Dude, are you living under a rock?

These bands are creating new music. But the money that allows them to do so comes from their old music. I have bands in my collection that have been making music for 30 years.

No they don't. They don't even make ok money. Tours are expensive and a lot of people, from road crew to venue security, take their cut before the musicians. The big guys, they make a killing on tours. But the small ones sometimes don't even break even.

In fact, a common wisdom in the industry is that touring is worth it not because the tour itself makes profits, but because it builds a fanbase and drives what is called "catalog discovery" - both old and new fans looking buying the albums with the songs they liked (and for the old fans, didn't know).

This study: https://www.giarts.org/article... says that 28% of income across all the musicians surveyed comes from tours. The share is larger for the rock/pop sector where it nears 40% but even that isn't easy money. And if you consider that only 20% of the rock/pop musicians make more than $50,000 a year, then it becomes a hollow statement.

Plus, it goes directly against your first statement - while on tour the band is not creating new music. So if you want to drive musicians more towards constantly creating (which most of them already do), then you can't make live performances the main income source.

There is more than one study and more than one way to look at it. Especially for streaming, having a catalog matters, especially for the smaller artists who will never have a charts-level hit:

"In 2024, nearly 1,500 artists generated over $1 million in royalties from Spotify aloneâ"likely translating to over $4 million across all recorded revenue sources. What's remarkable is that 80% of these million-dollar earners didn't have a single song reach the Spotify Global Daily Top 50 chart. This reveals a fundamental shift from hit-driven success to sustainable catalog-based income, where consistent engagement from devoted audiences matters more than viral moments or radio dominance."

https://cord-cutters.gadgethac...

Also don't forget that many studies such as DiCola's "Money from Music" focus on the superstars and the big hits. That is true, the charts pop music generates 80% or so of its income within the few weeks it stays in the charts and then drops of sharply.

Honestly, I don't care about the charts and superstars. They wouldn't starve if we cut copyright terms to six weeks. I do care about the indie artists that I enjoy. Who after ten years get the band back together for another tour through clubs with 200 or 500 people capacity. I'm fairly sure they would suffer if the revenue from those albums disappeared. And disappear it would. Maybe fans would still buy the CDs from the merch booth, but Spotify would certainly not pay them if it didn't have to.

Count the number of "former" intelligence officials on his company's board.

Then search for the many photos of him mouth-kissing his father and son (RIP).

They use both carrots and sticks to control compromised people.

I took mine apart and there were two separate display modules for the 4K screen with ribbon cables I didn't recognize so I just put it back together and stuck in an HDMI streaming stick flashed to LineageOS.

I got one around 2008. They were the best of the non-premium 1080p HDMI screens at the time.

The one I got had slightly better test review scores on display quality than the LG that year. The Sony was 20% better for 3x the price.

It lasted about twelve years and by then a bigger 4K with much brighter colors was half the cost in nominal dollars, so probably 1/4 the cost in real terms.

And by then cheap flashable streaming sticks were available as was pihole and fairly easy outbound NAT rewriting rules to keep the beasts contained.

He's basically a newborn :-)

Yes, but there is an important difference: TV had to appeal to an average audience member. Meanwhile the social media algorithms are intentionally working against you, trying to specifically find and use your triggers.

That's quite a different intent there.

On the TV, parents could also check the program for what they thought was suitable for their kid or not. They could watch the same program, even if not in the same room. Social media is a lot more personal and a lot harder to track and filter.

Hard disagree.

Not everything is subject to hype cycles. A lot of especially the SMALLER musicians, for example, basically live off their back catalog. I routinely buy the entire collection of artists that I freshly discover and fall in love with. And I totally feel that it is right that I pay them for music they made, no matter when they made it.

What is an abomination is copyright terms of DEATH + 70 years. Or whatever Disney pushed it to by now. I'm ok with inheritance of creative work, but it should not put the children into "never have to work in their entire life" territory.

Then again, there are two aspects: Creative control and money. I think that the Tolkien estate did a generally good job of protecting the integrity of JRR's works. Well, if we ignore Rings of Power, I have no idea what lies Amazon told them to get the approval for that shitshow.

And let's not forget that coypright law is also what protects GPL software.

Rob Reiner had talent, no one denies that - he also turned into a raging political gate-spewing jerk as he qualified for an AARP membership.

He made many excellent movies, more than I can count on both hands, but towards the end... uh, he was 'polarizing'

Not huge enough to turn a profit. Not huge enough to keep him on the air. But sure, it's 'huge'.

I suspect his foray into screenwriting is to keep him occupied/employed as he rides out a non-compete clause that will keep him off TV for a year or more... that's just a hunch, and that this project started to take form before his cancellation was announced works against my hunch, but honestly, it think it went from fun idea to kick-around with Jackson to a possible job once he found out his show was being cancelled.

You may want to explore the decision to cancel Late Night w/ Colbert - a show that loses tens of millions of dollars a year doesn't need government interference to be cancelled.

I suspect the reason Colbert is still on the air today, finishing out the season, is because the network would probably lose as much (or more) in severance packages to various staff, talent, the production company and the affiliates that would suddenly have a 90 minute hole in their schedule.. That and at the time of the decision they had nothing to put in it's place...

Look at the cost, look at the ratings, look at the contracts involved - its was nothing more than a solid business decision.

Writing a segment for "The Daily Show" or a monologue for "The Colbert Report" is one thing, writing (or having significant input) into a quarter-billion dollar project is a bit different.

He's teamed up with his son, and other successful screen writers, so it's not like he'll be writing the adaptation of the six chapters he loves so much by himself.

Remind me, how big is his writing staff on his current interview/entertainment show? My research indicates he has a writing staff of about 20.

I question how much writing he's done since he 'broke out' as a celebrity on "The Daily Show"...

He's got some comedic talent to be sure, but this isn't going to be a comedy movie, is it?

You realize that this change has zero effect on any router, no matter its country of origin, that was on the market last Friday (before this change went into effect) will still be available for as long as the MFG chooses to keep selling them, right?

https://docs.fcc.gov/public/at...

Lost in the story, every currently approved router is unaffected:

Source: FACT SHEET: FCC Updates Covered List to Include Foreign-Made
Consumer Routers, Prohibiting Approval of New Models

This order only impacts new routers.

Is the "Fossil Fuel Industry" actually responsible for "almost 90% of CO2 emissions" or are the customers that buy the fossil fuels and turn them into CO2 emissions responsible?

I think the issue is the consumer, not the producer...