My view on the RIAA and company vs P2P, is that both sides are wrong.

How much worth does something have if it's so easily duplicated, or a copy almost the same can be made easily?

If you could do the same with a Star Trek replicator machine as you do with Exact Audio Copy CD ripper and LAME MP3 or APE lossless compression(becoming very popular, so you get a perfect CD image of the original) with a car instead of a CD how much is a car worth?

The main problem, is that there are two things considered with all items sold; how much/hard it is to make, and how much/hard it is to duplicate.

If you could duplicate cars, would you buy them?

If you could duplicate your neighbor's $100,000 Jaguar, you wouldn't spend thousands on a car. You'd be screwing the car company over if you duplicated the car since they wouldn't make any cash off of it, but you'd be getting screwed yourself if you paid $100,000 for that kick ass car instead of getting it for free.

That'd put the car company out of business, if you could just duplicate one car. It'd have little to no worth since it's so easily duplicated, yet it'd have a high worth since it costs a lot to make.

The point is that you can't charge $100,000 for something duplicated for a few bucks or free, yet you can't charge nothing to a few bucks for something that took about $100,000 to create..

This is the biggest flaw of the current system of marketing, and you can't blame people for taking advantage of it, which they will do.

Enforcing monopolistic laws is just delaying technology and taking away freedom, while keeping the stone age way of thinking when it comes to buying and selling things, is just going to eventually lead to the downfall of this system.

Technology is changing things, faster then they ever expected.

"Techonology is changing things, faster than they ever expedcted." Amen.

Ah but Expose, as you are so fond of pointing out the quality of the so called copy, isn't anywhere near as good as the original. MP3 or ogg isn't close to the quality of a cd and it can be heard. Is it acceptable yes, just like the quality of radio is acceptable. I'll say it one more time, and I'm sure that I will have to say it 1000 times more. IT IS NOT AN EXACT DIGITAL COPY when the quality is lower than the original. There was a case decided yesterday in the ninth district that may be on point here. A photographer sued over thumbnail images of his work on someone elses website. Long story short, he lost. We may have just found our backdoor to "legal" filesharing...

That is one "back-door" worth exploring thumbtack. It works well with the Home Audio Recording Act. Part of the basis and premise of the act is that the home audio copy made would be somewhat inferior to the original (since, with analog equipment, it would be primarily recorded on tape.) Likewise with file sharing of MP3 files. A copy FOR PERSONAL USE is NOT ILLEGAL!!! Even if you don't own the original (didn't anyone besides me tape things off of the radio when the money was tight?).

Therefore, the RIAA is violating the Audio Home Recording Act by suinig filesharers, if the downloaders use it for personal use. Don't we all?

Yes it needs to be gone over with a fine tooth comb but the way I see it (IMHO)is a that an mp3 file is a low resolution representation of the original msic, not an exact digital copy. Just like a thumbnail image of an original piece of art or photograph.

But please remember that you can sit in and then test drive a car before you purchase it, allowing you to make an informed purchasing decision. Music fans never had that luxury, until now.

Not all downloads are an option to purchasing, if that were so, CD sales would be down 95% instead of 12% or 14%. Many people use downloads to decide if a CD is worth buying. People are tired of buying a CD (I am), on the strength of one song that got airplay, only to realize the rest of the CD stinks. I will even keep the download, after buying the CD, rather than re-rip it, as long as it was a quality rip.

None of this, in my opinion, is wrong.

Thumbtack, a lot are. EAC can fix scratched CDs so no worries on the ripping side, and this is a thread of all the perfect CD images( monkeysaudio.com is the site for the codec used) on the network, and links to them on the eMule/eDonkey2000 network. http://forum.sharereactor.com/viewtopic.php?t=110062&start=0 Almost every radiohead album has been released that way, one long APE lossless file and a CUE sheet. I even made a guide on how to rip that way.

That COULD be a good way to legalize filesharing, seeing as every network releases mostly lossy stuff, and even that ISN'T as good as a pressed CD. Nice loophole.

all market models converge to Technocratic Communism: everything is free, and all crap is made by robots.
people are just scared because they are STUPID.
STUPID people are afraid to live in a world where people can no longer be judged by their money; where people can only be judged by their character, intelligence, and other genetic traits.

If I could just replicate cars, candybars, clothes - WHATEVER! - for free, I would do so, and I would share it freely with my friends, too. And I dare anyone to call it stealing.

A world where anyone can "copy" a car for pennies, is a world that has no room for automobile manufacturers. It's as simple as that.

Thank God there are smart people like you to lead us on, spica. Now that I know I'm STUPID, I can rest easy about all the world's problems with you on the job. The only thing left to hope for, I guess, is a world where people are judged by their own capacity for arrogance. In that world, you will be the CEA: Cheif Executive Asshole, ruling over everyone stupider than yourself. Like everyone else in the world.

See? I told ya'all diggit has issues.

Way to go Spica. Everyone is afraid to let go and try to make it on their own merit or talent.The ones who quake the most are the corporate thieves and their shyster guard dogs. See, the world you envision is TRUTH. The truth is hated in this,"me first, fuck you" society. The RIAA is like a tick, a big bloated, greedy tick, sucking all it can get down it's greedy gullet.Like all corporations and harvard educated lawyers, the want what we have, and have the political power to take it unless we get fed up and start saying NO!One voice, then two then four then 16......NO NO NO!

"A world where anyone can "copy" a car for pennies, is a world that has no room for automobile manufacturers. It's as simple as that."

Yeah, but if the manufacturers went out of business and they couldn't make cars, then you'd have nothing to replicate. You COULD keep replacating the same car over and over again.. hmmm.

Back to the article... if such replicating technology existed, the manufacturers themselves would use it, building one car and duplicating the rest, thereby cutting their costs.
Maybe we would still need them because such duplicating machines would be large and expensive and I doubt common folks would have one sitting in their back yard, also, I assume you would need some raw material to put in the machine in order for it to make the car, that would cost something..or maybe we could run our toilet lines into the machines, then we would all be driving shiny new Jaguars made of POO!

Unfortunately, the replicator machines, just like most of Star Trek technology are the stuff of fantasy.

Spica, your comment reminds me of an old short story by Frederick Pohl called "the Midas Plague", which while highly implausible, was a lot of fun to read.

Your statement that all market models lead to technocratic communism was a little puzzling given that it is based on no evidence, or is there a technocratic communist nation on the planet that I'm unaware of?

The whole "robot labor" concept has been dropped by most futurists and S-F writers because it fails to understand that using robot labor is prohibitivly expensive when you consider that a minimally trained human can do the job for as little as pennies a day depending on where your factory is located.

Also, even in a communist country, the people need jobs, what else will they do? Drink? Play cards? We're not all geniuses like you.
People would get so bored with all their leisure time they would either invent some meaningless activity to persue,(western consumer culture anyone?), or they would revolt.

If you need proof of that, look at all of the lottery winners who keep their shitty jobs just because they don't know what to do with themselves, or guys who retire and then get so bored thay go back to work by choice

If you could duplicate cars then you could duplicate anything. So why would you buy anything? Hey I think you just solved the world hunger, poverty and greed problems. No need to buy no need for money. No need for money to get something so you can have what you need and want.

I would be replicating filet mignons....I want a Star Trek replicator..Computer: 1 Filet mignon medium rare, with sauteed mushrooms, and a arugila salad, with peppercorn ranch dressing. For wine I would like a Cabernet Savingon, 1997 please, lightly chilled.

If someone invented s tar trek replicator the economy would collapse overnight. Or possibly the government or a corporation would destroy the technology (and possibly the inventor) to prevent an economic collapse. You cant just ban it, that would just move replication facilities oversees and the economy would still collapse. The society which would appear after would be...intesting. If physical objects and information are worthless, how can you set up an economy? I suppose you could base it on whatever the replicators need to run, ultra-pure elements or power. Perhaps you could base an entire economy on skilled labour, people earning money based on time worked times their skill. Strangely, star trek appears to have no economy at all. Only one currency, and only one species seems to use that Who pays for those ships?

I suppose there is one industry that would survive. A replicator can produce replicators smaller than itsself, but not of equal size or larger. So someone would still have to make the large replicators

as far as duplicating cars ... if you could do it the car companies would do it ... so all you would get is a copy of a copy.

i agree with thumbtack ... a copy can never be as good as the original no matter how perfect it is ... why do they use masters for making cd's and not use the supposed exact duplicate the cd is. Quality is all important. if you want full thx and all that you go for the best there is not a dupe of a dupe of a dupe of a dupe.

with digital the loss of duplication may not be as noticeable as it was with tape but it exists and compounds itself over time as each generation is duped from the former.

clones even in nature are never perfect ... it seems that as clones are cloned the defects become prevalent and take over the good of the original.

shoshidge, i refer you back to the line where I call certain people STUPID.
Technocracy is something that appears as a likely outcome, given current trends in society and technolgy. It is a PROJECTION.
If you know of a more likely outcome, I am willing to hear it.

And I wouldnt worry about what to do in a world where people dont have to do monotonous work.
I refer you once again to my claim that only STUPID people are scared of such a world; and it is because monotonous work is all they do today.

Yes, robot labor is expensive: to have your food on a plate SPINNING inside a MICROWAVE with an electronic TIMER would cost you MILLIONS of dollars - back in the 1930's.
But, if it is SOOO expensive, then tell me, why are cars assembled and painted primarily by robots today?
Why do more and more stores use self-checkout machines instead of cashiers? Cashiers cost just minimum wage, do they not?
Why does the phone company connect me automatically to whoever I want to talk to after I push a few buttons, instead of an operator sitting there, connecting me manually?
Your definition of "robot labor" is narrow and (!) STUPID.
There is no significant conceptual difference between a ST replicator and a sewing machine. The former would be just a more versatile and _much_ more advanced version of the latter

please, think before you comment. If you just enjoy arguing with ME specifically, then go start a thread exclusively for that purpose.

Well said Spica. Shoshidge and others don't seem to understand the difference between the present, short-term future, and the long-term.

The kind of society where money will no longer needed and trade eliminated IS the ultimate goal and the real people in power know that. It is also inevitable for progression.

Several conditions must be met first though - mostly all technological advancements like nanotechnology and AI... but by far the most important is to get off-planet where we can move from a scarcity economy stuck on this little planet to an abundant economy in space. Why do you think billions are spent on a space program? In the name of academic research? Get real.

Of course - these kind of things are many lifetimes away.... what we see now is just the very beginning of a long and gradual process.

Read more: http://heim.ifi.uio.no/~thomas/po/the-culture.html

and http://www.cs.bris.ac.uk/~stefan/culture.html

Haha duplicate everyting in sight! People think boo hoo nobody would make cars or people wouldn't make movies and blah blah blah cause they have no money! Har! I say bring the creativity back to the people who are doing it because they want to do it for the sake of doing it! Sure if we could duplicate cars- the car companies would fall. Let em fall. You think people are just gonna sit around and duplicate the same shit? Haha cars would be so kick ass in such a world. Same thing for music tho. Just because the big record lables are hurting doesn't mean music will hurt. Seems to me they do more to hurt music, rights, creativity, and bank accounts of the artists as it is.

OK, first let's make this analogy correct. Car costs $100 000, then a blank car will cost around $3000 and the writer can be expected to cost about $400 000, plus of course the copied car will lack colour or any of the trim etc. you'd find in the original - it will be quite obviously a copy.

On the other side if it is as easy to replicate a car as a CD, then of course there'd be no justification for massive car prices - if a company is overcharging for their cars then they should go out of business just as the major labels should be put out of business and the owners left begging for change in the gutter. In my country a new basic, no luxury extras like air-conditioning etc, 1.3l car will take an average person 4-5 years to pay off; a CD costs the equivalent of $25 for one CD releases and around $35 for double CD releases. Would I spend 20 years paying off a copier when I could just go through 4 cars in the same time and be able to get some of my money back on each? No. If the copier really was cheap to buy and run, then I'd use it to try out cars, but like most of my copied CDs and tapes they'll mostly end up being driven once or twice then never looked at again.

There is only way one that most of us hear music, that is by getting copies from friends.

Spica, you are correct when you say stupid people have a lot to fear from the type of economy we've been talking about..but so do smart people.

Let's assume that robots start taking over all menial and manual labor, thereby, displacing the human workers who are doing it now.

Also, assume that the proportion of our population which is of a low IQ is anywhere from 15% to 50%
(based on your attitude, you'd probably aim higher).
Whatever the exact percentage, you now have made at least a billion people unemployed and unemployable.

These are people who do not have the cognitive capacity to contribute to society on an intellectual, philisophical or creative level.

So the question remains...What do you do with all of the stupid people? Shoot em? Sterilize them so they can't reproduce?
Labor camps would kinda defeat the purpose...

If stupid people don't have some kind of diversionary work to do they don't become smart, they become stupider.

Some turn to crime, some join stupid religions (or stupefy smart religions by their very presence), some join ugly political movements.

In other words, your shining path of technocratic communism results in high crime rates, religious hysteria and political fanaticism.

Some people believe this is actually happening in the USA, connecting the decline of decent blue-collar work to the increase in crime and antisocial behaviour.

My original point was that yes, technology IS replacing human labor in many areas like car manufacturing.

But while the bright minds of the atomic age believed that that would lead to shorter work weeks and more leisure time, instead, our society reacted by finding more work to do, which has resulted in our consumption-based economy.(Again, refer to "The Midas Plague" by Frederick Pohl).

The ditch diggers of yore are the burger-flippers and "scented bath-bomb" sellers of today.

The health of our economy is gauged on comsumption levels, if people stopped buying crap, our whole society would fall apart.

I think I'm gonna go smash my microwave now.

Actually, on second thought, I'll leave my microwave alone, it is serving a purpose as a spice rack and a place to store pots, I haven't even plugged it in in over a year.

I don't mean to sound overly hostile towards our consumption-based economy.
While it has contributed to high stress, poor health, low values, and environmental devastation, it has also increased technological development.

Safer,more efficient cars, space technology(eventually), telecommunications, the internet, to name a few, all directly or indirectly owe their existence to consumer demand and planned obselescence.

Just think Spica, if it wasn't for all of the STUPID people out there creating a demand for the technology that makes this anonymous forum possible, you would have to resort to spouting your misanthropic, arrogant bullshit to my face, in which case you would hopefully show some fucking manners, unless you think self-proclaimed mathematical genius absolves you from a fully provoked ass-kicking.

Yes, many things we use today were physically made by stupid people, and/or slaves.
When the transition to technocracy is complete, they will become extinct, one way or the other.
Feeding off the stupid and their blind consumerism to create a future world for the few worthy of procreation.

Do you see a problem with it?
I don't.

And btw, microwaves do save you a lot of energy if used instead of regular hotplates etc.
If you think that by not using it you are screwing me somehow, well, that is just strange.

if it were possible to copy cars, then a jaguar wouldn't cost $100,000, they'd be much less. the reason why CDs are $15 is because they simply sell copies of the CD.
the idea of manufacturing each car separately is equal to that of a band recording each and every CD separately. want to sell a million records? record your album a million times...
my point is, if they could make copies of jaguars instead of manufacturing each car separately, cars companies would surely take advantage of this and, if the technology was available in your average household, they would be forced to make cars dirt cheap.

We're going to be waiting a pretty long time for the stupid people to fade to extinction, as they seem to be the ones having all of the kids.

Especially if they are unemployed, boredom makes you horny and stupid people aren't as adept with contraception.

I don't use my microwave because I like to cook and I don't consume a lot of the types of food that microwaves are useful for, nothing to do with you really.
I was illustrating that while microwaves are convenient and modern, they aren't necessarily better

fair enough.

I do need to add though that by "one way or the other" I mean all kinds of extinction, including natural and others.

If cheap duplication of cars was a reality, of course it would happen, but, there would be the matter of who would repair such vehicles when they broke and where would you get parts.
The inventor of the Model T Ford, Henry Ford once said he would gladly give everyone a car for free if he had the absolute concession on selling parts!
BOYCOTT THE BASTARDS!