WarIs4Profit
-
Posts
29 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by WarIs4Profit
-
-
Les Claypool slapping the intro to Master of Puppets in concert. Awesome!
-
Its not that the Dutch or the Canadians are stupid. That would be a racist comment. Its just that the smart ones, or at least the ones want to be achievers which requieres individualism move to a more free country such as United States where they are able to undertake their accomplishments.
Socialism can work, its just that everyone needs to believe in the system, it cant be achieved through coercion. Sweden is a fine example: their people are healthy, they have a prominent scientific community, and it works because they all want to be there. They resisted the EU and its commie constitution longer than most other europeen countries, because they didnt want to be coerced.
-
Yeah, I can see that. Smoke on the Water is definitely moving into the metal realm:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jp3de50_d8...feature=related
I prefer highway star, but any deep purple cut is welcome on my radio.
The thing about metal lyrics that you have to understand, is most of the time they are singing about things that piss them off. When they sing about oppression, its not that they are for oppression, they are denouncing it. Metal is the ultimate form of protest music, in this day and age. Rappers sing about how they themselves are corrupt and dangerous, metal musicians complain about these people.
-
I would be willing to entertain the notion. In your estimation, how do Wright and Obama fundamentally differ in principle?
Wright has no experience working with honest caucasians; perhaps Obama has benefitted from his exploration of different social circles in the time since he and wright split paths.
My take on Wright is that his inflammatory speeches are the progeny of the preceding era, in which blacks were hated and feared by many powerful white people. It is possible that Obama, as a young man, has found it easier to forgive than his aged pastor. 20 years is a very long time; Someone who is fixated on the issues of that day would most likely seem like a radical, or a racist.
-
First off, I like music. And I do like popular music, including jazz and pop.
But I find much of the so-called music called "metal" and its similar forms of abject noise to be beyond appalling. It's nothing I can't resolve, however, by pressing the station button on my car radio or switching it off.
I personally find it insulting as a musician hobbyist that anyone dares call the noise put forth by Metallica, Megadeth, Kiss, and others like them "music."
As far as "psychology" I find that such "music" strongly favors death and is anti-sense-of-life. It's no wonder many brainwashed young people like this noise- perhaps it gives then a sense of relief from the misery of their daily "lives."
My take.
Chromatic doesnt mean bad, although some people dont seem to like it very much.
-
These guys wrote some amazing songs, yet due to the strange style they utilize as the vessel for the musical dissertation (vs. compulsion),
their fan base is not as widespread as many mediocre groups from the same era. I personally like Funk/Metal/Jazz, but it is a little overwhelming the first couple of times you hear it.
This is my personal favorite:
"Mama Didn't Raise No Fool"
The best of times, the worst of times,
the times you can't ignore.
Sometimes you bite the bullet
and flip flop on the floor.
They tell you where to go,
and they tell you what to do.
They set your face on fire
then stomp it out with their shoes.
I ain't no fool.
Mama didn't raise no fool.
The times I can't complain
are the times I do the most.
On a diet of black coffee
and prozac buttered toast.
These eunuchs in their prada
and Gucci flavored clothes.
Wouldn't know a fresh perspective
if it bit 'em up on the nose.
I ain't no fool.
Mama didn't raise no fool.
Don't do as they say,
just say as they do.
No flavor's quite so bitter
as the taste of one's own shoe.
I ain't no fool.
Mama didn't raise no fool.
Another gem :
"Year of the Parrot"
In the year of our Lord
Call it 1994
A fine vintage of mimicry
There are those that take their sound
From someone else's Toil
Liking to parrots you see
I've seen the likes of Kate Bush
And Van Morrison
Teaching the parrots to sing
Take a Zepplin riff
And you alter it a bit
And make lots of money
It's called plagiarism
You want some of that cheese
Just take a big ol' bite
Careful not to choke on it please
Now here we go
It's called plagiarism
A third selection :
Mr. Knowitall
They call me Mr. Knowitall
I will not compromise.
I will not be told what to do.
I shall not step aside.
They call me Mr. Knowitall
I have no time to waste.
My mouth it spews pure intellect.
And I've such elegant taste.
They call me Mr. Knowitall.
I sup the aged wine.
Oh I could tell such wonderous tales
if I should find the time.
I must be Mr. Knowitall
For ideas they come in bounds.
I am Mr. Knowitall
So spread the word around.
They call me Mr. Knowitall
I am so eloquent.
Perfection is my middle name
And whatever rhymes with eloquent
-
Richard Halley never sacrificed financial prosperity, quiet on the contrary he moved to a place where he got payed in gold. See that's the beauty of Atlas Shrugged, its consistency.
My mistake; he sacrificed immediate prosperity, in the terms he had come to know through his life in the mainstream of society.
He had been anticipating satisfaction in knowing that his music was appreciated by a lot of people, however the looters' prosperity did not last since it was founded in the manner of a leech.
My point was that he chose self respect over money, the same way that all of Rand's heros do at some point, typically upon realizing that what they had respected was not genuine.
-
Modern music is not crap. It's just that they hide all the good music where nobody ever gets to hear it.
Dredg - Ode To the Sun Incredibly uplifting piece
Opeth - To Bid You Farewell Beautiful, Powerful, Unforgettable
King Crimson - Level Five Haunting and compelling. The feeling of raw fear explained with a level of mathematical complexity rarely seen in music.
Opeth is sooo good, its one of the only modern groups I listen to atm. I think my favorite cut of theirs is Blackwater Park, not to mention that the entire album is a work of art. I love how Akërfeldt blends harsh metal singing with operatic interludes.
-
One could be well versed in copyright law and have no clue as to the moral foundations of it. Now if in fact it is legitimate for the law to enforce the creator's right to make copies of his work, we should be able to point to some ethical principle as to why whistling the Fifth Concerto by Richard Haley is not making a copy of a tune, but performing it at the Hollywood Bowl or on PBS is.
I belive a major distinction, being a material quantity in the eyes of the law, is whether you make a material profit through infringing on the copyright. People often cover modern songs they didnt write at concerts, yet you dont see those covers recorded on rock albums very frequently.
-
I've encountered it, every time.
Here's where youre wrong:
The fact that everyone would be an automechanic does not kill anyone. The fact that you do not sustain your own life, does. Everyone can be an automechanic AND sustain their life besides that. Noone will die because of everyone being a mechanic, everyone will die of stealing othere peoples wealth(as there is none).
So yes, if someone thinks that "being an automechanic" is in itself somehow morally good then it is another thing, as in "i should get paid for being an automechanic regardless of the fact whether im producing or not". By sustaining your life by producing automechanical services to people who value your services enough to pay you, is morally good. But the morally good thing is not the automechanic part, but the sustaining your life.
Being an automechanic has nothing to do with morals, as you can be an automechanic and do either good or bad things. But you cannot do good, by leeching off other people. Because a person can be an automechanic, and 1) make his living from that, 2) make his living on some other thing, 3) make his living off others. But a person cannot live off the productivity off others while at the same time living off the productivity of himself. That is once again a paradox.
I think his point was that if the only professionals were auto mechanics, there would be no food, no shelter, no materials with which to build automobiles, or even people to manufacture them. One of the things that drew me to the objectivist philosophy is that it is totally based around reality. Your statement regarding auto mechanics indicates that you do not consider reality when making your simplification.
-
it really is the lazy way out, the mystical miracle solution to whichever problem is the underlying source of a child's dissatisfaction.
-
this could concievably raise some objections, but the U2 front-man Bono comes to mind.
-
I'm pretty for sure that ADD exists (ADHD is more likely to exist though), even if the enviroment was changed. The public school system might foster it but, there are still children in private schools with it. More time and effort spent on studying the kids in question would be opitmal to answering the question here. Also, a complete change in enviroment to notice if there are differences in students in different enviroments.
Youre probably right, in the case of kids who are simply unable to concentrate. I should have been more clear about my statement, in that while schools do not cause a permanent case of the disorder, similar characteristics are observed in children who are not interested in learning in a structured group environment. I think that some teachers/administrators take advantage of the convenient avenue they have to control these children, by suppressing their behavior with drugs, rather than analysing the system they have created.
-
The I.D part of Stein is the least of my worries. His clamoring against the rich and calling for higher taxes shows the true face of much of the Republican party.
What did you expect from a guy who publicly gave away his money in the form of a game show?
-
Mandatory public education is the cause of ADD. Not only do students find themselves forced to study subjects of no interest to them, they are forced to learn things according to the method of a disciplinarian accorded the name of educator. Some of the smartest people I knew in elementary school were diagnosed with ADD; the only reason I managed to slip under the gratuitous drug dispensors' radar, was that I rarely uttered a word in class if not spoken to, due to being absorbed in some other task which was more to my interest.
-
-
the guy who played Aragorn would be good as Ragnar, his name escapes me.
it's too bad that they can't cast Rodney Dangerfield as Orren Boyle.
I think Harrison Ford would make a perfect Rearden, he has the composure of a man with the world on his shoulders. (at least he did in AF1)
-
George Harrison wrote some of the most meaningful songs produced by the Beatles, as many harcore fans will recognize.
"Taxman" is a bitterly humorous examination of socialist society,
"Something" is to date my favorite love song, not only for the lyrics, but the heartwrenching guitar solo and fills,
"While My Guitar Gently Weeps" is the single greatest Beatles song ever recorded, in terms of the complexity of the melody and the wonderful message
While Paul was an essential contributor, musically, and John had an incredible poetic talent, Harrison was the most original and independant member of the band.
-
Well ok,
First, I don't understand how you can say Ayn Rand didn't deserve her money.
Secondly, it seems to me that you are saying that the only people producing music that deserve money are artistic musicians. What about entertainers? I seriously doubt N'SYNC considered their music art, but does that mean its OK to steal it? What is the difference of Metallica selling their image instead of their music? If people are still buying their albums, regardless of what you think of them artistically, it proves that are still valued. Furthermore, the fact that people steal their albums proves they have value. Let's say I write a song only to entertain, and work incredibly hard doing it. This song sounds a lot like the Beach Boys-it does not follow any of their chord progressions or melodies, but it is in the same style. Now, let's say I make 10 million dollars of this song. Is it now OK people to steal it? Besides, who says Metallica are not hard working? They might have tried really hard to make an image that would sell well. In fact, they might have tried harder to make that image than they tried to make their older songs you enjoyed. Since (in this theory) they put more hard, honest work into the image than the music that you enjoy does that make it (the image) more valuable? Music is a product no matter how you look at it and just because you personally don't think Metallica's new music isn't art does not make it OK to take it. I think all (including their old stuff) is terrible but does that mean it is ok to steal? No, because no matter what it sounds like, they created so they should have ALL rights to it, saying they shouldn't based on your view of their artistic merit can be interpreted as people only deserve things if YOU say they earned them. Also, I don't think its fair of you to speak for Metallica, they might really, really enjoy their new material. Since they are the ones that created it, they decide the value, they will set a price and if you agree with their set price, you buy it. If you don't, move along. Someone might think the music you make is horrible, does that give them the right to steal it?
To summarize, what I gather you are saying is that if YOU feel something lacks meaning, than its creator lacks the right of private property of the given material.
Regardless of who created or for what purpose, THEY created it and should be the ONLY ones to say how it is distributed, if you get it any other way, you are stealing, it is wrong, this is not a gray issue.
When did I say that Ayn Rand didnt deserve her money? It seems every time I post something on this forum, somebody misinterprets what I write and then begins an argument based on their misinterpretation.
To depict : To represent in words
I will reiterate what I have said on the subject of media flavored "art". The whole bunch of drug bloated pop artists that have no artistic integrity or talent should stop whining about the fact that people are now capable of exchanging files through the internet. True art is not motivated by profit, and good musicians everywhere have been struggling for decades to achieve financial independance due to the overwhelming influence that the media seems to have on public taste.
I ask this question of anyone who cares to answer me in their own words: Does the media reflect the views of the majority in order to increase ratings, or are they "behind the scenes" kingmakers who manipulate their audience into supporting whichever talentless shill they happen to view as a potential flavor of the month sensation.
A good test (in my eyes) of whether you truly appreciate the music you listen to is thus: If you enjoy listening to the music ten years down the road as much as you did when it was first produced, you legitimately respect and appreciate it for its artistic merits, not for the sense of belonging to a group of like-minded people (the illusion being that these people are making their own decisions, and not simply following the media frenzy surrounding the art in question).
PS
I would never steal music, and on the occasion when I come across free recordings that I like, I purchase the albums at a later date. File sharing is not exclusive to thieves of art, it is a wonderful medium of advertising for those artists who do not get the representation in the media which they deserve. The only people hurt by this technological revolution are the artists who are not held in high regards by their fan base, who rely on the media to carry them. I could care less about their prosperity, and I would love to see these people eliminated naturally from the human gene pool. The only way to control file sharing is to enable an inordinate level of personal surveillance, which would more likely than not spark a bloody revolution, something which I believe should be avoided at all costs.
Peace!
edit: If you ask a muscian (somebody who loves music and would write music for its own sake, even if they had no opportunity to make a profit on it) what they thought was most important to them, pertaining to their work, they will reply that knowing that people appreciate their work is the most meaningful form of praise they could ever ask for.
For example, in Atlas Shrugged, Richard Halley achieves media renown, yet discovers that this form of success was hollow, as the people who flocked to his concert in droves were merely following a trend, and their praise was meaningless. He chose to forsake financial prosperity in order to live with those who loved his music by their own judgements, and not by the hand of compulsion.
Ayn Rand's views on this subject are quite synonymous with my own, regardless of the interpretation chosen by many of her followers. One can only guess at what she would have written about the modern world's issues, yet her philosophy clearly indicates that the artistic and industrial worlds coincide in the way that compromise in order to achieve wealth is the mark of someone who did not earn what they have reaped.
I stand by my views.
-
I used to like South Park a lot, but in recent seasons, clever dialogue and lighthearted messages have been replaced with more toilet humor and full on preachy-ness. There are quite a few episodes where I agree with the message, but there are to that stick out in my memory that give the complete wrong message. I might be remembering these incorrectly, so let me know if I'm wrong.
The first is one that talks about how rich musicians complain about when people steal their material, and South Park sides with the idea that its OK to steal from people who have money.
The second is one where they attack Speilberg and Lucas for remaking their movies with added effects, changes in dialogue etc. Saying that once they release the movies initially, they become somewhat owned by the public because the public attaches to them. And as I recall, they almost say the directors should not be allowed to do so.
Both of these arguments are ridiculous and flawed and obviously NOT in accordance to Objectivism, But on a lighter note, it IS a comedy show, and seen as such, can be pretty funny
They never attack industrialists, or people making their money in an honest fashion. Ayn Rand herself fully depicted the ways in which people can achieve wealth without earning it, such as musicians producing terrible, radio friendly (or in this day and age, MTV friendly) crap, and then complaining about technology and file sharing.
I used to respect Metallica, because their music used to be well thought out and not rely on an image to make sales. I am an amateur musician, yet I could (and have) written better music than the current output of the majority of media chart topping "musicians". I have no sympathy for these people, since their art is hackneyed and unworthy of the respect of hard working individuals such as myself. Peter Keating was not a heroic character, yet he was wealthy and successful in the sense of media attention and hype. There are far greater injustices in the artistic world, and South Park holds no punches in their analysis of societal values. They (the creators) understand the difference between earning wealth and taking advantage of the stupidity of the media obsessed, intellectually deficient majority.
When I listen to music, I enjoy it because it is good, not because it is popular and I would like to belong to the cult of media worshipping damned souls.
-
Perhaps the outspoken conclusion of each episode is that everything's relative and anything goes (particularly when Cartman wins), but in each episode theirs a struggle between the good and the bad, regardless of the result of the battle.
Cartman is typically representative of the weak and the corrupt, and while there are episodes where he is defeated by his lack of integrity, he does frequently appear victorious in the sense that he gets away with whichever scheme he has concocted. This is synonymous with Gail Wynand's change of heart near the end of the Fountainhead, where although he succeeds in restoring his prestige (by smearing Roark's name), he loses his personal struggle for his self respect.
The one instance where Cartman is truly the heroic figure (in my eyes anyhow), is the episode where he infiltrates the hippie drum circle and blasts them out of the town with Raining Blood (Slayer).
I'm not sure how to explain this peculiarity in the show's premise, except perhaps that Trey and Matt loath hippies more than corruption in the government, the media, and all of the other evils which Cartman represents. Then again, it's possible that they wish to portray Cartman as a necessary evil, in order to balance out the problems of the world.
-
King of the hill is somewhat of a wild card, I've found. Sometimes I find the episodes hilarious, but sometimes I can't bear to watch it due to the childishness of the dialogue. My interpretation of this is that the some of the writers are very good, while others have comedic deficiencies. I find that in particular, the Peggy oriented episodes are unappreciable, at least for someone with my dark sense of humor.
-
I am well aware (I posted that announcement early in this thread, actually), and while I may hit southparkstudios.com for some episodes, I prefer the DVD format and to watch on my TV. But thank you.
Your comments about southparkzone.com, though, as you are probably aware are in advocacy of piracy. Whether or not it's legal in the Netherlands or not (where it is hosted) is irrelevant to it's morality. There are plenty of piracy threads around the forum, if you wish to discuss a particular aspect of it, but generally speaking, piracy is immoral.
I wont go into my complicated view on piracy, but I will restate that Parker and Stone support media sharing, and have even figured out how to make money via agreements with the websites that host their shows.
-
I appreciate the more concrete examples. Unquestionably, I'll rewatch every episode again (most likely in order when season 11 and 12 come on DVD), and I'll keep my eyes and ears open to try to validate the claims myself to see if I can find any similarities beyond coincidence (Think of Sol's monologue in the movie pi: "Hold on. You have to slow down. You're losing it. You have to take a breath. Listen to yourself. You're connecting a computer bug I had with a computer bug you might have had and some religious hogwash. You want to find the number 216 in the world, you will be able to find it everywhere. 216 steps from a mere street corner to your front door. 216 seconds you spend riding on the elevator. When your mind becomes obsessed with anything, you will filter everything else out and find that thing everywhere.")
I'm still very skeptical that the coincidences you've presented are more than just coincidences and are orchestrated as a (subtle) inside joke.
FYI, although you are most likely aware, south park is easily available via web stream. The creators/writers are pioneers among artists, embracing the internet for its accessability and have negotiated a system whereby they retain a percentage of profits earned by internet sites broadcasting their work.
generally, i use southparkzone.com, since I am canadian, and comedy central does not allow persons outside the US to view recent episodes on their site.
Speculators / Rising prices
in Economics
Posted
In places where development is sprawled over a large distance with little access to public transit, the economic blow is sure to hit the hardest. Buildings stacked on top of each other is the way to go.