My sister contacted me today, asking my opinions on cloning (a topic of discussion in a book club she attends).
While I know this is a highly debated issue, I don't really know much about the subject. I couldn't recall any clearly defined objections to cloning, and couldn't think of any reason off the top of my head that I would object to it.
After a small amount of research and some discussion with coworkers, here is what I know:
There are three types of human cloning.
1. Therapeutic cloning (cloning cells from an adult)
2. Reproductive cloning (making a cloned human)
3. Replacement cloning (purely theoretical, would involve some combination of the above to regenerate limbs and body parts)
The most-discussed issue seems to be reproductive cloning.
The theory seems to be that a cell with the genetic material to be cloned is merged with an egg cell with it's cytoplasm removed.
Possible objections:
1. Cloning is unsafe at the moment. It is likely that many clones would die in the early stages of cloning before cloning became reliable.
This objection is not an argument against cloning itself being necessarily sinful, but it is an argument against experimenting with cloning.
2. Cloning crosses a line that determines how much control humans should have over their bodies.
This objection seems common, but is very vague. I have heard no good reason for drawing the line at cloning as opposed to organ transplants or artificial insemination with sperm from a donor.
3. There are few/no Biblically legitimate reasons people can give to actually have a child via cloning, thus it is not worth doing.
The third objection, like the first, does not make cloning out to be in itself inherently sinful. It does assume that there would not arise any situation where cloning would be justifiable, thus making it not worth researching.
I'm new to this issue, my opinions are young and have little substance as of yet. At the moment, I'm having trouble understanding why cloning has been singled out as being so objectionable. I would love to hear some good arguments (preferably Biblically supported) one way or the other.
2008-12-04
2008-11-27
My accomplishment for the day: a MySQL quine!
Some background: a "quine" is a program that outputs it's complete source code when run.
Some more background: I work at a company where I work with MySQL (a database engine) very often.
I was lounging around in the MySQL chat room on irc.freenode.net, and someone suggested that I try to write a MySQL quine - a database query that would return the text of the query itself.
After about half an hour of screwing around, I got it! It may not be a fantastic achievement, but I feel pretty leet about writing my first quine in a database query language.
SELECT REPLACE(@v:='SELECT REPLACE(@v:=\'2\',1+1,REPLACE(REPLACE(@v,\'\\\\\',\'\\\\\\\\\'),\'\\\'\',\'\\\\\\\'\'));',1+1,REPLACE(REPLACE(@v,'\\','\\\\'),'\'','\\\''));
Only 167 characters. Hah!
Some more background: I work at a company where I work with MySQL (a database engine) very often.
I was lounging around in the MySQL chat room on irc.freenode.net, and someone suggested that I try to write a MySQL quine - a database query that would return the text of the query itself.
After about half an hour of screwing around, I got it! It may not be a fantastic achievement, but I feel pretty leet about writing my first quine in a database query language.
SELECT REPLACE(@v:='SELECT REPLACE(@v:=\'2\',1+1,REPLACE(REPLACE(@v,\'\\\\\',\'\\\\\\\\\'),\'\\\'\',\'\\\\\\\'\'));',1+1,REPLACE(REPLACE(@v,'\\','\\\\'),'\'','\\\''));
Only 167 characters. Hah!
2008-07-18
The colorless crusader
Recently back from watching the Dark Knight, I feel as though I must tell someone about it. Internet, here I come!
I had a friend in college who would watch movies on a screen to his left while he played video games. If you went into his room, there was a good chance that one of two things would be showing to his left: one of the Lord of the Rings movies, or an episode of Angel.
If I had an extra screen in my room, you would probably find Futurama, Firefly, and a few other movies with high re-watchability showing continuously on my wall. It's not hard to imagine Dark Knight being added to that short list.
Christian Bale was, of course, buff and badass.
Whatever you may think about Heath Ledger, the sensationalism surrounding his death does not change the fact that he WAS the Joker. Phenomenal casting there.
It was an epic story, and it was very well told. Christopher Nolan has been added to my list of Storytellers To Watch For - a hard list to make in my ADD addled brain.
I don't regret making Dark Knight the movie that I'll spend my $8/year theater budget on.
I had a friend in college who would watch movies on a screen to his left while he played video games. If you went into his room, there was a good chance that one of two things would be showing to his left: one of the Lord of the Rings movies, or an episode of Angel.
If I had an extra screen in my room, you would probably find Futurama, Firefly, and a few other movies with high re-watchability showing continuously on my wall. It's not hard to imagine Dark Knight being added to that short list.
Christian Bale was, of course, buff and badass.
Whatever you may think about Heath Ledger, the sensationalism surrounding his death does not change the fact that he WAS the Joker. Phenomenal casting there.
It was an epic story, and it was very well told. Christopher Nolan has been added to my list of Storytellers To Watch For - a hard list to make in my ADD addled brain.
I don't regret making Dark Knight the movie that I'll spend my $8/year theater budget on.
2008-07-16
Things I think about while sitting on the toilet
If the date is May 31st, and someone tells you about an event happening in exactly one month, what date are they referring to?
It seems generally accepted that May 15th and June 15th are one month apart. But what happens when the following month does not have a date matching the current date?
June does not have a 31st day! Is it possible that a month from May 31st would actually be July 1st, skipping the month of June entirely?
Discuss.
It seems generally accepted that May 15th and June 15th are one month apart. But what happens when the following month does not have a date matching the current date?
June does not have a 31st day! Is it possible that a month from May 31st would actually be July 1st, skipping the month of June entirely?
Discuss.
2008-07-13
Numbers to make an optimist cry
I stumbled upon a random blog post today with some downright sobering truths on it.
The United States federal budget for 2009 is $3.1 Trillion ($3,100,000,000,000).
There are about 303,824,646 people living in the US right now.
The United States government is planning on spending around $10,200 for every person living in the country. Where do you think this money is coming from? (Hint: it's not from some place that actually exists.)
It seems like there should be some sort of insights I should share, but I'm still a bit staggered at the moment. Can anyone really think that this unchecked spending is justified?
Our government is out of control. All they can do is spend money they make up. Gold and guns, people - start investing.
The United States federal budget for 2009 is $3.1 Trillion ($3,100,000,000,000).
There are about 303,824,646 people living in the US right now.
The United States government is planning on spending around $10,200 for every person living in the country. Where do you think this money is coming from? (Hint: it's not from some place that actually exists.)
It seems like there should be some sort of insights I should share, but I'm still a bit staggered at the moment. Can anyone really think that this unchecked spending is justified?
Our government is out of control. All they can do is spend money they make up. Gold and guns, people - start investing.
2008-04-07
What is software worth, eh?
A discussion rages (in many forums, at this moment in my hotel room) about What Software Is Worth and What You Are Paying For When You Buy It.
There are many philosophical arguments (going on in this hotel room, even) but I am going to give my opinion as a consumer here.
To me, as a person who buys software, I see it this way: I am paying someone to get software. Sometimes I pay the person who made the software. Sometimes I pay someone who happens to be publishing the software.
Once I pay someone to get the software, I should be able to do what I want with it. I am willing to pay for support of that software and other services (online play, ahoy).
A software producer may think they are selling me a license to use their software (on N number of computers, perhaps), but whenever they try to enforce that, I generally find myself inconvenienced.
If I find that the cost that the publisher/producer expects me to pay for the software is more then I am willing to pay, I will generally disregard what they want and get the software from someone else (or use the original software in a manner that the producer/publisher considers illegal).
This may include using one license on more computers then they expected. Or downloading their software using bittorrent.
There are many philosophical arguments (going on in this hotel room, even) but I am going to give my opinion as a consumer here.
To me, as a person who buys software, I see it this way: I am paying someone to get software. Sometimes I pay the person who made the software. Sometimes I pay someone who happens to be publishing the software.
Once I pay someone to get the software, I should be able to do what I want with it. I am willing to pay for support of that software and other services (online play, ahoy).
A software producer may think they are selling me a license to use their software (on N number of computers, perhaps), but whenever they try to enforce that, I generally find myself inconvenienced.
If I find that the cost that the publisher/producer expects me to pay for the software is more then I am willing to pay, I will generally disregard what they want and get the software from someone else (or use the original software in a manner that the producer/publisher considers illegal).
This may include using one license on more computers then they expected. Or downloading their software using bittorrent.
2008-04-06
Customers
I think I've realized why talking to customers can be such difficult work.
When you are talking to a customer as a developer trying to figure out what your software needs to be able to do, they always describe their tasks in terms of the steps that they take. Instead of saying "In order to properly do my job, I need to be able to order any number of products from a vendor and assign them to these tasks" they say "In order to do my job, I open screen A and fill out fields B and C."
As the developer, it is your job to find out exactly what happens on screen A, and exactly how important fields B and C are to the process of... whatever it is they are doing.
If you call back later to support your product, they never say "I was filling out field D on screen E and the program crashed when I hit submit" - they always find it more meaningful to describe the problem "I was ordering products from a vendor, and the program bounced me back to my desktop."
Never mind that you can order any random product from a random vendor on their computer without any errors - there is some combination of fields that when filled out causes a horrible crash, and all they can remember is the abstract of what they were doing the last time it happened.
When you are talking to a customer as a developer trying to figure out what your software needs to be able to do, they always describe their tasks in terms of the steps that they take. Instead of saying "In order to properly do my job, I need to be able to order any number of products from a vendor and assign them to these tasks" they say "In order to do my job, I open screen A and fill out fields B and C."
As the developer, it is your job to find out exactly what happens on screen A, and exactly how important fields B and C are to the process of... whatever it is they are doing.
If you call back later to support your product, they never say "I was filling out field D on screen E and the program crashed when I hit submit" - they always find it more meaningful to describe the problem "I was ordering products from a vendor, and the program bounced me back to my desktop."
Never mind that you can order any random product from a random vendor on their computer without any errors - there is some combination of fields that when filled out causes a horrible crash, and all they can remember is the abstract of what they were doing the last time it happened.
2008-03-31
How do you read the internet?
Until recent years, I had no particular method of digesting the internet. There were a couple blogs that I would check on every once in a while to see if there was any new content, and I had 5-10 webcomics that I would visit about daily to check for new episodes.
I found new content mostly by word of mouth, or by specifically searching for something that I thought might exist. How backwards I was!
I've improved my content discovery and digestion methods somewhat since then. My first step was to venture into the world of RSS feeds.
Any web site worth its salt that releases content regularly (on a schedule, or not) has an RSS feed these days. You don't have to worry about what it is, all you need to know is that it tells your RSS reader whenever there's something new for you to look at.
What's an RSS reader? Why, it's simply a handy application that you give RSS feeds to so that it can hold on to them, and let you know when there is something new for you to read. Personally, I use Google Reader.
If you notice yourself visiting any web page to check for new content - trust me, you're doing it wrong. An RSS reader allows you to compile all of the web sites you want to keep up on, so that instead of spending time loading all those web pages you're interested in every day, you can just read up on all the updates that you haven't seen yet.
When it comes to discovering new content, I personally use StumbleUpon - a social networking site without the annoyances that come from interacting with strangers on the internet. You start off by selecting any set of topics that you're interested, and you're ready to Stumble.
Any time you want to see something new, you just click the button inside your browser (it shows up on a toolbar plugin). It takes you to a highly-rated web site that you have not seen on one of the subjects you were interested in. You have the option to indicate whether you do or don't like the site.
I've stumbled on many blogs, webcomics, funny pictures, funny videos, useful applications, and other random web sites that I would never have found without StumbleUpon. If you want to get more out of the internet, I'd reccomend it.
I found new content mostly by word of mouth, or by specifically searching for something that I thought might exist. How backwards I was!
I've improved my content discovery and digestion methods somewhat since then. My first step was to venture into the world of RSS feeds.
Any web site worth its salt that releases content regularly (on a schedule, or not) has an RSS feed these days. You don't have to worry about what it is, all you need to know is that it tells your RSS reader whenever there's something new for you to look at.
What's an RSS reader? Why, it's simply a handy application that you give RSS feeds to so that it can hold on to them, and let you know when there is something new for you to read. Personally, I use Google Reader.
If you notice yourself visiting any web page to check for new content - trust me, you're doing it wrong. An RSS reader allows you to compile all of the web sites you want to keep up on, so that instead of spending time loading all those web pages you're interested in every day, you can just read up on all the updates that you haven't seen yet.
When it comes to discovering new content, I personally use StumbleUpon - a social networking site without the annoyances that come from interacting with strangers on the internet. You start off by selecting any set of topics that you're interested, and you're ready to Stumble.
Any time you want to see something new, you just click the button inside your browser (it shows up on a toolbar plugin). It takes you to a highly-rated web site that you have not seen on one of the subjects you were interested in. You have the option to indicate whether you do or don't like the site.
I've stumbled on many blogs, webcomics, funny pictures, funny videos, useful applications, and other random web sites that I would never have found without StumbleUpon. If you want to get more out of the internet, I'd reccomend it.
2008-03-30
What makes art?
Being a logical geek, I find that just about everything in life can be boiled down to an algorithm or formula. Some are more complicated than others, and I don't understand a lot of them very well, but that doesn't make it not true..
A conundrum that vexed me for some while is the question of what makes art art. I talked to one man who was of the opinion that all it takes to create a poem is to write something with personal meaning, something that need not be accessible or meaningful to anyone else.
This never sat quite right with me, but not having nailed down the definition of what actually makes something art, I didn't have any well thought out retorts at the time. I believed that art should be accessible to a larger audience then the person who created it, but where do you draw the line? Is it art when 50% of the people who see it come away with some appreciation for what you created?
Since then, I have become convinced that accessibility does not actually have anything to do with art. I think most real art is accessible to a large number of people, but its accessibility is not what makes it art.
To me, art seems to be the result of a function that takes two parameters: complexity and coherence. If you have something with high complexity that is totally incoherent, such as many pieces of modern art, I would call it a poor example of art.
On the flip side, if an art piece is coherent and straightforward but has no complexity, I would see little reason to laud it either.
It is when you create something that is both highly complex and yet still understandable that you create what I would call art. It is accessible because it is enjoyable, and it makes a lasting impression for something other than shock value.
A conundrum that vexed me for some while is the question of what makes art art. I talked to one man who was of the opinion that all it takes to create a poem is to write something with personal meaning, something that need not be accessible or meaningful to anyone else.
This never sat quite right with me, but not having nailed down the definition of what actually makes something art, I didn't have any well thought out retorts at the time. I believed that art should be accessible to a larger audience then the person who created it, but where do you draw the line? Is it art when 50% of the people who see it come away with some appreciation for what you created?
Since then, I have become convinced that accessibility does not actually have anything to do with art. I think most real art is accessible to a large number of people, but its accessibility is not what makes it art.
To me, art seems to be the result of a function that takes two parameters: complexity and coherence. If you have something with high complexity that is totally incoherent, such as many pieces of modern art, I would call it a poor example of art.
On the flip side, if an art piece is coherent and straightforward but has no complexity, I would see little reason to laud it either.
It is when you create something that is both highly complex and yet still understandable that you create what I would call art. It is accessible because it is enjoyable, and it makes a lasting impression for something other than shock value.
I have my standards, darnit!
It seems there is a lot of low-quality content flying around the tubes these days, and I felt it appropriate to set some sort of minimums. Thus...
I will not read any paragraph longer than ~100 words.
I will delete (or thumb down, depending on the context) any comment that scores a Disagreement Hierarchy rating of 0.
I will lower my opinion of any person who completely ignores proper capitalization in their post or comment.
This list to be updated as I further define my pickiness.
I will not read any paragraph longer than ~100 words.
I will delete (or thumb down, depending on the context) any comment that scores a Disagreement Hierarchy rating of 0.
I will lower my opinion of any person who completely ignores proper capitalization in their post or comment.
This list to be updated as I further define my pickiness.
2008-03-28
"boobs"
I looked at my traffic statistics today. Very little traffic (I guess if I wanted some, I'd tell more people about my blog).
So I looked at the search strings people used to find my site. A good number of them were my name (hi, Mom). However, I did note that if you want random page hits, it seems to be worthwhile to reference some famous actors in conjunction with the word "boobs" in a post.
So I looked at the search strings people used to find my site. A good number of them were my name (hi, Mom). However, I did note that if you want random page hits, it seems to be worthwhile to reference some famous actors in conjunction with the word "boobs" in a post.
Homeschooling and socialization
Homeschooled children getting enough socialization is an argument that won't seem to die, and I'm not about to rehash it. However, I did have a random thought the other day.
I realized that the allegations of poor-socialization skills continue because most homeschoolers are different. On the whole, homeschoolers are generally less likely to have done at least one of the following:
1. Watched a television show regularly
2. Kept up on the latest blockbuster movies
3. Listened to all of the top-40 hits from the the last decade
and have probably spent more time in front of a book than a television set.
This does not make them less likely to be able to articulate their ideas to others, or less of a people-person. It does mean that they are less likely to be able to take part in a workplace conversation about pop culture.
I've spent plenty of time in the last few years consuming my share of pop culture, and what have I gained? The ability to state an opinion about a recent movie with a decent chance of someone else having seen it as well, or the ability to quote a popular internet meme and share a laugh with some of my nerdier friends.
If I were suddenly transplanted to another culture, all those hours watching Family Guy would have been in vain. I could either fall back on my homeschooling background and spend some time communicating with people I didn't share a background with, or wonder why everyone else was less socialized than myself.
If someone can't stand to communicate with you simply because you don't share the same knowledge of pop culture, that is a failure in their education - not yours.
I realized that the allegations of poor-socialization skills continue because most homeschoolers are different. On the whole, homeschoolers are generally less likely to have done at least one of the following:
1. Watched a television show regularly
2. Kept up on the latest blockbuster movies
3. Listened to all of the top-40 hits from the the last decade
and have probably spent more time in front of a book than a television set.
This does not make them less likely to be able to articulate their ideas to others, or less of a people-person. It does mean that they are less likely to be able to take part in a workplace conversation about pop culture.
I've spent plenty of time in the last few years consuming my share of pop culture, and what have I gained? The ability to state an opinion about a recent movie with a decent chance of someone else having seen it as well, or the ability to quote a popular internet meme and share a laugh with some of my nerdier friends.
If I were suddenly transplanted to another culture, all those hours watching Family Guy would have been in vain. I could either fall back on my homeschooling background and spend some time communicating with people I didn't share a background with, or wonder why everyone else was less socialized than myself.
If someone can't stand to communicate with you simply because you don't share the same knowledge of pop culture, that is a failure in their education - not yours.
Piracy and the consumer
I get most of my movies and music from other individuals on the internet using bit torrent technology.
I don't do this as a statement against "the man" (as much as I do loathe him), or because I am so poor that I have no other options. I choose piracy as my primary means of acquiring media because it gives me the best return for my input.
There are 2 things I consider when spending money on entertainment (mostly music, movies, video games). How much enjoyment I get out of it (or think I will get out of it) and how much investment it will take to get that enjoyment.
Using this formula combined with my own personal constants of what things I generally enjoy and what resources I have at hand, many of the regular options for media consumption don't make the cut - watching a movie in theaters costs around $8 in my city now, not to mention the investment of time spent finding parking. Plus I can only watch a movie when the theater feels like showing it, and I can't drape myself across a couch while enjoying it.
Television programming also falls short - I'm not willing to invest 1/3 of my media-viewing time watching advertisements (which aren't even being targeted to me personally!).
Purchasing DVDs is a reasonable option once in a while, but very rarely. It is not very often that I expect to get full retail price worth of enjoyment from any DVD movie.
Now when I talk about enjoying a movie, it's not always all selfish gratification (honest!). I am motivated, as a capitalist consumer, to support those who produce high-quality products with my hard-earned dollar. But in Duff-Land, the "media I support" budget is pretty low compared to the amount of media I consume.
At this point in my life, I would be willing to donate around $20 a month to those whose works I had enjoyed that month. If I was paying full retail for price for all the movies I enjoyed, I would probably be paying closer to $100 a month.
So what are my options? As far as movies go, Netflix is a great option. Excellent selection of movies, and for your convenience, many films are now becoming available to stream over the internet and watch within minutes. For less than $20 a month, you have some solid options for watching movies.
When it comes to music, I'm harder to please. I would be willing to pay about $5 for an album I enjoyed - and I don't mean a 5-track album. iTunes is a popular option, but (besides being more than I would like to pay), I would want to be able to download higher-quality tracks (most of their tracks are 128kbps), and I will not pay money for anything infected with DRM (Digital Rights Management, designed to limit your use of the file).
Thus, in most cases, I turn to piracy. I download my movies and music (and the occasional video game) because nobody is willing to take what I'm willing to pay for their goods. It's not that I don't want to pay the fine actors and writers of the television series House, it's just that I'm not going to pay $120 for the right to watch the first 3 seasons at my own convenience.
Not long ago, Nine Inch Nails released the Ghosts I-IV, four volumes comprising an album. Instead of releasing their album in a traditional way, the first volume was released for free on torrent tracking sites such as thepiratebay.org. The entire album was available to purchase from the official website in several different formats. One of the formats was digital download - for $5.
Now, a newly released 36-track album for $5 is a heckuva deal by most media standards. Plus, the tracks were available in several different high quality audio formats (including lossless) without any DRM attached.
I loved the idea, and purchased the digital version. The download servers were completely swamped, and I ended up downloading the entire album using bittorrent anyway - but that wasn't the point. I was given the option to pay the artist for his work, without having to worry about a record label skimming off the top.
The album was pretty good, and makes its way onto my playlist reasonably often. But since then, I've noticed a change in how I think of music. I still download albums without a second thought, but now when I find one I really appreciate, my first instinct is to go to the artists web site and PayPal them some money to show my support.
It's pretty annoying, really. I have daydreams about running into my favorite artists at some generic bar and buying them a round of drinks to show my appreciation. I can't afford to buy albums from all of the artists I support, so I'm stuck with my daydreams for now.
Until artists start breaking away from the record labels wholesale and releasing albums in a way that gives their fans better options, piracy will remain the best option for the regular consumer of media in most cases.
I don't do this as a statement against "the man" (as much as I do loathe him), or because I am so poor that I have no other options. I choose piracy as my primary means of acquiring media because it gives me the best return for my input.
There are 2 things I consider when spending money on entertainment (mostly music, movies, video games). How much enjoyment I get out of it (or think I will get out of it) and how much investment it will take to get that enjoyment.
Using this formula combined with my own personal constants of what things I generally enjoy and what resources I have at hand, many of the regular options for media consumption don't make the cut - watching a movie in theaters costs around $8 in my city now, not to mention the investment of time spent finding parking. Plus I can only watch a movie when the theater feels like showing it, and I can't drape myself across a couch while enjoying it.
Television programming also falls short - I'm not willing to invest 1/3 of my media-viewing time watching advertisements (which aren't even being targeted to me personally!).
Purchasing DVDs is a reasonable option once in a while, but very rarely. It is not very often that I expect to get full retail price worth of enjoyment from any DVD movie.
Now when I talk about enjoying a movie, it's not always all selfish gratification (honest!). I am motivated, as a capitalist consumer, to support those who produce high-quality products with my hard-earned dollar. But in Duff-Land, the "media I support" budget is pretty low compared to the amount of media I consume.
At this point in my life, I would be willing to donate around $20 a month to those whose works I had enjoyed that month. If I was paying full retail for price for all the movies I enjoyed, I would probably be paying closer to $100 a month.
So what are my options? As far as movies go, Netflix is a great option. Excellent selection of movies, and for your convenience, many films are now becoming available to stream over the internet and watch within minutes. For less than $20 a month, you have some solid options for watching movies.
When it comes to music, I'm harder to please. I would be willing to pay about $5 for an album I enjoyed - and I don't mean a 5-track album. iTunes is a popular option, but (besides being more than I would like to pay), I would want to be able to download higher-quality tracks (most of their tracks are 128kbps), and I will not pay money for anything infected with DRM (Digital Rights Management, designed to limit your use of the file).
Thus, in most cases, I turn to piracy. I download my movies and music (and the occasional video game) because nobody is willing to take what I'm willing to pay for their goods. It's not that I don't want to pay the fine actors and writers of the television series House, it's just that I'm not going to pay $120 for the right to watch the first 3 seasons at my own convenience.
Not long ago, Nine Inch Nails released the Ghosts I-IV, four volumes comprising an album. Instead of releasing their album in a traditional way, the first volume was released for free on torrent tracking sites such as thepiratebay.org. The entire album was available to purchase from the official website in several different formats. One of the formats was digital download - for $5.
Now, a newly released 36-track album for $5 is a heckuva deal by most media standards. Plus, the tracks were available in several different high quality audio formats (including lossless) without any DRM attached.
I loved the idea, and purchased the digital version. The download servers were completely swamped, and I ended up downloading the entire album using bittorrent anyway - but that wasn't the point. I was given the option to pay the artist for his work, without having to worry about a record label skimming off the top.
The album was pretty good, and makes its way onto my playlist reasonably often. But since then, I've noticed a change in how I think of music. I still download albums without a second thought, but now when I find one I really appreciate, my first instinct is to go to the artists web site and PayPal them some money to show my support.
It's pretty annoying, really. I have daydreams about running into my favorite artists at some generic bar and buying them a round of drinks to show my appreciation. I can't afford to buy albums from all of the artists I support, so I'm stuck with my daydreams for now.
Until artists start breaking away from the record labels wholesale and releasing albums in a way that gives their fans better options, piracy will remain the best option for the regular consumer of media in most cases.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
