[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [microsound] mp3 redux
i agree i wish we didn't behave like cancer cells too, but i feel it is
futile to try and stop the death wish. maybe i'm just being too cynical and
i know that's not a way to base a society. Hopefully the superorganism
concept will start to take hold. With plastic though you can't forget
entropy: things naturally fall apart...one item that comes to mind is space
junk. Though i can't really figure out why that came to my mind...maybe i've
been listening to too much devo. Now for a lost trane of thought...devo +
microsound = ?
Also another thought...couldn't evil be a defense mechanism nature built
into man to limit his productivity if he overproduced?
I'll have to find his book over at the library.
Until we realize that our assumptions on existence and life are not based
merely on the limitation of "knowing" where, who and what we are, we will
continue to be nothing more than jackasses without a clue as to what could
be or is going on around us. Ask yourself where are you, then ask where that
is and continue until you really can't prove anything or any truth. Most
people who feel they understand everything about themselves happen to also
not see how that disables their ability to understand that they cannot
understand themself let alone everyone else. That's why science and religion
can sometimes seem indistinguishable yet further diametrically opposed
understandings.
another book maybe you already have read ..
http://www.danmillman.com/pages/books/waypeacewar.html
----- Original Message -----
From: "dbuchwald" <dagmar.buchwald@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "microsound" <microsound@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, January 26, 2003 12:03 AM
Subject: Re: [microsound] mp3 redux
> I always liked the idea that ants and cockroaches will outlive us... I am
a big
> cockroach fan. I am also in for the super-organism concept. On the other
hand
> exactly that concept should teach us not to behave like cancer cells,
which is
> something we've begun to do -- everyone doing his/her 'own' thing giving a
shit
> how it affects the larger whole. That's what I meant. And, pardon if I
was not
> well informed, I really thought stuff like plastic would never rot,
virtually
> NEVER. I also don't think that mineral oil will form again after it has
been
> used -- but then again who cares? Nobody needs it but us...:) And we
didn't
> need it for the largest part of our evolution either...
>
> Howard Bloom's book sounds interesting. Similar ideas are presented in
Joel de
> Rosnay's book 'homo symbioticus'. In English: 'The Symbiotic Man: A New
> Understanding of the Organization of Life and a Vision of the Future'
>
(http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0071357440/qid=1043557184/sr=
8-2/ref=sr_8_2/002-2722945-4371221?v=glance&s=books&n=507846)
>
> Dagmar
>
> walrus and the carpenter wrote:
>
> > good point. but do you mean don't decay in the sense that a product made
by
> > man doesn't decay within his lifetime? Just because something will not
decay
> > in our lifetime doesn't mean it will not be overtaken by nature. Nature
will
> > likely not be defeated by all of this man made pollution. It could even
> > survive a major worldwide global thermo nuke war(think the movie
wargames
> > http://www.movieprop.com/tvandmovie/reviews/wargames.htm ). We might be
gone
> > but the bees and insects and oceans would likely overflow with
lifeforms, in
> > fact there's quite a large amount evidence to support this with the
> > dinosaurs having come and gone and now man rising up from the shadows of
the
> > genetic stew brought from the ocean.
> > no flame intended on my part either
> >
> > maybe another book for microsounders to read is "The Lucifer Principle"
by
> > Howard Bloom http://howardbloom.net/lucifer/about.html
> > being how it's likely to be found in a library or ordinary bookstore and
it
> > relates to microsound on a variety of levels. who knows?
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "dbuchwald" <dagmar.buchwald@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: "microsound" <microsound@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Saturday, January 25, 2003 3:37 PM
> > Subject: Re: [microsound] mp3 redux
> >
> > > Hm, I am not sure whether you can really compare nature's reproductive
> > abundance
> > > with the large-scale output of products by humans -- products which
don't
> > decay
> > > and do not dissolve back into the natural flow of (re-)production but
> > which use
> > > a large amount of natural 'ressources' (don't like the word; it
already
> > reflects
> > > a certain view of nature, that is: a large storehouse from which to
take
> > > whatever we want).
> > >
> > > Just a remark in passing. I don't intend to open up a flame about
> > ecology.
> > >
> > > Dagmar
> > >
> > >
> > > walrus and the carpenter wrote:
> > >
> > > > Cool off. It's all going to your head and coming out wrong. Your
> > arguments
> > > > deny biology and nature...something you nor I can stop. Nature is a
> > massive
> > > > copying mutating machine that blows your rationizations to
fragments.
> > What
> > > > about evil? Get used to it because it's in everyone's genes. Do you
> > think
> > > > that every executive and artist out there in the world is god's
little
> > > > angel? Of course not, neither are they all devils. But the most
> > proactive
> > > > and reproducing groups are the most successful. Redundencies are
> > completely
> > > > necessary in humans and most definitely in nature. To deny this is
like
> > > > fighting a war on some drugs. If you really want to fight piracy
close
> > down
> > > > every reproducing plant in the world...call back every cd-recorder,
make
> > the
> > > > rain go away and make the sun shine for all of us. But i'll be the
first
> > to
> > > > go on record and say that your ideas about nature are a moral
blasphemy
> > > > towards god's creation just as the illegalization of plants/nature
is a
> > > > paradox of capitalism and freedom's natural biological functions.
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "jan.l" <jl@xxxxxxx>
> > > > To: "microsound" <microsound@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Sent: Saturday, January 25, 2003 4:50 AM
> > > > Subject: Re: [microsound] mp3 redux
> > > >
> > > > Why should anyone need to report their income or lifestyle to you?
Why
> > do
> > > > you need this information? Do you see yourself as material for at
strong
> > > > leader (maybe in uniform?) that knows everyone elses best and you
will
> > then
> > > > decide who gets what and which lifestyle you think they should adher
to?
> > > >
> > > > Personally I dislike shorts. Lets join forces. I can shoot anyone
> > wearing
> > > > shorts and you can beat artists until you get all their income
> > statements
> > > > and decide what they can have for dinner tonight and which one are
> > allowed
> > > > to have a car or wife & children.
> > > >
> > > > All these rationalisations for stealing IP are becoming more & more
> > > > ridiculous. Why not just relax, look at yourself in the mirror every
> > morning
> > > > and say "I am a greedy little thief" and then to hell with it and
> > continue
> > > > saving your money by copying all the stuff you want. Heck, even the
RIAA
> > > > might go for that deal ;=)
> > > >
> > > > You are trying wildly to separate out certain people/activities in
> > society
> > > > as some kind of paria - free for everyone to hunt down and
capitalize
> > from.
> > > > In this case composers/musicians. Next week? Taxi drivers?
Homosexuals?
> > > > Muslims?
> > > >
> > > > Is it o.k. to do just anything because technology makes it possible?
Is
> > it
> > > > o.k. to shoot liberals just because we have the technolgy (guns)? Is
it
> > o.k.
> > > > for every pervert to listen and watch their neighbors make love just
> > because
> > > > the technology to secretly spy on them is available? Is it o.k. for
Dow
> > to
> > > > ignore Bhopal just because they can get away with it?
> > > >
> > > > Still you *can* have your file-sharing within todays system without
> > making
> > > > everyone using it a greedy little person. Simply make your case to
the
> > > > artists/composers/musicians and if it is as good as you say it is ..
> > they
> > > > will come in droves and happily surrender their IP to anyone who
needs
> > free
> > > > content to improve their site-profits (morpheus, kazaa and whatever
> > sites
> > > > there are). Some may not give up their IP rights and work for
nothing -
> > > > but why not just ignore those few and let them have their way - just
let
> > > > them grumpily sit in their corner guarding their stuff.
> > > >
> > > > >There's a moral point that continually comes up regarding
downloading -
> > > > support
> > > > >the indie labels if you download. This indie boosterism doesn't do
it
> > for
> > > > me.
> > > > >As much as I'd like to lend a hand to other artists, this
capitalist
> > world
> > > > >forces me to be more practical. There is an idea that artists
should be
> > > > able to
> > > > >earn enough money from their creative endeavors to support
themselves
> > and
> > > > their
> > > > >families. I would love to be a part of that (sometimes
questionably)
> > > > enviable
> > > > >group; however, I doubt many people aside from the superstars and
other
> > > > >major-label-supported performers are doing so. To those list
members
> > with
> > > > CDs
> > > > >out, remind us if the income from sales of your CDs is your only or
> > major
> > > > >source of income. If it is, would you be kind enough to tell us not
> > your
> > > > >income, but a self-assessment of your standard of living
(lower-class
> > by
> > > > >American standards and proud of it, comfortably middle-class,
> > rich-as-hell
> > > > and
> > > > >not done yet)?
> > > > >
> > > > >The continuing death of labels (such as Strictly Rhythm
> > > > >http://www.discjockey101.com/oct2002.html) means that labels aren't
> > keeping
> > > > up
> > > > >with the times. They are offering an obsolete product. Some people
> > continue
> > > > to
> > > > >promote packaging (case, liner notes, hand-drawn/printed art) as a
> > > > >justification for the production of CDs. However, it's arguable
that
> > these
> > > > are
> > > > >contributors to environmental problems. The mining of the aluminum
at
> > the
> > > > core
> > > > >of the CD destroys wildlife habitats, the solvents used in
sputtering
> > the
> > > > >aluminum disc with plastic are toxic, the use of the plastic in the
> > cases
> > > > >supports Bush's oil empire, the cardboard in the sleeves brings
down
> > more
> > > > >trees, the manufacturing process uses too much electricity which
wastes
> > > > >resources, the selling of the CD in stores through distributors
> > promotes an
> > > > >inefficient delivery system, and so on. Why buy such a product when
it
> > is
> > > > >available, minus all drawbacks, for free on the web? There is the
moral
> > > > >argument that I should buy it because not to is stealing. However,
if
> > > > buying it
> > > > >means supporting and affirming all of the aforementioned ills,
wouldn't
> > > > >downloading be at least in morally neutral territory?
> > > > >
> > > > >The only arguments I hear on various lists are moral ones. Why do
all
> > > > writers
> > > > >ignore the economic side of this, imho, primarily economic issue?
What
> > is
> > > > the
> > > > >product that an artist can provide that is compelling enough to
buy? I
> > have
> > > > a
> > > > >well for my water; why would I pay the city for their water system?
> > Live
> > > > >performing is one aspect. Jello Biafra moans about the
> > > > >artists-as-traveling-minstrel, and given the poor environmental
> > conditions
> > > > of
> > > > >most venues (cigarette smoke, drunken spectators, competition with
the
> > > > >meat-market background), I can see his point. Those of you who are
> > selling
> > > > CDs
> > > > >and performing live, what is the breakdown, percentage-wise, in the
> > income?
> > > > >Steve Albini writes (http://www.negativland.com/albini.html) that
for
> > most
> > > > >major label bands, the CD is already a vehicle for promoting a tour
> > (the
> > > > only
> > > > >real source of income). Interestingly, farmers have been facing a
> > severe
> > > > >downturn in the price of their commodity. Without subsidies,
farming in
> > > > America
> > > > >isn't profitable. The same goes for American manufacturing. In our
> > world,
> > > > >everything has become too easy to make and so there is too much of
it.
> > Core
> > > > >economic issues are being challenged in ways that haven't been
before.
> > > > >Capitalism relies on scarcity and unlimited resources (sounds
absurd
> > from
> > > > the
> > > > >start, doesn't it?). We are rapidly facing the end of scarcity (at
> > least
> > > > for
> > > > >many information-based products) and the end of unlimited resources
> > (oil,
> > > > land,
> > > > >wood, others).
> > > > >
> > > > >So the real question is: how can artists make a living at art in
this
> > > > economic
> > > > >situation? For me, donations aren't a viable answer; I already find
the
> > > > >Salvation Army guy at Christmas to be a nuisance. What is a
compelling
> > and
> > > > >morally-superior product that an artist can produce to make a
> > reasonable
> > > > >income? While it's clear that the problems with capitalism are
> > > > long-standing,
> > > > >it doesn't appear that other viable systems are forthcoming. I
realize
> > it's
> > > > a
> > > > >little OT, but can anyone recommend recent writing (preferably
> > web-based)
> > > > >discussing these problems? Anyone know any outstanding articles on
gift
> > > > >economics?
> > > > >
> > > > >Renick
> > > > >
> > > > >__________________________________________________
> > > > >Do You Yahoo!?
> > > > >Everything you'll ever need on one web page
> > > > >from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
> > > > >http://uk.my.yahoo.com
> > > > >
> > > >
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > >To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > >For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > >website: http://www.microsound.org
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > website: http://www.microsound.org
> > > >
> > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > website: http://www.microsound.org
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > website: http://www.microsound.org
> > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > website: http://www.microsound.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> website: http://www.microsound.org
>
------------------------------