|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: Re: Mike, smell the coffee... posted by tenor39 on May 08, 2003 at 04:23:04:
Mike,This stuff is all a done deal, my friend.
Check out the hirez and hidef specs - they're on the net in various places. The first bullet point in every one of their statement of objectives is copy protection - has been for YEARS! DVD-Audio, DVD-Video, SACD, IEEE1394, DVI/HDCP, HDMI, etc.
Check out congressional testimony from content producers (Audio and Video). Opposition group materials are also plentiful. Copy protection is the number one issue.
Did you know that DVD-Audio sat on the shelf for over a year because the proposed CP mechanism (CSS) had been cracked for DVD-Video and the audio boys took a "time out" until they could come up with a more robust CP scheme?
What were you doing during the public comment periods when these issues were being debated and decided. What groups (there are many) that were (and are) fighting these CP schemes have you joined or supported or made any effort to become aware of? What are doing THIS MINUTE to make your views known about the upcoming HD-DVD format?
Yeah, that's right - NOTHING. You're clueless about CP, DMCA and the equipment manufacturers' complicity (either forced or willing) in de facto enforcement of this regime. Rather, you make pewling posts here where your views can have no effect at all on the reality of the situation. You're distressed? OK. But don't bitch at me, buddy.
You're the one who's been sitting on his hands while others acted in their own self-interest. You expected they would act in YOUR interest, perhaps? Well, they made decisions and now you don't like them - tough. You're goddamned right I have an involvement in CP. It's going to affect my choices and freedom - of course I'm involved. I've met, phoned, mailed, emailed, posted and otherwise engaged players on both sides of these issues for years. I know the positions, I know the technology and I know the economics. Given this knowledge, I've decided that CP makes sense in maintaining the exchange of hirez and hidef content for cash.
You can be people or you can be "sheeple". You missed the people boat on CP. Don't blame me.
Follow Ups:
Me thinks you protest too much, Austin. OK, let's look at your points on by one, shall we:1. "Check out the hirez and hidef specs - they're on the net in various places. The first bullet point Me thinks you protest too much, Austin. OK, let's take your points one by one:
in every one of their statement of objectives is copy protection - has been for YEARS! DVD-Audio, DVD-Video, SACD, IEEE1394, DVI/HDCP, HDMI, etc."-I have been. For 4 years now. But the same arguments they make about the new formats and data transmission protocols are the same arguments they made about analog cassette, VHS tape, CD copying, and so on.
2. "Did you know that DVD-Audio sat on the shelf for over a year because the proposed CP mechanism (CSS) had been cracked for DVD-Video and the audio boys took a "time out" until they could come up with a more robust CP scheme?"
-No kidding?? Gosh, Austin, you must think I've lived in a Biosphere for the last 20 years. Regardless of what "scheme" they come up with for CP it WILL be hacked.
3. "What were you doing during the public comment periods when these issues were being debated and decided. What groups (there are many) that were (and are) fighting these CP schemes have you joined or supported or made any effort to become aware of? What are doing THIS MINUTE to make your views known about the upcoming HD-DVD format?"
-I'm a member of the AES, Austin, and there are groups of us in the audio world that provide content that are actively fighting what's happening. Personally, I could care less about HD-DVD because it’s another excuse to buy the same movies all over again. Though the blue laser technology is now a marketable reality, it will be years(5) before software is available, mainly because of the CP issue.
4. "Yeah, that's right - NOTHING. You're clueless about CP, DMCA and the equipment manufacturers' complicity (either forced or willing) in de facto enforcement of this regime. Rather, you make pewling posts here where your views can have no effect at all on the reality of the situation. You're distressed? OK. But don't bitch at me, buddy."
-Hmm...you're either a psychic or you're making a huge ASSumption(I'd bet on the latter). I've had many conversations with content providers and equipment manufacturers. Because I'm in the music side of things I think I've gotten to know this issue intimately. I bring it to the attention of the Asylum because I DO believe my views can have a positive effect. I've petitioned my Congressman, John Mica, MANY times over DMCA, and the petulance that Sen. Fritz Hollings is trying to sneak through. If consumers refuse to participate then the market will not support it, as long as we have a market-based economy, that is.
5. "You're the one who's been sitting on his hands while others acted in their own self-interest. You expected they would act in YOUR interest, perhaps? Well, they made decisions and now you don't like them - tough. You're goddamned right I have an involvement in CP. It's going to affect my choices and freedom - of course I'm involved. I've met, phoned, mailed, emailed, posted and otherwise engaged players on both sides of these issues for years. I know the positions, I know the technology and I know the economics. Given this knowledge, I've decided that CP makes sense in maintaining the exchange of hirez and hidef content for cash."
-Again, how the hell would you know? Answer: You don't have a clue as to what I know or who I am. I NEVER expected the powers that be to make decisions in my, or anyone else’s behalf. They exist solely for their own self-interest. Follow the money trail and you'll always find the truth. You say you're concerned over choices that affect your freedoms, and yet you've decided that those freedoms aren't worth fighting for so long as you have what you wanted, be it Hi-rez audio/video, money, whatever.
6. "You can be people or you can be "sheeple". You missed the people boat on CP. Don't blame me."
-Based on what I just said above who looks like the "sheeple", Austin? I'm not blaming you for anything, but you still haven't addressed many of the questions that I've put to you in previous posts. I didn't start this thread to make a political statement, but you've declared yourself an 'expert' on this issue. What I'm expressing is my OPINION, nothing more. Though I operate in circles that deal with content questions daily, I would never say I have it all figured out. And so what if I'm "late to the dance", in your opinion? Maybe if enough of us remember what our gonads are for(sorry, ladies)we could change the direction of this thing. Or maybe we should all just lie down and take it up the ying-yang. There are definitely much larger issues here than CP. But this is where the battle is for us, at the moment.
Mike
Mike,I apologize for getting the wrong impression from your previous posts. To my reading, they did not evidence the depth of knowledge that one should have acquired given your stated involvement in these issues over a long period of time. Good for you. You researched, you understood, you interacted and YOU LOST!
CP is here, it's going to stay here and your options to avoid it are severely restricted both by statute and the marketplace. Your "fight to the last" stance is, you must admit, a bit Quixotic given the circumstances. Perhaps you can "borrow" a few tapes from your workplace from time to time to substitute for commercial content that you won't be buying in the future. Or take walks in the park and read books instead of viewing HDTV. Perhaps your return to nature will inspire other people to follow you - but not me.
I'll be fully wired into the Matrix - on demand HD PPV and hirez PPL at locations and times of my choice! CP is the price I must pay - so be it.
Here's something I posted last year on a different forum. It applies every bit as much to hirez as to HDTV. Maybe it'll give you some understanding of where I see things going and why I support rapid deployment of digital media.
July 2002
As to my point of view, I guess you could call me a "rent" freak. We're not on this earth permanently so in the final analysis, all we can do is "rent", never own. That said, what you really want to "own" (call it a long-term lease
) are appreciating or income-producing assets. Financially speaking, it's a loser to put equity into depreciating (or obsoleting) assets. Much more efficient to determine an acceptable cost for ongoing use of the asset and budget for it as a recurring expense. This normalizes your budget and frees capital to invest in assets that make sense to "own". Let's put some practicalities on this foundation.
When you own something, you're the one left to deal with its inevitable obsolescence. In terms of media content what happened to all the "equity" in the huge record and cassette collections we all had a few years ago? It's in the trash can, that's where. Thinking back, would you have rather owned these formats or simply rented the content? Keep in mind, the same original analog master tapes were used to source the same content in LP, cassette, CD and now DVD-Audio/SACD. Rebuying the same thing over and over again is the ultimate waste of resources.
Then there are the maintenance costs associated with ownership. You've got to have space to put the stuff, a system to index it all, mechanisms to replace broken items, etc. Then, if you want to use the item in more than one location, you've got to physically truck it around or even worse, buy a duplicate. Much more efficient to have a flexible distribution system.
Finally, and most importantly, there's the time element associated with ownership. It takes time, lots of time, to build, maintain and distribute your own media collection. How long to add one additional CD or DVD to your collection? Research, get in the car, go to the store, stand in line, get back home, open the d*mn security wrappers, spin it, categorize it, index it, input it and store it. WHEW!
I consider time the most valuable and limited resource both in absolute and relative terms. I am more than willing to pay someone else for their time in setting up and maintaining a media distribution system that I can use whenever I want. The best part is it will end up saving me money as well!
Yes, I'm renting. No, I don't have "ownership" of the content. But neither do you when it's certainly going to be obsoleted in the future. Here's the biggie: by renting, I free large quanitities of time and financial resources to invest as I see fit on assets that generate a return to me. I can put dollars into nice HT furniture, lighting, artwork, investments, etc. rather than into depreciating content. I can INVEST in good quality audio amplification and speakers (low depreciation and obsolescence). I will minimise the EXPENSE of everchanging pre/pro, receiver and TV features. I'll buy a relatively cheap receiver or RPTV, expect it to last two or three years and consider it an ongoing EXPENSE. I will NOT spend $10,000 on a plasma or high-end pre/pro that will be obsoleted over the same period. When I feel that these big ticket items have reached a technology plateau where they will hold their value and currency, I WILL invest in them.
Buy content? NEVER! Add up 400 DVDs at $15 each. That's $100/month for 5 years!! You'll be able to watch a different one every day for over a year. But then you've got to watch them all over again the next year and the next and so on. Do you really think 480p DVD will be around in 5 years? NetFlix has got it right except for the snail mail interface. On the other hand, if it was PPU at $1/viewing, I'm going to see over 1800 different movies in the same time for less money. And when HD-DVD content pops up, I'll be watching it - you'll be rebuying your 400 DVDs in the new HD format. We'll both be buying new TVs
! That's the view from the "renter's" side.
Alright. Now I understand WHY you're OK with this whole thing. Let me give you my take on this."I apologize for getting the wrong impression from your previous posts. To my reading, they did not evidence the depth of knowledge that one should have acquired given your stated involvement in these issues over a long period of time. Good for you. You researched, you understood, you interacted and YOU LOST!"
That's an opinion, Austin, not a fact. Most consumers want products in their hands, not vaporware that they have to pay for again and again. The final chapter hasn't been written yet.
"CP is here, it's going to stay here and your options to avoid it are severely restricted both by statute and the marketplace. Your "fight to the last" stance is, you must admit, a bit Quixotic given the circumstances. Perhaps you can "borrow" a few tapes from your workplace from time to time to substitute for commercial content that you won't be buying in the future. Or take walks in the park and read books instead of viewing HDTV. Perhaps your return to nature will inspire other people to follow you - but not me."
CP may be here to stay, but the marketplace has yet to weigh in on the implementation of it. I think you misunderstand why I believe what I do. Don Quixote, I'm not. I'm talking about principles that go far beyond just the entertainment industry. I think I'll have plenty of options outside of "a few tapes". It's a shame that you compare LIVING life to just VIEWING it. I think you're missing out on a great deal.
"I'll be fully wired into the Matrix - on demand HD PPV and hirez PPL at locations and times of my choice! CP is the price I must pay - so be it."
Fair enough. I may choose to participate-or not. It depends on price, quality, selection, etc. But the key is I can live without it.
"As to my point of view, I guess you could call me a "rent" freak. We're not on this earth permanently so in the final analysis, all we can do is "rent", never own. That said, what you really want to "own" (call it a long-term lease ) are appreciating or income-producing assets. Financially speaking, it's a loser to put equity into depreciating (or obsoleting) assets. Much more efficient to determine an acceptable cost for ongoing use of the asset and budget for it as a recurring expense. This normalizes your budget and frees capital to invest in assets that make sense to "own"."
OK. I agree with this to a point, but I'm not convinced that owning 'depreciating' assets is always a bad choice, fiscally speaking. If you choose not to own your own car, home, or audio system you can't really tweak them to your liking. It's also very hard to establish a credit rating as a renter. Are you going to rent a HDTV? How about the digital front end of your audio system? What about a computer? These items are becoming obsolete at an increasing rate as technology moves faster and faster. But I don't see "Rent-a-Center" offering these things in the near future.
"When you own something, you're the one left to deal with its inevitable obsolescence. In terms of media content what happened to all the "equity" in the huge record and cassette collections we all had a few years ago? It's in the trash can, that's where. Thinking back, would you have rather owned these formats or simply rented the content? Keep in mind, the same original analog master tapes were used to source the same content in LP, cassette, CD and now DVD-Audio/SACD. Rebuying the same thing over and over again is the ultimate waste of resources."
Sentence one is true. However, I think a large group of vinyl enthusiasts would strongly disagree with your next few statements. How much music that came out on LP is still not available (and never will be) on CD? In keeping with your philosophy, aren't you really "Rebuying" the same thing again each time you rent it?
"Then there are the maintenance costs associated with ownership. You've got to have space to put the stuff, a system to index it all, mechanisms to replace broken items, etc. Then, if you want to use the item in more than one location, you've got to physically truck it around or even worse, buy a duplicate. Much more efficient to have a flexible distribution system."
True. But ALL distribution systems need an interface to connect to the outside world. Unless you're supporting Alpha Wave, direct- connect to the brain, you're going to need multiple interfaces.
"Finally, and most importantly, there's the time element associated with ownership. It takes time, lots of time, to build, maintain and distribute your own media collection. How long to add one additional CD or DVD to your collection? Research, get in the car, go to the store, stand in line, get back home, open the d*mn security wrappers, spin it, categorize it, index it, input it and store it. WHEW!"
This assumes that the outcome is the only important thing. How about the joy of the journey? You remind me of the science-fiction writers of the late '60's-early '70's, that thought we would have a pill for everything. Why do anything to have a real feeling or experience when you can pop a pill and avoid all of the risks? Kind of like the "Virtual Reality" freaks. No risk, but not real either.
"I consider time the most valuable and limited resource both in absolute and relative terms. I am more than willing to pay someone else for their time in setting up and maintaining a media distribution system that I can use whenever I want. The best part is it will end up saving me money as well!"
So you can use your time to do what? This is truly outcome based thinking. As far as saving you money, that will depend on how much the content providers charge you. Do you believe for an instant that as they become a monopoly that the price will stay static? Or do you beleive in government regulation? I don't like either option.
"Yes, I'm renting. No, I don't have "ownership" of the content. But neither do you when it's certainly going to be obsoleted in the future. Here's the biggie: by renting, I free large quanitities of time and financial resources to invest as I see fit on assets that generate a return to me. I can put dollars into nice HT furniture, lighting, artwork, investments, etc. rather than into depreciating content. I can INVEST in good quality audio amplification and speakers (low depreciation and obsolescence). I will minimise the EXPENSE of everchanging pre/pro, receiver and TV features. I'll buy a relatively cheap receiver or RPTV, expect it to last two or three years and consider it an ongoing EXPENSE. I will NOT spend $10,000 on a plasma or high-end pre/pro that will be obsoleted over the same period. When I feel that these big ticket items have reached a technology plateau where they will hold their value and currency, I WILL invest in them."
Good luck on this one. This is the biggest flaw in your argument. To truly enjoy your rented, hi-rez content, you'll need state-of-the-art gear. While SOME technologies will stay the same, MOST will not, even amps and speakers. Compare the best speaker from 10 years ago with what you can buy for half of its original cost today. Do you really beleive there will ever be a "technology plateau"? I think this is wishful thinking. If anything, obsolecence will increase in speed, not decline.
"Buy content? NEVER! Add up 400 DVDs at $15 each. That's $100/month for 5 years!! You'll be able to watch a different one every day for over a year. But then you've got to watch them all over again the next year and the next and so on. Do you really think 480p DVD will be around in 5 years? NetFlix has got it right except for the snail mail interface. On the other hand, if it was PPU at $1/viewing, I'm going to see over 1800 different movies in the same time for less money. And when HD-DVD content pops up, I'll be watching it - you'll be rebuying your 400 DVDs in the new HD format. We'll both be buying new TVs!"
I don't disagree with you here, especially when it comes to movies. I own very few DVD's, mostly because I'm very choosy. I'd rather rent most of them, and do. It will be YEARS before digital-only video is a reality, mostly because the enthusiasts that want HD have been early adopters of the present technology. HD is not for the masses at the present, and may never be.
If you want to base your life, Austin, on this theory you've stated, you're more than welcome to. But don't expect the rest of us to agree with it, or not object when it's trying to be forced on us. I think the fact I stated to you about not needing to have every new thing that comes down the pike is really quite freeing. I no longer feel addicted. I belong to "Audioholics Anonnymous".
Mike
Mike,You seem to be in substantial agreement with my POV. Buy the stuff that has long-term meaning and value to you. Expense everything else.
One point you're not quite getting. We are quickly moving (or being moved) from having to personally purchase, install and maintain the infrastructure needed to deploy digital services to a model where these things are "given" to us. The infrastructure costs are recovered by all of us paying a small continuing "upgrade" fee to the service providers.
Examples abound. Internet access via cable modem - cable already in place, modems effectively "free", monthly access charge. HDTV - effectively "free" cable STB or DBS dishes upgraded for "free" financed by higher monthly service charges. I expect all advanced services to adopt this deployment model as time goes on.
The important thing is that the conduit is built. Anything that helps to build this digital services conduit is good. At the moment, the major impediment to this process centers on copy protection. The content producers have delayed infrastructure rollout until they get assurance that what they put into the pipeline will remain their property. I could care less. As long as the pipeline is built.
Let's fast-forward a few years. Analog TV is history. Analog music is history. It's all digital. The pipelines are in and content is flowing. Now stay with me here. Do you consider there is a limit on the "appetite" of 300 million (US only) people for content? Look at all the "narrow-cast" cable channels (the FOOD channel?). Of course there's no limit. So here's this gaping maw demanding an infinite amount and diversity of content with a payment mechanism for that content already established. What's the entry price to become a content producer given the infrastructure to deliver your content and get paid for it is already in place? It's next to nothing.
You're a new musician just starting out - you appear on one of the Emerging Artists channels and do your thing in HDTV and hirez audio. You don't pay to get on the channel - there's 50 of 'em and they need content 24/7 but you don't get paid either unless people click on "download this music". If they do, you get paid and the EANet takes their cut. Movie fan, same deal. Like porn, help yourself. Civil war buff, watch McPherson lecture in real-time.
The point I'm making is that once the infrastructure is in place, the existing barriers to content distribution evaporate and the free market rules content production. This is where we're headed and CP is a very small price to pay.
My take.
Austin
I think, Austin, that we have SOME agreement on certain issues. But you still haven't answered the pertinent questions that I put forth to you. These have more of a spiritual component to them, and you have avoided them in your replies. Your very good at spinning things to fit your world-view. This discussion is now beyond the scope of this forum, but as I've said repeatedly, I don't have to have these things to have life. This, to me, is the ultimate victory over any system that is being forced on the rest of the public. Life is not a spectator sport, Austin. Peace to you, my friend.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: