over two years, and this is the first time that they have done something like this. I'm sure if they were put into a similar situation they'd do it again, and it may be a little bit disingenuous to downplay that, but considering how tight their requirements are for uploads, I doubt they'll NEED to do this very often.

  • Nov 9th, 2009 @ 1:00pm

    Re: maybe it's about cohesion?

    Actually, What allows apps, as long as they follow certain guidelines. This program technically did, hence the lengthy explanation to their users of why they were taking it down.

  • Nov 9th, 2009 @ 12:31pm

    Re:

    SteelWolf:I think the big deal has less to do with the software itself than with how high-profile it is. My guess is that a site like what would rather not give legal guns additional reason to hunt them down for "leaking secret law enforcement software."

    That was my understanding of it. Steven has posted what they put up on the main page, and though their wording is a bit cryptic, it seems to me that they got rid of it simply because it was so high-profile, and a site like What can exist only as long as it is at least somewhat under the radar. The last thing you want is to have a tool that isn't that interesting, but will still draw lots of negative attention to your site/private tracker.