Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuna
'Tis a nice evening out - just picked half a kilo of blackberries.
I think you misunderstand me. I'm not arguing for the status quo at all and have been involved in 'next generation' technology for a long time (sadly that makes a lot of the stuff I've worked on 'last/failed generation' by now!).
|
You see that is what Moejoe can't seem to grasp.
Apparently, anyone who disagrees with him/her must simply be stuck in the past arguing for the status quo. Apparently, one could never simply disagree with his/her proposed vision for a new world order whilst at the same time agreeing that a new world order may in fact be needed.
Once again, it is far easier to simply dismiss the others point of view and accuse them of arguing something they are not than to actually constructively discuss the issue at hand.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Tuna
The first observation is that the old publishing methods have worked extremely well up to this point and haven't yet been rendered untenable by technological change. The second is that the proposed replacement, favoured by Anderson and others shows no evidence that it can reproduce the cultural breadth and sophistication of the old ecosystem that it seeks to replace.
That's not saying that free media cannot point to some genuinely exciting works, nor is it saying that traditional paid media is the only game in town. It's just saying that before we rush to tear down the big corporations, we should be sure that we have something genuinely capable of replacing them. I feel Anderson's lofty vision falls short and we will need other models to support creative works in the future.
|
But it's soooo much easier to tear down than it is to come up with something that is actually and demonstratively better don't you see? And if any disagree with you, accuse them of being stuck in the past, simple sheep, easily led by the will of the big evil corporations who just want to sell you things. That'll make your position seem so much more worthy and noble.
Cheers,
PKFFW