Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Businesses

Submission + - All 19 Studies on What FileSharing Studies Really Say Posted (zeropaid.com)

Dangerous_Minds writes: You might remember a series of studies that was started earlier this month that promises to reveal what filesharing studies really say. The series was in reaction to a study that was used to promote SOPA. This morning, the series was concluded with some final thoughts from the author, links and full citations for additional review. The author found overwhelmingly that enforcement of copyright was not the answer to the industries woes, but rather, adaptation to a changing technological environment. He also found that, although some studies did comment that file-sharing may have displaced sales, the level of displacement was negligible at worst and had a good positive impact on sales at best. He also found that the only artists that could possibly be harmed by filesharing are the biggest superstars in the industry. Meanwhile, lesser known artists are actually benefiting from filesharing. Those are just a few of the findings. Here's links to the parts of the whole series: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19.

Comment Re:Don't blame math (Score 2) 371

Reality distortion field? I'd have to say it's the rest of us in the distortion fields. We don't have enough information to understand the system, yet many of the people on this topic have decided they know who to blame for the crash. I've come to accept that reality distortion fields are a necessary part of belonging to the human race. The few of us that can get past them are likely to hold power over the rest of us. Using reality to one's advantage is of course the ultimate power.

Comment Re:Don't blame math (Score 2) 371

No need to blame the banks. It was a systemic problem that was not created exclusively by the banks (Ratings agencies told them the risk was low), by finance (derivatives are actually an excellent financial tool when used intelligently), by government (government backed credit has been used since time immemorial, some for good some for bad, regarding both intention and result), by salesmen (the micro-economics were sound), by buyers (again with the micro-economics), or by the ratings agencies. I don't have a comment for the last one, as they (much more than the SEC or any government agency) are the watchdog for these situations. If there was any misdeed, it was that the finance guys felt good about creating crazy derivatives while the ratings guys felt good about rating them. Yes, some people in this huge equation were malicious. They can be found in each and every corner. And they would have gotten away with it except for the crash. Justice for any who committed crimes, but blame none if not the whole for the crash.

Comment Re:Warren Buffett called derivatives "time bombs". (Score 3, Insightful) 371

Or, with a different twisted view, derivatives were thought to be helpful by those who have done an otherwise fantastic job of dealing with the complex nightmare of the finance world. That they turned out to cause a catastrophe is more about our collective failure to understand the problem and heed the advice of the few against the resounding successes the stock market gave all of us. We were awash in wealth from the lowly home-owner with a mortgage only sustained by constant economic grow to the financier receiving another multi-million dollar bonus. Only those who had no need for continued success could view the situation with cold logic and real understanding, but they were telling us something we didn't want to hear.

Comment Re:economics ? (Score 1) 371

Also from wikipedia - In economics, more precisely in contract theory, signalling (or signaling: see American and British English differences) is the idea that one party (termed the agent) credibly conveys some information about itself to another party (the principal). For me, you are signaling that the science of human interaction scares you. It scares most people. It probably scares me in ways that I don't recognize.

Comment Re:economics ? (Score 4, Insightful) 371

I think we need to be more specific. It's not the complexity of the system (or else there is no interesting science), it's the inability to test hypotheses that makes economics a dubious science. But the same is true for many other disciplines (climate science, astrophysics, social sciences, etc). For me, the difference is that economics is mostly the science of human interaction, which much like biology turns political before most people have even heard the science. It is unfortunate to see it turn political so quickly on Slashdot, the place where science should always be heard first.

Comment Re:bad idea (Score 1) 240

How is this a new thing in the 20th century? Even America is ran by a few super-elites. So they prefer economic exploitation to civil war. That's thousands of years of super-elite evolution that not all super-elites in the world have mastered. For instance, we have 4 year plans rather than 5 year plans. Ours are codified by law rather than specific initiatives of the super-elites.

Why play this as an us vs them? I'm getting tired of Straussian revisionism.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Show business is just like high school, except you get paid." - Martin Mull

Working...