lorem ipsum
Add an image
Add a link
go back to maingo to old version
It also goes well with the feeling I've had for a long time; that the industry must adapt to the medium, rather than trying to handcuff end users using new technology. Lost in the whole downloading debate, it seems, is the fact that copyright is not about ownership of a product, but the balance between ownership of tangible property and the ownership that comes with the development of that property ('intellectual property'). He also goes through a number of viewpoints on the whole DRM issue, including society, artists, business and, ultimately, Microsoft.
load more posts . . .
December 22, 2004 -- 5:49 PM
posted by eric
note to self:
lab review:
Since its beginnings, DJing has always been shrouded in mystery. From blacking out the label of Gaz’s “Sing Sing” to the solitary, quiet figure in the corner removed from the party and playing records for everyone else, many people have maintained a “I wonder how they do that” attitude about DJing. In their book “How to DJ Right,” Frank Broughton and Bill Brewster do their best to demystify exactly what is involved in what they call “the art and science of playing records.” You can tell the two authors love music, and they express this in a dry British humor style that makes the book a very quick read despite the fact that it contains a mountain of information. Simply put, there’s something for everyone in here. From beginner to experienced, all DJs can learn the simple (How to Cue, chapter 6), the complex (How to Mix Harmonically, chapter 31) and all points in between. The two authors do an admirable job catering to specific types: battle DJs will want to checkout the How to Scratch and Juggle chapters, club and party DJs will flip to How to Read a Crowd, and dance music DJs will take note of How to Pace the Night. Even hateful ol’ Roctakon was skimming How to Make a Re-Edit chapter. There’s also chapters on How to Mix CDs and MP3s (of course I keep it real and thus didn’t read it, but it’s good to know it’s there). The two authors are simultaneously educational and encouraging, and offer the reader the starting point for many possible avenues to explore. A total of 283 pages, includes lots of illustrations and pictures for you illiterates, anecdotes and philosophy from a ton of DJ superstars, a full glossary, and a sample DJ contract. Personally, I think this should come with every package the Lab sells (ed.note: It does already). –the Woodman
December 22, 2004 -- 5:42 PM
posted by eric
Money Studies and Turnt(L)ABle does KIM JUNG ill:
December 22, 2004 -- 5:05 PM
posted by Al
Alright! in blatant proof of my uncoolness in western music zero! Yep! thats right! the big happy donut of nothing! Then again you guys probally haven't listened to the albums I listen to either so lets call it even.
December 22, 2004 -- 2:11 PM
posted by edo
We should curl ASAP. Can Jere go curling?
December 22, 2004 -- 12:28 PM
posted by Par
Three. I feel so proud.
December 22, 2004 -- 12:08 PM
posted by eric
take a tally: I've listened to 14 of the TOP 50 albums of the year according to pitchfork
how many have you listened to?
December 22, 2004 -- 11:48 AM
posted by Beck
When curling?
December 22, 2004 -- 11:40 AM
posted by Par
Oh, and three days before Christmas is a horrible time to attempt to accomplish anything at work. At least, that's my excuse.
December 22, 2004 -- 11:40 AM
posted by Par
Wow. I've read about Cory Doctorow's (also of BoingBoing.net fame) DRM talk, but I never actually read it until today. It's a little long, but well worth the read, and goes well with that Tycho quote I posted not long ago, in that the moral arguments about copyright law are superfluous. Cory rather handily takes on the argument of absolute morality in copyright law (the "downloading is theft" approach to the internet):
Technology that disrupts copyright does so because it simplifies and cheapens creation, reproduction and distribution. The existing copyright businesses exploit inefficiencies in the old production, reproduction and distribution system, and they'll be weakened by the new technology. But new technology always gives us more art with a wider reach: that's what tech is *for*.
Tech gives us bigger pies that more artists can get a bite out of. That's been tacitly acknowledged at every stage of the copyfight since the piano roll. When copyright and technology collide, it's copyright that changes.
Which means that today's copyright -- the thing that DRM nominally props up -- didn't come down off the mountain on two stone tablets. It was created in living memory to accommodate the technical reality created by the inventors of the previous generation. To abandon invention now robs tomorrow's artists of the new businesses and new reach and new audiences that the Internet and the PC can give them.
Tech gives us bigger pies that more artists can get a bite out of. That's been tacitly acknowledged at every stage of the copyfight since the piano roll. When copyright and technology collide, it's copyright that changes.
Which means that today's copyright -- the thing that DRM nominally props up -- didn't come down off the mountain on two stone tablets. It was created in living memory to accommodate the technical reality created by the inventors of the previous generation. To abandon invention now robs tomorrow's artists of the new businesses and new reach and new audiences that the Internet and the PC can give them.
It also goes well with the feeling I've had for a long time; that the industry must adapt to the medium, rather than trying to handcuff end users using new technology. Lost in the whole downloading debate, it seems, is the fact that copyright is not about ownership of a product, but the balance between ownership of tangible property and the ownership that comes with the development of that property ('intellectual property'). He also goes through a number of viewpoints on the whole DRM issue, including society, artists, business and, ultimately, Microsoft.
December 22, 2004 -- 11:21 AM
posted by edo
No no.. I used borrowed a calculator from Paras for that test. I still have to give it back to him. We didnt even need the calculator on the test... or I did the question wrong.
load more posts . . .