Robert 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (445) comment rss

  • On the post: Can You Understand How Technology Works Without Understanding Code?

    Robert ( profile ), 17 May, 2012 @ 11:21am

    Maybe not programming but protocols?

    Something that helps bridge the computer/Internet illiteracy gap is understanding protocols.

    I'm not talking about having someone memorize them, but if you want someone to understand why when they plugged in their new printer and it didn't work.. it helps to explain how devices talk (though technically USB should have fired that up to the OS with an interrupt, but I digress).

    My family does not need to learn to code, but I try to get them to understand what is happening. I use analogies that help them remember. Think of the old RS232. Request to send, clear to send, etc.. Easy analogy, you're at a bar, you make initial eye contact and smile, that's request to send, the woman smiles back, that's clear to send.

    In terms of explaining how the Internet works, I've had the privilege of trying to do that on the now non-existent a2f2a.com which was intended to bring artists and fans together. The intent was to open communication between the two parties and help artists understand how technology benefits them and how consumers can understand the value of investing/supporting artists.

    Quite often that barrier of background information existed and explaining things became tiring. Some just don't want to get it, but coding would not have helped.

    What does help is to explain that, the content you are viewing right now was copied from one computer (server likely) to your web browser and is sitting in areas of your memory (or in the case of Windows, being stored and retrieved numerous times to/from your harddrive - cursed virtual memory management).

    So in this case, explaining HTML or database coding wasn't necessary and even if the artist understood SQL they would not understand TCP/IP. So it would benefit more by explaining how computers communicate and how data is exchanged, hence protocols being of high importance.

  • On the post: Economist: Copyright Is An Antiquated Relic That Has No Place In The Digital Age

    Robert ( profile ), 16 May, 2012 @ 02:57pm

    Re: Re:

    That's if people know who created the original work.

    A friend of mine had no idea Bryan Adams wrote "Heaven" when he heard the dance version by some female artist. Imagine if you showed up on her blog, loads of obsessed fans unknowingly attributing the song's creation to said female artist, and tried to explain it was from Bryan Adams. You would be ostracized.

    So true, on Bryan Adam's website those same fans of said female artist would be ostracized or on some other website, say Billboard. But it isn't foolproof.

    Many people think "I Write The Songs" was actually written by Barry Manilow. It was Bruce Johnston of the Beach Boys.

    What would help is if the performing/covering artist attributed the creation to the original author.

  • On the post: Musician Wonders What It Would Take To Become An Open Source Musician

    Robert ( profile ), 16 May, 2012 @ 01:36pm

    Re: Release Raw Material

    Perhaps fans can help by hosting it with bitTorrent?

    Release one song's "source code" at a time? That way you're not using up your webspace for that.

  • On the post: Musician Wonders What It Would Take To Become An Open Source Musician

    Robert ( profile ), 16 May, 2012 @ 01:31pm

    Not all will embrace it

    Some points on this:
    1) Matthew Good replied to a post (some time back) from myself regarding jamming with fans - he does not do that, music is too personal. I suspect other musicians might feel this way, even for non-personal things like just jamming to the blues. Some are just so deep in their music they can't just jam without that connection.

    2) Roger O'Donnel of The Cure tried a different approach through MySpace fans back in the day, he offered to remix their work, combine it into an album, release it on iTunes and give the fans a cut in the revenue. That sounded like a cool idea, though I didn't follow up to see how it went. So it doesn't have to always be fans remixing the artist's work, could go the other way too.

    3)Back with www.matthewgood.org was in a different form, that is it had a paying members section (only $25 but some shared the content and others bitched about the paywall so it was scrapped) a group of us "M+" members collaborated using Google Wave. We covered songs, the first being Apparitions. That was a true collaborative effort and we had like 8 or 12 people contributing in various ways. Some sang, some added percussion treatments, others (me) played guitar, others added strings, and some just gave creative input like add thunder. It was really awesome to be a part of, despite not including the artist himself. There were other songs going on in parallel, but eventually it died down when the main website became less interactive. We didn't include the artist or take it far enough, but there was a lot of potential and you really felt like you were contributing to the artist even if all you were doing was covering the material. It made you feel more connected. More inspired to buy.

    Point being, we have to remind anyone asking "will this work for me" that maybe not, but you need to try different things. There is no magic bullet (ie: fans remix your work) that will work. The key is to be flexible and not get your shorts in a knot if what you tried didn't work for you.

  • On the post: Economist: Copyright Is An Antiquated Relic That Has No Place In The Digital Age

    Robert ( profile ), 16 May, 2012 @ 01:05pm

    It depends on the consumer. To some it is worth only $0.05 but to others it is worth $2.05. Flexibility is the key and that's what is lacking.

  • On the post: Economist: Copyright Is An Antiquated Relic That Has No Place In The Digital Age

    Robert ( profile ), 16 May, 2012 @ 12:04pm

    As an aspiring musician, the only use for copyright I would ever want is to stop someone from claiming they wrote what I wrote. If they perform it, I'd like them to have me in the list of credits. That's it.

    If I make no money and someone covers or even says "hey, can I have just the music without your singing [ assuming I take lessons again and regain a decent voice ]" or just take the instrumental pieces and make a fortune rapping over it, so be it. As long as I get credit, that's what I am after.

    If I want to earn money and make a career so I don't have to develop software full time, then I would work with the performer or studio or fans directly means for fans to purchase something and get something they value in return.

    I like cycling, jamming, cooking, gardening, etc.. any of those I'd be open to as a package idea. I also build electronic stuff at home. That would be more expensive as I'd have to put it through safety testing.

    The point is, I would not use copyright laws to control copies. I'd use bitTorrent and when you want a free copy of the music or whether you purchased a package and want the free download, I'd just link to the torrent files. I'd probably have to write some software to keep track of seeds and reliability and all that. You can't like to a wrong file because someone mis-seeded. And why should I make direct downloads and pay extra for hosting and bandwidth when I can utilize bitTorrent or P2P for that very purpose?

    My music would have value still, even if the majority to contributed financially were actually not paying just for the music itself.

    This goes for anyone, I don't believe the value approaches zero. Economics can't explain everything. As brilliant as Keynes was, his theories were not 100% accurate. You cannot predict or fully understand human behaviour. If people only took what was free, why is iTunes doing so well? Because people will pay if you make it easy AND give them a reason.

    $0.99 IS worth it for a copy of a song if it means something to the consumer. But so is $25 or $50 for a package that gives them so much more and they connect with the artist.

    You have to have fun! It has to be real. If you can't connect, like Neil Peart, they you need other ways to entice people to buy, especially if your music is drowned out by the millions who create and share online.

    How many of you understand Neil Peart just can't interact with fans in a personal manner? He struggles with interviews. But what can Neil do if he was a solo artist? Um... I don't play drums but if he had a package that included his music and drum lesson video, little tricks or practice techniques, not even necessarily personalized (because that would be too much work for him), I'd buy it. Seriously, drum practice exercises from a percussion hero? Hell yeah.

    Copyright for controlling copies of musical works is pointless. Copyright for credit where credit is due or for even enforcing licensing for someone profiting off of your work, is what it should be limited to. Abolishing it entirely isn't really necessary. Reform sure as hell is though.

    Cheers.

  • On the post: TV Network Execs Contemplate Going To Court To Say Skipping Commercials Is Illegal

    Robert ( profile ), 15 May, 2012 @ 02:10pm

    Re:

    Franlin,

    Are you telling me that making skipping of commercials illegal is indicative of loss of intelligence for our species, to the point where you'd like to leave?

    What about pollution? What about our governments or corporate greed or basic lack of humanity and respect for one another, let alone other species or the planet in general?

    There's so much to be embarrassed about with regards to the things humans have and continue to do, we should have built that ship and left a LONG LONG time ago!

    "Everybody knows, that the world is full of stupid people, so meet me at the mission at midnight.."

  • On the post: TV Network Execs Contemplate Going To Court To Say Skipping Commercials Is Illegal

    Robert ( profile ), 15 May, 2012 @ 02:05pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    "or I buy movies..."

    But you're right, because I use the library to check some stuff out first, yeah, I guess I'm a "pirate."

  • On the post: TV Network Execs Contemplate Going To Court To Say Skipping Commercials Is Illegal

    Robert ( profile ), 15 May, 2012 @ 01:34pm

    Re:

    What am I if I channel hop to watch multiple movies or shows at once? (Well... when I visit the family, we don't have cable/internet cable or even an antenna and don't want it - for now we borrow from the library or I buy movies when they are a reasonable price).

  • On the post: Microsoft-Funded BitTorrent Disruptor Won't Make Pirates Pay, But Might Break The Law

    Robert ( profile ), 14 May, 2012 @ 11:37am

    Still don't get it.

    All they will do is drive innovation for a new filesharing protocol and client/server application.

    They won't get anyone to magically switch to "legal" methods of acquiring material. That isn't their goal anyhow, this tool won't even target movies or music from major labels, it will target the competition, the indies.

    In the words of Sam Kinison on It's a Bundyful Life "No, much like a neutered dog... you don't get it."

  • On the post: Musicians Realizing They Don't Need Major Labels Anymore

    Robert ( profile ), 14 May, 2012 @ 11:20am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    That's some interesting (awful) contractual obligations.

    I especially find the American Idol breach section (1st page, last paragraph) interesting, as it assumes damages done by breach of confidentiality to be $5 million!

    I wonder if the leaked portion of the contract that I just read constitutes such a violation and somehow means the Network and Producers are under a $5 million damage claim?

    Or are they insinuating that they have some hidden stuff, such as fixing the results outcome, that if revealed would tarnish the show's reputation (and the Netowrk/Producer)?

    In that case, what exactly are they hiding?

  • On the post: Protestors Give USTR 'Corporate Power Tool Award'; Replace Toilet Paper In Hotel With TPP-TP

    Robert ( profile ), 14 May, 2012 @ 10:43am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Awesome

    That's a rather old and trite attack on someone.

    Caring is better than nothing. Informing people is better than just caring and that's what AC is likely doing, but you're not in their circle so you don't know what they are doing.

    I don't join protests, instead I try to inform people in a non-confrontational way. Those I try to inform I try to understand their views first and get them to question things for themselves.

    I don't join protests because to me, it's an easy way to be misrepresented and have my efforts turned against me. So instead I hope by getting people to think and question and talk, it will improve their decisions in voting. It's small scale but I my hope is it spreads.

    When you try large scale quick changes, they are often easily ignored or reversed. However, slow gradual changes become entrenched and are far more difficult to reverse (such as erosion of civil liberties).

  • On the post: Protestors Give USTR 'Corporate Power Tool Award'; Replace Toilet Paper In Hotel With TPP-TP

    Robert ( profile ), 14 May, 2012 @ 10:38am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Awesome

    I agree that there is a possibility that the majority don't care. They could be asleep, but the could also simply not care. It's akin to farm animals knowing they are going to die and not trying to make a run for it.

    Perhaps there's just too much FUD going on that people are no longer affected when a real message of alarm comes along?

    Take a look at airline safety procedures, people complain and then they get used to it and stop trying to fight.

    At some point though, something has to strike a nerve with the masses and what might help is more creative stunts by people who appear to be "normal." Occupy movements could have done better if the stereotypical protesters were not the only ones interviewed in the lamescream media. And the masses do not look for information with less bias, they just hear what comes through CNN or whatever they have turned on while preparing dinner.

    Some say it is the CIA who is responsible for infecting the mass populous with apathy for just about anything. Maybe there is truth to that.

    Or worse, as you suggested, maybe people really just don't care.

    The question is why?

  • On the post: EMI Kills Off More Innovation: MP3Tunes Declares Bankruptcy Due To 'Withering' Legal Costs

    Robert ( profile ), 11 May, 2012 @ 03:50pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    I actually wanted Lindows back in the day because it seemed way cheaper and better than Windows.

    Alas, they went bye-bye.

  • On the post: EMI Kills Off More Innovation: MP3Tunes Declares Bankruptcy Due To 'Withering' Legal Costs

    Robert ( profile ), 11 May, 2012 @ 03:17pm

    Re: Re:

    You mean like RealDVD, who's creator (RealNetworks) attempted to defy gravity with their efforts to appease Hollywood (they DRM'd RealDVD up the wazoo) only to shelf the product.

    For more details:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_group_efforts_against_file_sharing

  • On the post: EMI Kills Off More Innovation: MP3Tunes Declares Bankruptcy Due To 'Withering' Legal Costs

    Robert ( profile ), 11 May, 2012 @ 01:06pm

    Profits in the millions, none to the artists

    Where are the yahoo's who normally say that file sharing sites and technology companies keep the profits for themselves and not share with the artists?

    ** hears only crickets **

    Here's another example as proof the labels won't let any sharing site make profits, let alone provide artists with a non-old-industry revenue stream.

  • On the post: A Speculative Example Of CISPA's Potential For Abuse

    Robert ( profile ), 08 May, 2012 @ 01:35pm

    Re: Re: Re: Stock traders know the truth.


    Just think for a moment if you were running for office. You made a promise to yourself to not be swayed by money and to be honest. Then one day you have people from both sides of an argument come and offer money. You could easily then accept money from the one you were going to support anyways and turn away the other.

    Maybe at first, but after a few terms in office, you'd be so good you'd be able to collect the offers from both sides and do absolutely nothing, all while giving the appearance to appease each side simultaneously.

    That's a talented, and useless, politician.

  • On the post: Here We Go Again: FBI Wants Backdoors To Snoop On Nearly All Internet Communications

    Robert ( profile ), 07 May, 2012 @ 08:29am

    Inefficient

    The FBI can get off their lazy backsides and utilize the NSA and DHS to push the NSA to share all their information with the FBI.

    According to a PBS documentary, the NSA can crack most encryption available in very little time. So why doesn't the FBI do the NSA a favour and start accessing the NSA's databases.

    Maybe they can learn some SQL commands and figure out how to sort through 4TB growth every month.

    What is next, police requesting powers to snoop? Come off it. If you already have the data captured, use that and stop increasing the risk of privacy invasion by everybody and their mother requesting backdoors. If they start with the FBI, it will not end! We need backdoors plugged. The NSA has the access, FBI should get data from them, stop increasing vulnerability because you don't want to share and you don't know how to get along.

  • On the post: After Years Of Trying To Kill YouTube, Movie Studios Are Embracing & Profiting From It

    Robert ( profile ), 07 May, 2012 @ 07:49am

    filesharing

    How much do you want to bed it's the studios hiring people to upload "leaked" "illegal" content to filesharing sites? Think about it, if it takes off in popularity, they know it will be worth the advertising money and a large theatrical release. If not, little promo, maybe a theatrical release or straight to DVD.

    But with either case, always blame piracy for hurting profits (which are ever higher) and artists (which are screwed over even more in the name of "piracy").

    "Oh sorry Mr Artist, you see, thanks to piracy, your record did not sell well, so we'll have to lower your advances or not give you any more advances, and take larger shares of your other streams of income."

    Mr Artist: "Why, Mr Lawyer, is your collections agency taking my daughter's babysitting money?"

    Mr Lawyer: "Because of piracy. We all have to make sacrifices Mr Artist. Now run along and rant to your fans about how piracy has taken away your daughter's babysitting money. Get your friends to do the same and maybe, just maybe, we'll give your daughter a whole dollar at Christmas. Unfortunately, she'll have to be taxed as though she earned her full babysitting income for the year, so in the end she'll still owe us."

    Mr Artist: "Cursed piracy." *to fans and potential consumers* "Thanks for ruining my life. We artists need to eat too."

  • On the post: How Amanda Palmer Built An Army Of Supporters: Connecting Each And Every Day, Person By Person

    Robert ( profile ), 04 May, 2012 @ 03:10pm

    Re: Cost of hiring a team?

    Your assumption is the team is large.

    Team *could* be volunteer fans. Team could also be a group of individuals who are not out to maximize profits at all costs, but instead earn a decent living (and they do exist).

    You can also automate a great deal of the emails (automated phone calls are annoying and not a good bet) to sound relatively person. Answering unique emails, 20 a day, when it is your career to do that, you can make the time.

    For someone starting out, working a job, your fanbase won't be hundreds of emails each week.

    Again, if you know people who like artists, are technical, and who want to help artists starting out, yes you can create an effective team and still be affordable. You can even be more efficient than the artist, but this would be marketing, not fan-interaction replacement. That has to be up to the artist.

Next >>