| Author
|
Russian site has ripped Cytopia.org tracks
|
Inner Demon
Started Topics :
6
Posts :
321
Posted : Jul 18, 2007 15:53
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-07-18 05:40, shamantrixx wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2007-07-17 23:04, cytopia wrote:
I dont think we will attain that by making all free and renouncing money- |
|
In order to have an opinion about that we should try to do it. Until we try we can't know that it's not going to work. But as long as we don't try anything we're not going to change for sure.
|
|
Sure its been tried. Money, after all, is just a medium we use to exchange goods and services.
Before 'coin' existed I might've traded you 3 pigs for one of your horses. Money enables me to buy your horse even if you have no desire to buy my pigs. So money is the layer that no longer makes it necessary for a particular deal to be mutually desirable. Thus enables specialization and the basis of what we know as a civilized way of life.
Quote:
|
Another interesting thing is that the more money one has the more he's determined that we should keep monetary system.
|
|
Yeah its called self-preservation  I wouldn't blame people for it.
Quote:
|
Too bad that those don't realize that money is debt and by it the governments keep us in slavery. What pays your bills also serves as a way to keep you addicted to the system.
|
|
If a system requires you to be a part of it - how can your partaking NOT reinforce it?
Quote:
|
Instead of cooperating we're competing with one another.
|
|
Look at the evolution of species. For millions of years beings have developed through competition, not cooperation. Just because we're intelligent and have introspective capability doesn't mean we can consciously tweak the very drivers of evolution.
Quote:
|
If we would to loose money this moment we'd have enough resources to feed the whole planet and work maybe 2 hrs a day. So money really serves to those who already have enough of it to keep the others deprived of basic human needs. So don't lie to your self... It's the greed and ambitions that keep the money system running.
|
|
Bullshit.. and what kind of calculation is that anyway? Do you really think people are satisfied just because they can be fed? And why do you assume people don't want to work? Most people want to be active, work etc and 2 hrs a day won't cut it
Read some economic development theory and you'll quickly find that the theory stating that in order for some to be rich, others must be poor (known as dependency theory, but there are various approaches to it, structuralist etc) was dismissed by a pretty much unified body of scientists, and little or no research in that area has been conducted in the last 50 years - its simply been discarded as a false assumption.
I completely agree that there are major downsides with the monetary system and that it kind of feeds into the darker side of us humans, but don't forget how beautiful it is too and how much it has done for us. Sure one may criticize but please do offer us an alternative solution... I can't think of one! |
|
|
Spindrift
Spindrift
Started Topics :
33
Posts :
1560
Posted : Jul 18, 2007 16:00
|
Sure money can work if they would have some value.
As it is now they are not backed up by anything.
The whole monetary system as we know it today started with goldsmiths making receipts for people depositing gold with them.
That receipt then had the value for the gold deposited...no problem there.
Thing is that they realised that many people never claimed back their gold, so they could make more receipts than they had gold deposited, basically making money from nowhere.
This practice is today still the basis of all banking and is know as fractional reserve banking.
Lend money you don't actually have and charge interest....pretty much a scam if you ask me...and we are all getting scammed.
A lot of our taxes go to these bankers who lend money they don't have to our governments...your rent or your house loans pay these bankers for this money that never actually existed.
These banker control how much money will be available and can create depressions or an overflow of money when they want.
Lend out a lot, rake in interest and then contract the money flow and seize peoples property when they cannot pay.
There has been successful money systems in the past, but the one we have now is not one of them...except for a selected few.
Here is a interesting video on the subject:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-515319560256183936
 (``·.¸(``·.¸(``·.¸¸.·`´)¸.·`´)¸.·`´)
« .....www.ResonantEarth.com..... »
(¸.·`´(¸.·`´(¸.·`´``·.¸)``·.¸)``·.¸)
http://www.myspace.com/spindriftsounds
http://www.myspace.com/resonantearth |
|
|
|
neuromantik
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
28
Posts :
593
Posted : Jul 18, 2007 16:54
|
Philosphical debates aside, this is the reality of the music business, and believe me it won't change, so quit complaining.
Seriously, it sucks that we don't live in the 17th century where all of these classical composers had patrons and could charge for music or performances, but the reality is that music has lost its intrinsic monetary value, after all, it can be copied ad infini without LOSS to the artist. That is the definition of copyright invringement, so please refrain from using the words THEFT or STEALING.
Most of the musicians I know need to work for a living besides making music, especially if it's an underground subgenre with limited mass appeal. I will take for example what I consider to be a very professional artist in the psyscene (at least in the past): Tim Schuldt. Aside from music, he does mastering, production for other bands in all genres, works on his live band, licenses remixes etc...
I'm sorry to say this but you artists need to wake up and realise that just because you invested ungodly amounts in your studios it does not ENTITLE you to demand anything in return, as you will always be slaves to market economics. |
|
|
|
shamantrixx
Started Topics :
7
Posts :
549
Posted : Jul 18, 2007 18:08
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-07-18 16:00, Spindrift wrote:
basically making money from nowhere.
This practice is today still the basis of all banking and is know as fractional reserve banking.
Lend money you don't actually have and charge interest....pretty much a scam if you ask me...and we are all getting scammed.
|
|
Exactly! It is more than obvious that money is completely useless piece of paper blessed by magical wand of banking system. The only validity it has is this mass delusion of believing that monetary system has some benefits for the humanity. It's made out of nowhere and that's exactly where it will lead us.
"It occurred to me by intuition, and music was the driving force behind that intuition. My discovery was the result of musical perception"
Albert Einstein, speaking about his theory of relativity |
|
|
|
shamantrixx
Started Topics :
7
Posts :
549
Posted : Jul 18, 2007 19:05
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-07-18 15:53, Inner Demon wrote:
So money is the layer that no longer makes it necessary for a particular deal to be mutually desirable. Thus enables specialization and the basis of what we know as a civilized way of life.
|
|
Trading goods would equally support specialization while money enables only one thing. Those who don't work can print some money and live comfortably while others do their work.
Same as we have economical structures and banks we could simply have trade centers that would enable you to trade your products for any other products you may need. Also it would provide you insight in what products are needed and would be ideal for you to make in order to have better trading conditions.
That would be equally efficient while it would made professions like politicians, bankers and soldiers obsolete since nobody would be interested in trading anything with them. That would make everybody interested in production of useful things and food while high IQ idiots behind drawing boards of weapons manufacturers would have to consider using their alleged intelligence for intelligent purpose which could make them become truly intelligent in the end.
And about our "civilized" way of life... I would like to remind you that the term civilized comes from the word citizen. The later has a quite interesting meaning:
Citizenship is membership in a political community (originally a city or town but now usually a country) and carries with it rights to political participation; a person having such membership is a citizen. It is largely coterminous with nationality, although it is possible to have a nationality without being a citizen...
from Wikipedia
Quote:
|
On 2007-07-18 15:53, Inner Demon wrote:
Look at the evolution of species. For millions of years beings have developed through competition, not cooperation. Just because we're intelligent and have introspective capability doesn't mean we can consciously tweak the very drivers of evolution.
|
|
This is utter rubbish. Individuals have survived by forming tribes. Members of the tribe work in complete cooperation in order to overcome natural disasters, large predators etc. Division of labor had a spin of which you call specialization and believe it to be a spin of monetary system. Obviously this is not true. Human evolution has largely been cooperative. It is only since the advent of "civilization" that we started this competitive mode of behavior. Cities have developed for one purpose only... to accumulate power and provide residence for large number of soldiers and their families. Money was designed to trick them from moving from smaller and functional communities into artificial and abstract way of living. Once disconnected from nature we have soon turned our back on nature and by that we stabbed our self in the back.
Quote:
|
On 2007-07-18 15:53, Inner Demon wrote:
Bullshit.. and what kind of calculation is that anyway? Do you really think people are satisfied just because they can be fed?
|
|
I don't give a fuck what would satisfy those who are no longer hungry. But the way I see it more than HALF of people on the planet would be satisfied if they could have enough food and water because they don't have that.
If being fed and healthy is not enough for someone than he can do whatever will make him satisfied as long as it does not deprive others from being fed and healthy.
Quote:
|
On 2007-07-18 15:53, Inner Demon wrote:
And why do you assume people don't want to work? Most people want to be active, work etc and 2 hrs a day won't cut it |
|
If you perceive labor as a human activity than you should question your system of believe. Playing music, dancing, drawing art, communicating... those are human activities. Hunting, gathering or working in any other way with that goal is really an animal behavior raised to the technical level of super chimpanzee.
Quote:
|
On 2007-07-18 15:53, Inner Demon wrote:
Read some economic development theory and you'll quickly find that the theory stating that in order for some to be rich, others must be poor |
|
Do you subscribe to just any thing you read or you have a capacity for critical analysis?
Once humans have developed agriculture it immediate result was a 100 times more food than one could consume. That surplus enabled this "great" idea of centralizing wealth and power in the first place. Today we have technology that is another 100 or 1000 times more efficient than human labor and every attempt to portray the situation with such statement is ridiculous and without any factual support. It is a modern dogma under a scientific cover up!
"It occurred to me by intuition, and music was the driving force behind that intuition. My discovery was the result of musical perception"
Albert Einstein, speaking about his theory of relativity |
|
|
|
D-A-R-K
D-A-R-K Records
Started Topics :
96
Posts :
494
Posted : Jul 18, 2007 21:09
|
No it's not only a question of money.
Besides, yes companies that produce hardware get paid, so the artists have to inject money in that equipment, do you think keyboard are given away on the corner of the street??!!
No money ain't a good thing, but it seems it's too far by now, so we have to live with that, although I hate cause it creates exactly what we are talking about here, if money wouldnt be involved there would surely be less issues, for everyone, but that's how it is now.
Also, do you think that CDs get pressed for free????
Come on wake up and admit the facts that are present in todays life.
Anyhow, nice discussion, lots of opinions, fun to see what people think about it and how people care about the scene. Ask any label, artist or distro, besides the Britney Psyrs and no it's not going well. We all love it, but to which extent. If you think that releasing a CD can be done in 2hrs by nights, it may take you monthsssss to make it happen, and that's for the part that we control, then it has to go in some other people's hand to get done and finally see the daylight in the shops. It's a bit faster for digital, but still a lot of hours involved to make it happen.
Cheers
D-A-R-K Records
http://www.d-a-r-k.net
http://www.dark-records.com |
|
|
|
UnderTow
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
1448
Posted : Jul 18, 2007 21:51
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-07-18 16:54, neuromantik wrote:
Philosphical debates aside, this is the reality of the music business, and believe me it won't change, so quit complaining.
|
|
Well I think complaints are valid but yes, this is pretty much the way things are. The genie is out of the bottle.
Quote:
|
the reality is that music has lost its intrinsic monetary value, after all,
|
|
But that isn't true. People still want it so it has monetary value. The fact that people can get it illegally doesn't deny the fact that people want it. That is the definition of monetary value.
Quote:
|
it can be copied ad infini without LOSS to the artist. That is the definition of copyright invringement, so please refrain from using the words THEFT or STEALING.
|
|
The word theft or stealing is indeed incorrect according to the law but we all know what is meant by it.
Quote:
|
Most of the musicians I know need to work for a living besides making music, especially if it's an underground subgenre with limited mass appeal. I will take for example what I consider to be a very professional artist in the psyscene (at least in the past): Tim Schuldt. Aside from music, he does mastering, production for other bands in all genres, works on his live band, licenses remixes etc...
|
|
That is indeed the way things work now but that doesn't mean it is right! If an artist can't live off their music because no one wants it, that is one thing and just tough luck for the artist. If an artist can't live off their music because people are copying it illegally, that is an entirely different thing.
That is the issue people have with all this. It isn't that there isn't a market for psytrance. There is! It is that so many are copying instead of buying!
Quote:
|
I'm sorry to say this but you artists need to wake up and realise that just because you invested ungodly amounts in your studios it does not ENTITLE you to demand anything in return,
|
|
Oh absolutely. I know a few people with huge amounts of equipment that can't produce any music worth listening to. But that is entirely different than knowing that thousands of people are enjoying your hard work without compensation for it.
Quote:
|
as you will always be slaves to market economics.
|
|
But this isn't market economics at all! With market economics, you set a price for your work and people decide to pay for it or not. In the current situation, the market is broken because people are getting the music for free whether the artists wants it or not. That is the whole problem!
UnderTow
|
|
|
|
UnderTow
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
1448
Posted : Jul 18, 2007 22:07
|
Quote:
| The message you are about to post is too long.Forbidden
|
|
Grrr.
UnderTow |
|
|
|
UnderTow
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
1448
Posted : Jul 18, 2007 22:09
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-07-18 19:05, shamantrixx wrote:
Trading goods would equally support specialization while money enables only one thing.
|
|
Maybe what you actually mean is that YOU can only think of one thing it enables... Your failure, not the system's.
Quote:
|
Those who don't work can print some money and live comfortably while others do their work.
|
|
Ah of course, it really is that simple. Thats why everyone is doing it. So where are those beautiful Shamantrixx currency notes? Or maybe not. 
Thats just your weird conspiracy nut view on things. Money is just there for convenience. Does the system get abused? Sure. Does that mean that the system itself is at fault? no. Can it be improved? Probably but getting rid of it is utterly brain dead.
Quote:
|
Same as we have economical structures and banks we could simply have trade centers that would enable you to trade your products for any other products you may need.
|
|
Ok, as you obviously havn't made the effort, lets think about this for a minute. You have some goods that you want to trade for other goods. So what happens exactly at this trading center? Lets say you have some home made clothes and want some vegetables. Do you go to the vegetable section in the hope that someone just happens to have the vegetables you want at a price you are willing to pay AND that that person wants your home made clothes and agrees on the price you are willing to pay? Unlikely and very inefficient.
But lets assume that you manage to find the right deal. But wait a minute, you spent all winter making those clothes so they are worth quite a bit. So you trade it for quite a bit of vegetables. There is only so much pickled vegetables and chutneys you can make so what happens to all the other vegetables? You let them rot? No of course not. Maybe you trade them in for some other goods you need.
A day at the trading center becomes quite a complicated exercise and takes allot of time.
Neither easy nor efficient.
So we upgrade this model a little bit:
You bring your goods to a counter and have your goods appraised (by who? Who sets the value?) and get a piece of paper stating the value of the goods you brought to the trading center. (This sounds very much like money .... hmmmm). Then you can use this piece of paper to trade for other goods you desire. If you have some left over value from the goods your brought, you can either find goods that fit exactly that amount (you will probably need to compromise to end up with a zero balance) and leave the trading center or you can maybe just have a tab running at the trading center for next time you come back. (Guess what, the trading center has just become a bank).
But maybe the trading center doesn't have the goods that you want. Luckily the trading center has agreements with other trading centers so that you can use the surplus on your trading center tab at these other trading centers. (Hey we have the beginning of a financial system!)
So we have a problem because we are now in a world with money, banks and financial systems so this won't do. We have to go back to your very smart system of only trading goods for goods. It is very inefficient. It means you can only buy and sell goods at these trading centers unless you happen to know someone directly that has the goods you want and wants the goods you have. No just walking into a shop and hoping that the guy behind the counter wants to trade your home made clothes for that brand new Access Virus. Fat chance of that. Actually, your system is so incredibly primitive that we don't even have shops any more (let alone mail order or whatever).
Your system doesn't work Shamantrixx unless it takes on more and more aspects of modern financial systems. That is exactly what has happened over the ages because IT IS A BETTER SYSTEM THAN JUST TRADING GOODS FOR GOODS!
Quote:
|
Also it would provide you insight in what products are needed and would be ideal for you to make in order to have better trading conditions.
|
|
You are imagining a solution to a problem that doesn't exist: Existing products already have market value, demand and offer etc so you can already tell if your product is needed or not. New products (for which often the market is created) wouldn't benefit from your proposal whatsoever.
And anyway, how would visiting a trading center here in Europe tell me that maybe someone in Asia wants my products? Not that it matters because in your system, with the exception of actually going to Asia with your goods and trading them individually for other goods, you can't actually do international commerce because there is no banking system. Hmmm... that sucks.
And by your logic, everyone would have to adapt to whatever is traded at the local trading centers. That kind of goes against what you describe later in your post as "an animal behavior raised to the technical level of super chimpanzee." But of course, internal consistency is for smart and logical people. There isn't much risk of you being accused of that is there?
Quote:
|
That would be equally efficient while it would made professions like politicians, bankers and soldiers obsolete since nobody would be interested in trading anything with them.
|
|
LOL. Well I think I've already dispelled the "equally efficient" myth so no need to comment on that. So we are left with the extremely naive idea that people won't trade their stuff with politicians, bankers and soldiers. For one, bankers wouldn't exist would they? (Duh!) Soldiers? Sure, you might need people to protect your interests, your fields or maybe even your trading centers! Soldiers would certainly still be in demand. Politicians? People will always be interested in people that can promote their ideologies so politicians will still be paid. (And whether you like it or not, unless we go back to living in caves and huts, governments and politicians will always be arround whatever they might be called).
Continued in next post.
UnderTow
|
|
|
|
UnderTow
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
1448
Posted : Jul 18, 2007 22:10
|
Quote:
|
That would make everybody interested in production of useful things and food
|
|
Useful things and food? And who determines what is and isn't useful? Oh yes the market. Just as it is right now.
Quote:
|
while high IQ idiots
|
|
Something I'm sure you have never been accused of either. (The high IQ part I mean. I'm sure you've been called an idiot numerous times).
Quote:
|
behind drawing boards of weapons manufacturers would have to consider using their alleged intelligence for intelligent purpose which could make them become truly intelligent in the end.
|
|
As long as you are not proposing what is and isn't intelligent. That would really fuck up the world.
Quote:
|
And about our "civilized" way of life... I would like to remind you that the term civilized comes from the word citizen.
|
|
Indeed: from the Latin civilis "of or proper to a citizen," alternate adj. derivation of civis "townsman" (see city). The sense of "polite" was in the Latin form, from the courteous manners of citizens, as opposed to those of soldiers.
Quote:
|
The later has a quite interesting meaning:
|
|
But irrelevant. What counts is the way the word is used and it's current meaning:
1. having an advanced or humane culture, society, etc.
2. polite; well-bred; refined.
3. of or pertaining to civilized people: The civilized world must fight ignorance.
4. easy to manage or control; well organized or ordered: The car is quiet and civilized, even in sharp turns.
Quote:
|
Citizenship is membership in a political community (originally a city or town but now usually a country) and carries with it rights to political participation; a person having such membership is a citizen. It is largely coterminous with nationality, although it is possible to have a nationality without being a citizen...
from Wikipedia
|
|
Yes so?
Quote:
|
This is utter rubbish. Individuals have survived by forming tribes.
|
|
You moron. Inner Demon wrote: "Look at the evolution of species." We have not evolved physically since we are humans. So whatever state we were at when forming tribes, evolution had already done its thing...
Quote:
|
Members of the tribe work in complete cooperation in order to overcome natural disasters, large predators etc.
|
|
Which fairy tale book did you read? Human history has been about cooperation AND competition. Not only did/do tribes compete against other tribes and against other animals (for food resources), individuals within tribes have always competed amongst themselves.
Quote:
|
Division of labor had a spin of which you call specialization and believe it to be a spin of monetary system. Obviously this is not true.
|
|
Your first sentence above doesn't make much sense...
Quote:
|
Human evolution has largely been cooperative. It is only since the advent of "civilization" that we started this competitive mode of behavior.
|
|
LOL. Of course before we had civilization, we didn't have written language so we don't have records of this. But that won't get in the way of Shamantrixx forming some very naive ideas about it all.
Quote:
|
Cities have developed for one purpose only... to accumulate power and provide residence for large number of soldiers and their families.
|
|
LOL. How do you come up with this stuff?
Quote:
|
Money was designed to trick them from moving from smaller and functional communities into artificial and abstract way of living.
|
|
Again, how do you come up with this stuff? Watching too many Alex Jones videos? LOL.
Ah of course, the cabal of gold and silver exchangers throughout the world had a secret meeting with their ultra-secret handshake and decided cunningly to trick the entire world into moving into towns... with money! I can imagine all the lecherous grins on their faces when they concluded their meeting. "Hurray hurray, we shall con them all into becoming towns people! Our evil knows no limits!"
Money wasn't invented for convenience oh no! Lets not get logical and obvious explanations get in the way of a good conspiracy theory!
Or was there some kind of purpose to this diabolical plan? Who needs an explanation when one has a perfectly good conspiracy theory instead!
Quote:
|
Once disconnected from nature we have soon turned our back on nature and by that we stabbed our self in the back.
|
|
6 billion and growing. That's one hell of a failed backstabbing.
Quote:
|
I don't give a fuck what would satisfy those who are no longer hungry.
|
|
No? Why not? That does cover allot of people you know. But you have shown numerous times that thinking too much about how things all fit together isn't one of your faults.
Anyway, you didn't explain where your bogus figures came from.
Quote:
|
But the way I see it more than HALF of people on the planet would be satisfied if they could have enough food and water because they don't have that.
|
|
And as soon as they have food and water... they want all the rest. Have you ever actually traveled? Especially to third world countries? Do you think the only thing you will see is people, food and water (or lack thereof)? No of course not. Even people on the edge of starvation have other needs and wants than just food and water (although that of course is their priority).
Ignoring the rest is so incredibly silly and naive...
Quote:
|
If being fed and healthy is not enough for someone than he can do whatever will make him satisfied as long as it does not deprive others from being fed and healthy.
|
|
That is exactly what most people do.
Quote:
|
If you perceive labor as a human activity than you should question your system of believe.
|
|
You mean that if someone is not utterly lazy, their system of belief is invalid? LOL.
Anyway, human activity is exactly what it means: Anything humans do. Labor is one of the things that humans do thus labor is a human activity.
It isn't because you are a lazy cunt that doesn't want to work that your system of belief is any better than anyone else's. (Which your completely deluded rants have shown time and time again).
How unpleasant it might sound, activities like cleaning the toilets are necessary human activities. Your bullshit pseudo-philosophy won't clean the toilets for you or put food on the table.
Quote:
|
Playing music, dancing, drawing art, communicating... those are human activities.
|
|
As defined by the almighty all knowing Shamantrixx. Yeah right.
I bet your mum cleans your room for you. It's the only explanation I can find for your total alienation from the real world.
Quote:
|
Hunting, gathering or working in any other way with that goal is really an animal behavior raised to the technical level of super chimpanzee.
|
|
LOL. You obviously don't understand the concept of a job well done. Or doing work you enjoy.
So, oh supreme being who has left behind all animal behaviour, you don't wipe your arse after taking a dump? That wouldn't fit in your bullshit pseudo-philosophy would it? Cleaning up one's mess is indeed a typical animal behavior.... not!
As usual, you have everything arse-backwards. (Yes I was going somewhere with all the toilet remarks ).
Quote:
|
Do you subscribe to just any thing you read or you have a capacity for critical analysis?
|
|
LOL. That describes you exactly: Believing any old rubbish you read and incapable of critical analysis.
Quote:
|
Once humans have developed agriculture it immediate result was a 100 times more food than one could consume.
|
|
Ah, more figures. Where do these figures come from? Thin air most probably.
Quote:
|
That surplus enabled this "great" idea of centralizing wealth and power in the first place.
|
|
Well agriculture is one of the corner stones of modern societies, yes. But that isn't a bad thing. (Nor is centralised power necessarily a bad thing but thats another discussion...)
Quote:
|
Today we have technology that is another 100 or 1000 times more efficient than human labor and every attempt to portray the situation with such statement is ridiculous and without any factual support.
|
|
What statement? About dependency theory? (Which you btw didn't quote entirely giving it a different meaning). More efficient technology would seem to support the statement rather than counter it.
I'm guessing you misread in your contrarian eagerness.
Quote:
|
It is a modern dogma under a scientific cover up!
|
|
Aha! A scientific cover-up! That explains it all! Conspiracy theory at it's best! You don't like those smart scientists do you? You don't understand them, they get in the way of your nice little bogus theories, they make you look ooooohhhhh sooooooo stupid. If I was you I wouldn't like them either.
It really sucks that some Russian site is offering all of Cytopia's catalogue for download. Period. No need to come up with all this pseudo-philosophical bullshit.
UnderTow |
|
|
|
UnderTow
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
1448
Posted : Jul 18, 2007 22:34
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-07-18 21:09, D-A-R-K wrote:
No money ain't a good thing, but it seems it's too far by now, so we have to live with that, although I hate cause it creates exactly what we are talking about here, if money wouldnt be involved there would surely be less issues, for everyone, but that's how it is now.
|
|
I don't think money is either good or bad. It is just a neutral representation of value. All the problems come from the humans that handle the money. If there was no money, people would find other ways to screw each other.
Money really isn't the problem. Greed is.
UnderTow |
|
|
|
Spindrift
Spindrift
Started Topics :
33
Posts :
1560
Posted : Jul 18, 2007 22:46
|
I'm not sure I agree with what your saying undertow.
Sure it's not as clear cut as saying that there is no market, and hence no revenue.
But it's also not as simple as saying that because people listen to illegal copies there is actually a market.
From an art perspective it has been a very brief period where you could directly expect revenue for people appreciating your art.
People have paid to go to concerts and still do, but it's only when printing of notes and recordings when the notion of copyright was born.
Nowadays even children's camps have to pay licensing fees to sing around the camp fire due to the way that copyright is enforced.
In the end it's just a technicality how you reproduce the material...listening to an mp3 of the artists recording or humming away on a nice melody you heard.
There I don't really like to draw a line...it should be free to reproduce other peoples art and even modify and incorporate it into your own work.
To claim that this sequence of notes belongs to me only and anyone who reproduce them have to pay me a fee is from my perspective a bizarre notion.
IMO art should be created to be shared, otherwise your not an artists and is instead producing a product that should be treated as such.
I don't personally create music to get monetary compensation...for me seeing a couple of hundred people blissing out on the dance floor and having an outlet for my creativity means a lot more than a few hundred bucks in CD sales.
If I was looking for fame or money I would for sure not be producing the kind of music I do, but if one have that motivation and the necessary skills there is for sure money to be made in the music industry still today...competitive business it is, but it's not that it's impossible to make money by making product out of music.
And if we treat it as a product selling CD's it's quite simple from a business perspective...it just don't work out too well.
The service or having a CD pressed and distributed to the store is what people been paying for, and now according to many they don't want to pay for that service any more.
The reasons for it doesn't matter really....if your product is selling CD's and people are not wanting to buy them you need to change business.
Magazines and books sell less because of the internet as well...it's just a fact you have to live with and look for new ways to make money.
There is no time to dwell on if you think people is doing the right thing to your business...you have to make sure your business is doing the right thing for the people....that's market economy.
(``·.¸(``·.¸(``·.¸¸.·`´)¸.·`´)¸.·`´)
« .....www.ResonantEarth.com..... »
(¸.·`´(¸.·`´(¸.·`´``·.¸)``·.¸)``·.¸)
http://www.myspace.com/spindriftsounds
http://www.myspace.com/resonantearth |
|
|
|
Spindrift
Spindrift
Started Topics :
33
Posts :
1560
Posted : Jul 18, 2007 23:01
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-07-18 22:34, UnderTow wrote:
I don't think money is either good or bad. It is just a neutral representation of value.
|
|
I don't know if you can call it neutral if you have any insight of how the monetary system works.
And it's not representing a fixed value.
I agree though that money doesn't have to be bad, but money in itself doesn't mean much, the big question is how the monetary system works.
And if you don't think there is any conspiracies going on when it comes to the monetary system you are quite naive and uninformed.
People do a lot of things for money, and if you think that doesn't involve carrying out an "act of working in secret to obtain some goal" and that our current monetary system is constructed out of sound principles to distribute wealth in a sensible way rather than ending up in some bankers pockets you really live in lala land.
(``·.¸(``·.¸(``·.¸¸.·`´)¸.·`´)¸.·`´)
« .....www.ResonantEarth.com..... »
(¸.·`´(¸.·`´(¸.·`´``·.¸)``·.¸)``·.¸)
http://www.myspace.com/spindriftsounds
http://www.myspace.com/resonantearth |
|
|
|
UnderTow
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
1448
Posted : Jul 18, 2007 23:16
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-07-18 22:46, Spindrift wrote:
I'm not sure I agree with what your saying undertow.
Sure it's not as clear cut as saying that there is no market, and hence no revenue.
But it's also not as simple as saying that because people listen to illegal copies there is actually a market.
|
|
Well that depends on how you look at it. One of course should never equate every downloaded copy to a loss in earnings but if the music was not available as illegal downloads, a certain amount of people that are now downloading tracks, would buy them.
Quote:
|
From an art perspective it has been a very brief period where you could directly expect revenue for people appreciating your art.
People have paid to go to concerts and still do, but it's only when printing of notes and recordings when the notion of copyright was born.
|
|
Of course because copying wasn't possible before.
Quote:
|
Nowadays even children's camps have to pay licensing fees to sing around the camp fire due to the way that copyright is enforced.
|
|
Which IMO is too extreme... I don't blame the system as such but rather greed from a few that would stoop to this level.
Quote:
|
In the end it's just a technicality how you reproduce the material...listening to an mp3 of the artists recording or humming away on a nice melody you heard.
|
|
That is why there are distinctions between the copyright of the music (the notes) and the performance and mechanical rights etc.
Quote:
|
There I don't really like to draw a line...it should be free to reproduce other peoples art and even modify and incorporate it into your own work.
|
|
Here I don't really agree. I don't see why it should be free unless the artists decides it should be free. Why do the people taking suddenly have all the rights over the people it is taken from?
I do think using stuff to create something new is different than just copying. One is just consuming someone' elses work, the other is creating something new.
Quote:
|
To claim that this sequence of notes belongs to me only and anyone who reproduce them have to pay me a fee is from my perspective a bizarre notion.
|
|
Why is it so bizarre? If those notes would not have come into existence without that person coming up with that sequence, that person has created value where there wasn't. Why not recognise that value?
But it isn't just the notes. Especially in Psytrance.
Quote:
|
IMO art should be created to be shared, otherwise your not an artists and is instead producing a product that should be treated as such.
|
|
Well I think we can have a huge debate about what is and isn't art but IMO that isn't the point. I would say that it is up to the artist to decide whether they want to share or not. Again, why do the takers suddenly have some claim on something that they did nothing to create in the first place?
The artist sets a value to their art and people either agree with this and pay for it or not. Seems quite simple.
Quote:
|
I don't personally create music to get monetary compensation...for me seeing a couple of hundred people blissing out on the dance floor and having an outlet for my creativity means a lot more than a few hundred bucks in CD sales.
|
|
Sure but that isn't the point of this discussion. You can do whatever you want with your music. That is your right. I just don't think anyone else should decide for you.
Quote:
|
If I was looking for fame or money I would for sure not be producing the kind of music I do, but if one have that motivation and the necessary skills there is for sure money to be made in the music industry still today...competitive business it is, but it's not that it's impossible to make money by making product out of music.
|
|
I know. But again, this isn't really the point. I think the one that creates the art/content/whatever should be able to decide what price to set on it and the market can decide whether they agree with it or not.
Quote:
|
And if we treat it as a product selling CD's it's quite simple from a business perspective...it just don't work out too well.
The service or having a CD pressed and distributed to the store is what people been paying for, and now according to many they don't want to pay for that service any more.
|
|
Only because they can get of for free in this broken market. If they couldn't I'm sure more CDs would be sold. People really were paying for the music. Not the media. (Or any old CD would do which obviously isn't true).
Quote:
|
The reasons for it doesn't matter really....if your product is selling CD's and people are not wanting to buy them you need to change business.
|
|
From a business perspective I agree. That doesn't make it right.
Quote:
|
Magazines and books sell less because of the internet as well...it's just a fact you have to live with and look for new ways to make money.
|
|
Agreed to a certain extent. I would say that the decline in book and magazine sales has more to do with competing content on the net (often from the same content providers) more so than downloads of books in PDF format or whatever. So there are similarities but also differences with the music business.
Quote:
|
There is no time to dwell on if you think people is doing the right thing to your business...you have to make sure your business is doing the right thing for the people....that's market economy.
|
|
From a business perspective you are right but I wouldn't say that this is really a market economy. It would be a market economy if there were no illegal copies of the music available.
Not that that helps much if you run a label or a music store...
UnderTow |
|
|
|
UnderTow
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
1448
Posted : Jul 18, 2007 23:27
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-07-18 23:01, Spindrift wrote:
I don't know if you can call it neutral if you have any insight of how the monetary system works.
|
|
I'm talking about the concept of money in general. There are quite a few financial systems in the world currently. Some better and some worse than others...
Quote:
|
And it's not representing a fixed value.
|
|
No. Nor did I intend to imply that. (I don't think anything at all has a fixed value).
Quote:
|
I agree though that money doesn't have to be bad, but money in itself doesn't mean much, the big question is how the monetary system works.
|
|
SystemS.
Quote:
|
And if you don't think there is any conspiracies going on when it comes to the monetary system you are quite naive and uninformed.
|
|
I don't think there is a "conspiracy" from a few people controlling the whole world or anything like that, no. That doesn't make me naive or uninformed. On the contrary.
I think there are people with more or less power abusing their power more or less forming various temporary shifting alliances depending on what their wants and needs are at any particular time. Is all this 100% honest? No of course not but just calling the entire financial and monetary construct a conspiracy is IMO very naive and uninformed.
Quote:
|
that our current monetary system is constructed out of sound principles to distribute wealth in a sensible way rather than ending up in some bankers pockets you really live in lala land.
|
|
Actually I think that allot of the financial systems are more or less well intended. Sure there is abuse and sure people will try and design and bend the system to their advantage but saying that there is a big plot by a few cunning men (and women) to rob the poor of their hard earned money is just as much living in lala land as believing that everything is all nice and shanti.
UnderTow |
|
|
|
|
