 |
|
Art For Free
How would I feel if I was in a band whose songs were available for free from some online service like Napster? The same way I feel about having my writing online. It can only help me. Music is "free" on the radio, is it not? How easy has it been over the past several decades to record songs off the radio? Obviously it didn't kill the record industry, or keep bands from living like royalty. I feel that those bands that made such a fuss about their music being free for download online have forgotten why they began creating art in the first place. At what point did it become about selling units, or selling out stadiums? If they're already making millions and millions of dollars, what could it hurt to have their music downloaded by their fans? Does the milking from the fans ever take a break for them? Downloading music from the web has been a missed opportunity for promoting singles off albums. For smaller bands, free downloads was a blessing--an opportunity to have your music available almost anywhere to anybody. It was a perfect promotional tool. After all, even with a record contract, it's the live shows that bring the real money. What better way to get people to see (and pay) your band than to have them familiar with your music? How would I feel about my writing being online, downloaded by thousands upon thousands of people? Where can I sign up?
March 27, 2003
Autobahn
How can a highway with no speed limit be one of the safest stretches of roads in the world? Because Germans actually focus on driving. They don't eat lunch, apply makeup, or talk on cell phones. The only way to get a speeding ticket on the Autobahn is by going too slow (often times in the left lane, which like in the United States, is reserved only for passing). Driving licenses are much more difficult to acquire in Germany. You can go whatever speed you'd like, but if you run out of gas on the Autobahn, you're breaking the law. The difference in their laws and ours is that theirs are designed to increase responsibility rather than the issuance of tickets. Fifteen miles per hour above present US highway speed averages (not speed limit, because it's very rare that Americans actually keep it at or below the posted speed limit) is far less dangerous than the disregard for driver's attention and road etiquette. Speed limits don't save lives. Awareness does. Speed limits are to our government as hamburgers are to McDonalds--a vital source of income. Save lives? Statistically, no. It's safer to drive on the Autobahn with speeds above 100 mph than it is to drive on your nearby North American highway.
March 25, 2003
The Greatest Invention
I believe that the greatest invention in the history of mankind was verbal and written communication (although agriculture certainly has its place). Communication and understanding will set us free. The greatest modern invention, therefore, must be the Internet. It is power to the people. It is the safe embodiment of a human hive mind, a collective pool that crosses all racial, social, and geopolitical boundaries. If knowledge is power, then the Internet has to be the most powerful tool mankind has ever created.
March 20, 2003
Sign Language
Sign language shouldn't be restricted to the deaf. In fact, it should be a mandatory part of early education. Our language exists in two forms (written and spoken), but what if we could have a third way of communication? The next time you're at a concert screaming into the ear of your friend, think of how nice it would be to be able to sign your thoughts. Sign language would practically make the whisper and the scream obsolete. Its potential use in society would greatly outweigh the difficulty in teaching it to children.
March 18, 2003
Reality TV
It seems that the most common opinion of reality TV states that it's a sign of the "end times", or at least the glorification of moral depravity. Tell me which is better, a television show with canned laughter and unrealistic settings, situations, themes, and characters, or humans responding to realistic circumstances? Leave It To Beaver or Survivor? I'll take Survivor any day. Just the argument itself, that something portraying realism is the downfall of society should tell you an awful lot about the thin fabric that comprises our society. We prefer security blankets over realism. Not me. I'd rather see people getting hitched to strangers on live TV. It's absurd, just like it's supposed to be. It's not a glorification, it's a parading of ignorance. It should be viewed for what it is, a mirror on the empty soul of our American society. An opportunity for the idiots of our country to see the error in their ways. A "let this not happen to you" lesson. Reality TV can only be as dumb as the civilians of this country. As long as we have fools to participate, I see no reason to be critical. It truly is a mirror of society. Don't like it? Do something on a personal level to change it.
March 13, 2003
Trust the Experts
Whatever line of work you happen to be in, you know better than anyone else the ins and outs of your trade. So why is it that people feel the need to override a qualified opinion so much of the time? Who better to know how to cut your hair than your own hairstylist? They were schooled in knowing these things, whereas you more than likely saw some cool hairdo on TV that will probably look hideous on you. Who better to know what's really good on a menu than the people who work at the restaurant? Ask the waiter their opinion. No one knows that menu better than they do. If sometimes we listened rather than talked, we might find life could be a whole lot easier.
March 11, 2003
Let It Happen On Purpose (LIHOP Conspiracy)
The last plane to crash on 9-11 hit the Pentagon roughly one hour after the first plane hit the World Trade Center. It was all over the news at the time that more planes were still unaccounted for, so this was no secret to the entire nation. How is it that a jet can give over one hour's notice of crashing into a building, and yet nothing was done about it? I know for certain that our military does not operate that slowly. Even the Minutemen back in the Revolutionary War could have done more about it than our military did. Hell, a guy standing outside the Pentagon with a shotgun could have done more than our military and defense. I really don't think all radar systems in the country were down, so they knew where it was going with plenty of time to respond. How much money do we sink into defense? The only plausible explanation is that the military was told not to react. That the jet's course was going exactly as planned, or intended, or at the very least, allowed by our leaders. This bit of information only scratches the surface of the evidence that points this direction. If the American leaders did not create the terror that struck our country on that day, they did allow it to happen. Why? To declare war on a concept rather than a nation. To bring a lethal combination of fear and patriotism to our country that enabled the government to tighten its control of the citizens, with the actual (and surprising) support of the citizens. In fact, in most cases, the US citizens have been the mob that enforced the new laws that make the Constitution obsolete. I don't fear another terrorist act as much as I fear how my government will respond to it. You should, too. Please be informed. Search "LIHOP" on Google or read this book. The evidence that backs this theory is as disturbing as it is convincing.
March 6, 2003
War on Terrorism
Why is Bush so intent on attacking Iraq when we never achieved our goal of taking out Bin Laden? With North Korea showing themselves to be a much more viable threat, what reason (other than the control of oil in that region of the middle east) are we so focused on attacking Iraq? Fighting terrorism seems to be a motive with Iraq, but there is no proof of any Iraqi involvement. But we do know for certain that the terrorists involved in 9-11 were largely from Saudi Arabia, whom we consider allies. Blaming Saudi Arabia isn't going to happen for two reasons that are both connected. One, the obvious--oil. Two, the Bush family is very close to the Bin Laden family (am I the only person who finds this to be uncanny, at the very least?). So we get continuing terrorist threats, along with the knowledge that North Korea already possesses "weapons of mass destruction", and somehow our concern is Iraq? Makes very little sense to me. I also find it interesting that the United States is the only country that can have these types of weapons. Do we really trust the President that much? I don't trust anyone who wields that much power. Anyone who seeks it is by default not worthy of obtaining it. Especially the means with which Bush obtained the position of Presidency in the past election. (for related reading, go to this link)
March 3, 2003