Sharetapes - A Digital Mixtape For Sharing Playlists
So let me get this straight. I create a playlist via whatever service (in most cases, for free) then I will pay $10 ($7 for 5 cards + $3 for shipping) to be able to share a QR code (something I could print for free- or skip the middleman and just email the link or post to twitter/facebook)… to my spotify or Youtube playlist.
This is about the exact opposite of simplifying things. As it explains in the FAQ:
Does the receiver need a special app to play a Sharetape?
Services like Spotify require the receiver to have a subscription to play on mobile devices. Using YouTube or 8tracks does not require the receiver to have a special app, except a QR code reader for devices without NFC.
… I must have missed something, this doesn’t sound convenient at all, and it doesn’t really seem like a sound premise for a business.
“Stop The Cyborgs’ was founded in response to the Google Glass project and other technology trends. The aim of the movement is to stop a future in which privacy is impossible and corporate control total.”
NB Addendum: “Two things are quickly lost in any internet debate: humor and nuance. So in retrospect we should have guessed that people would find it hard to read past the name ‘Stop The Cyborgs‘. We thought it would be a bit of fun – a suitably cyberpunk sounding opposition group. However we have been variously accused of hating technology & hating anyone who isn’t 100% biological. This is not the case. We love technology and we love people. Indeed we even wear clothes and create technology ourselves. Some of us might even have metal bits.” Read more…
Favorite quote from their site:
“People claim “You can’t fight the future” by which they mean “One particular possible future“.”
Absolutely agree with this. I’m also glad that their approaching this issue with tongue in cheek. I think adding a little humor to what some people may label as paranoia always helps the message go down.
Sure to be appealed by usa admin., and probably does not apply to visiting Canadians; but, finally, a win for 4’th amendment at the border.
Progress for individual rights. Enjoy it while it lasts.
Its no surprise that the pay-what-you-want business model may not work all the time, or work for every artist. There obviously was some novelty to large acts like NIN and Radiohead trying it out. Now the bloom is off the rose and those relatively small transactions mixed with overhead and other costs may not be as appealing (especially if they’re trying to launch a new tour or new album).
But what is more important now is that the artists are in control of their own destinies. They can pick up and move and change. They aren’t beholden to the record companies outright. Its just one more way for them to do the things they want.
There will still be the PWYW* model for back catalog, or for different projects/opportunities. Now that the record labels have also come around to a more artist-friendly model, it would be advantageous to keep as many options open as possible
*say it like “Pe-wew!” Its fun.
The team acknowledges that not all users will be happy with the change and apologizes to those affected…
I had just come around to liking Tweetdeck. Its far from perfect, but it did a lot of things really well. I really can’t wait for them to revoke Tweetbot’s access (and Favstar) and then it’ll just be the boring web presence and all the precious “sponsored tweets” we can handle.
Thanks Twitter. I’d happily stuff a few bills in your G-string, but you know, asking your customers to support the product just isn’t as appealing I guess.
The glorious circle of life.
For some reason a WSJ writer decided to try to determine if Twitter is worth $10 billion, thought it was last valued at $9 billion by the Blackrock Group. He spent some time wading through the hype and financials of the social network.
I spent the last week trying to write a column that…
I never understood where WSJ dreamed up that figure, just because one investment group is gambling on huge success with Twitter. It makes sense that Blackrock says “oh yeah, its worth a mint,” because they’re putting money on the line and want other investors to come along and do the same.
I am, by no means an average twitter user, but I do fit some of the demographics of one. Let’s see: I follow almost no brands (certainly no major ones) and make a bunch of silly comments. How in the world is that worth $4 a month to their advertisers? Yes, I see promoted tweets, but I’ve never clicked on one. Never.
Sure there are firms out there who want to be “in the discussion”, and some startups do great support over twitter, but none of those things are worth the amount that Twitter seems to believe it is.
Even though its far from ‘traditional reporting’, go check out Cracked’s article on "Why McDonald’s has the most insane Twitter account" and see if twitter, as a big brand, makes any sense.
Pay not attention to the black monolith behind you.
“A robot sits before Buddhist monks, as they pray during a mass alms-offering ceremony at King Mongkut’s Institute of Technology Ladkrabang in Bangkok, on June 19, 2012. The ceremony was held to mark the 2,600th anniversary of the enlightenment of Lord Buddha.”
From the extraordinary collection: Robots at Work and Play - In Focus - The Atlantic, via Dan W
And as the university says we sleep for seven hours a day, in practice that means that three quarters of waking time is spent receiving information, the majority of which is electronic.