http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2008/06/12/tech-copyright.html
This article is about the copyright Bill C-61 presented by Minister Jim Prentice which clearly states what can and cannot be done with digital media, generally they are attempting to make peer to peer sharing of media files illegal. I read that the future of internet can be implemented in positive ways, like the peer to peer file sharing was created with the intent to bring down the music industry. Another positive use was the invention of Skype, which uses similar P2P technology, and this technology is used with the intent to bring down the telecommunications systems. Apple's Iphone has even created programs to detect and destroy the use of skype on their iPhone.
More specifically, the ones that would loose more money i feel are media outlets, and Television networks. However even these networks are starting to take advantage of the internet by directly broadcasting their shows on their websites.
If anything P2P sharing shares the wealth for the artists. Like 'how the media is biased' radio stations are biased as well. generally radio stations play big label music not because the music is good but because the labels that produce these artists are paying to have their music broadcasted. In fact, the issue at hand was fought 80 years ago when the radio first came out. Artists felt that it was taking away from sales then, and now it is a positive form of exposure. You now consciously pick the music you want to listen, instead of having it mindlessly thrown at you.
Generally, the use of MySpace has brought new up and coming artists into the spotlight, which have created new band labels. These revenues are taken away from the big labels, such as Sony music, Warner Bros. studios, Universal studios, and virgin Music.
In fact the artist themselves dont actually lose money. Take iTunes for instance. people are actually paying for each iTunes song, and the artist gain their revenue. The revenue that would go towards the music studios are now going to apple. This is just a new form of business and they've taken advantage of that. Also artists stir the pot, because they actually don't like studio labels like, Prince, or more recently how radio head allowed fans to decide how much to pay for their album, and allowed them to download them for free. This slaps studios in the face Big time.
The bill, I feel is a negative aspect and the artists don't necessarily loose out. They are just sharing opportunity.
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
Friday, July 18, 2008
Smoking is Cool
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/smoking/smokingbans.html
This is mainly a rebuttal towards the blog posted by SSV, they are a worthy opponent. Canada is considered to be among those countries at the forefront of anti-smoking legislation, but the rest of the world is beginning to catch up.
As a non-smoker i have a large opinion on this topic, well if you now me i have a large opinion on everything. A study found that discriminating against smokers is the only form of acceptable form of discrimination. But in the end it still is discrimination. Taxing smokers for their lung cancer affects on the health care system is ridiculous. What about the Obese, they place great strain on our health care system and they don't pay anything for doing so. If anything smokers are already taxed, the only time i buy cigarettes is when i go over the boarder. The Canadian government taxes cigarettes largely, this money is most likely going back into the health care system, so if anything we should thank smokers currently for paying towards operating our health care system, but paying for research into cures for cancer and aids, and other diseases irrelevant towards smoking.
Also the argument of second hand smoke is unfair and ridiculous. Honestly smoking contributes approximately 5% to poor air quality. The rest of the 95% come from things like energy production, industry, and transportation. Our addiction to oil and production of nitrous oxides, Sulfurous oxides, are worst than our addiction to smoking. Take Europe for example; they have the largest amount of smokers in the world, smoking there is a large part of their culture, and it is greatly accepted. And yet they have higher life expectancy than we do. This is due to perhaps a better health care, but one things for sure is their air quality is much cleaner due to reduction of pollutants from transportation. Cars were made to transport people not cars.
In the end i feel that smoking is your choice, and like any choice you pay for the consequences. Yes it disturbs people, but that guy revving his supped up Honda civic in front of McGuinness Front Row is doing more external harm than any cigarette. These are known as externalities. In the good old days, Hollywood portrayed smoking as sexy and amazing, and i love this form of market placement, thats why i wanted to buy the tumbler after batman begin came out. Personally i think smoking is cool, i just don't smoke because I'm too cheap to buy smokes.
This is mainly a rebuttal towards the blog posted by SSV, they are a worthy opponent. Canada is considered to be among those countries at the forefront of anti-smoking legislation, but the rest of the world is beginning to catch up.
As a non-smoker i have a large opinion on this topic, well if you now me i have a large opinion on everything. A study found that discriminating against smokers is the only form of acceptable form of discrimination. But in the end it still is discrimination. Taxing smokers for their lung cancer affects on the health care system is ridiculous. What about the Obese, they place great strain on our health care system and they don't pay anything for doing so. If anything smokers are already taxed, the only time i buy cigarettes is when i go over the boarder. The Canadian government taxes cigarettes largely, this money is most likely going back into the health care system, so if anything we should thank smokers currently for paying towards operating our health care system, but paying for research into cures for cancer and aids, and other diseases irrelevant towards smoking.
Also the argument of second hand smoke is unfair and ridiculous. Honestly smoking contributes approximately 5% to poor air quality. The rest of the 95% come from things like energy production, industry, and transportation. Our addiction to oil and production of nitrous oxides, Sulfurous oxides, are worst than our addiction to smoking. Take Europe for example; they have the largest amount of smokers in the world, smoking there is a large part of their culture, and it is greatly accepted. And yet they have higher life expectancy than we do. This is due to perhaps a better health care, but one things for sure is their air quality is much cleaner due to reduction of pollutants from transportation. Cars were made to transport people not cars.
In the end i feel that smoking is your choice, and like any choice you pay for the consequences. Yes it disturbs people, but that guy revving his supped up Honda civic in front of McGuinness Front Row is doing more external harm than any cigarette. These are known as externalities. In the good old days, Hollywood portrayed smoking as sexy and amazing, and i love this form of market placement, thats why i wanted to buy the tumbler after batman begin came out. Personally i think smoking is cool, i just don't smoke because I'm too cheap to buy smokes.
Privatizing the LCBO is a Great Thing
Premier Harris says a re-elected Tory government might reconsider the idea of selling the province's liquor stores. The Conservatives promised to look at privatizing the LCBO in the last election. But they dropped the idea after Harris said the government would not get enough "bang for its buck." - cbc.ca, may 27 2008.
The concept of privatizing the LCBO is dear to my heart. Especially since i am from an area where alcohol is privatized, (Alberta) . There are so many different aspects i like and dislike about the LCBO, however there mostly dislikes! the only thing i like about the LCBO is the 'Around the World'. Thats where they have the international section in the LCBO and you can pick an choose an 8 pack made up of various beers of the world, mostly Europe. Another great aspect is the cleanness, and their large selection in wine, but i don't drink wine because wine is for people who are either old or snutty folk.
Aside from that I HATE the LCBO. Taking a page from my home town, alcohol privatization was decided by premier Klein, and in his most simple defense, it was largely due to the freedom of competition. He was a free thatcher ism, and a Reaganometallic supporter. Turns out Klein came out openly admitting that he was an ALCOHOLIC.
There are many reasons i love the idea of privatizing Alcohol. First of in a economic perspective, this now becomes another medium for people create small businesses. And for these people to become self sustaining, and provide motivation to excel, rather than having those high school graduates work at the communist regime the LCBO with no motivation to move ahead in their work.
Another reason is the open times. The LCBO closes at 11, that is so ridiculous. That doesn't give you enough time to get drunk at a bar, and decide to go to a liquor store afterwards for more. It pretty much means game is over when the tap runs dry. That i ssooooo ridiculous and makes life unworthy. In alberta, depending on the community; meaning the lower income areas, liquore stores are open till 2 am. That is capitalism right there. That owner is willing to stay up later to make more, and he is aiming those customers that want more at a lower cost, and people always want more.
Reason number 2, Since capitalism is in play, there would be more abundance of liquor stores. Back home, there are liquor stores at every plaza available. Here i have to take a 15 min bus ride in order to get to the nearest LCBO. And given that I'm a student, the freedom of a vehicle is not available. Liquor would be more easily accessible, and distance would not be a factor.
The last reason i HATE the LCBO is pricing, all the LCBO's have the same over priced liquor. Again capitalism would bring in best support for both the consumer and supplier. Competition amongst liquore stores would force them to lower prices, which would be great for us consumers, more specifically us poor university students.
Ever since i came here i never liked the LCBO and am still not a fan. Privatization all the way!!!
The concept of privatizing the LCBO is dear to my heart. Especially since i am from an area where alcohol is privatized, (Alberta) . There are so many different aspects i like and dislike about the LCBO, however there mostly dislikes! the only thing i like about the LCBO is the 'Around the World'. Thats where they have the international section in the LCBO and you can pick an choose an 8 pack made up of various beers of the world, mostly Europe. Another great aspect is the cleanness, and their large selection in wine, but i don't drink wine because wine is for people who are either old or snutty folk.
Aside from that I HATE the LCBO. Taking a page from my home town, alcohol privatization was decided by premier Klein, and in his most simple defense, it was largely due to the freedom of competition. He was a free thatcher ism, and a Reaganometallic supporter. Turns out Klein came out openly admitting that he was an ALCOHOLIC.
There are many reasons i love the idea of privatizing Alcohol. First of in a economic perspective, this now becomes another medium for people create small businesses. And for these people to become self sustaining, and provide motivation to excel, rather than having those high school graduates work at the communist regime the LCBO with no motivation to move ahead in their work.
Another reason is the open times. The LCBO closes at 11, that is so ridiculous. That doesn't give you enough time to get drunk at a bar, and decide to go to a liquor store afterwards for more. It pretty much means game is over when the tap runs dry. That i ssooooo ridiculous and makes life unworthy. In alberta, depending on the community; meaning the lower income areas, liquore stores are open till 2 am. That is capitalism right there. That owner is willing to stay up later to make more, and he is aiming those customers that want more at a lower cost, and people always want more.
Reason number 2, Since capitalism is in play, there would be more abundance of liquor stores. Back home, there are liquor stores at every plaza available. Here i have to take a 15 min bus ride in order to get to the nearest LCBO. And given that I'm a student, the freedom of a vehicle is not available. Liquor would be more easily accessible, and distance would not be a factor.
The last reason i HATE the LCBO is pricing, all the LCBO's have the same over priced liquor. Again capitalism would bring in best support for both the consumer and supplier. Competition amongst liquore stores would force them to lower prices, which would be great for us consumers, more specifically us poor university students.
Ever since i came here i never liked the LCBO and am still not a fan. Privatization all the way!!!
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
The New Hockey Night in Canada
Ohh, what a shame, so it will no longer be, I Truly am disappointed in the lost of our nations national theme. That song is probably more well known than our own national anthem. If anything that song crosses national lines and unites Canadians. Just asking who can sing our national anthem, if anything who can sing out nations anthem in French. The lack in words in the Hockey Night in Canada theme brings anglophones and francophones together. Surrounding our nations only athletic pride, Hockey. I mean what else are we athletically suppose to be proud about, Down hill ski. This is the one sport we are capable of holding over the Europeans. Colbert even made a huge skit about it on the show, where he played the theme, and ate hot dogs and shot a gun and talked about killing beavers. It was offensive to Canadians, but still funny.
And now there changing there throwing out a competition to change make a new song.The winnings are pretty substantial, $100 000, which is pretty good considering you only win 50 000 for winning in fear factor. But the evidence shows. The new theme will take a long time to adjust to. I mean looking at all the current entries. The most rating that anyone of them have received is no more than 2 out of 5 stars. People just cant let go, I cant let go, it will never be the same.
And now there changing there throwing out a competition to change make a new song.The winnings are pretty substantial, $100 000, which is pretty good considering you only win 50 000 for winning in fear factor. But the evidence shows. The new theme will take a long time to adjust to. I mean looking at all the current entries. The most rating that anyone of them have received is no more than 2 out of 5 stars. People just cant let go, I cant let go, it will never be the same.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)