3 ms·

I feel that that the article often mixes cause and effect. It also neglects to mention that the cost of producing music is much less than ten, twenty, fifty yea

I feel that that the article often mixes cause and effect. It also neglects to mention that the cost of producing music is much less than ten, twenty, fifty years ago. I have the tools in my modest office to record a track, edit it, cut it, release it, and promote it. That ease of production inevitably leads to a much greater supply than the market can handle. I believe software is on the same path. Ten, twenty years ago, to create, distribute, and market software was a complex undertaking involving many actors. But now motivated software developers can release and market products with much greater ease than even shareware producers experienced in the 1990's. Seven years ago I released my main software product (poker hand tracking and analysis for OS X), a niche product within a niche market. I thought I would own the niche forever. But due to the ease with which competitors could create and launch, there has been a steady stream of competitors in my small, small space. This increased supply should lead to a decreased average income for mini moguls like myself.

cJ0th 11y ago
> I feel that that the article often mixes cause and effect. That was also my impression. I certainly agree with your observation that it is the ease of distribution which influenced the development first and foremost. It doesn't really take a prophet to point out that stuff which is predestined to become "tap water" will be tap water one day. Mass markets (and thus the pop music industry) have always wanted to sell stuff in huge quantities. From a business point of view, I see rock and roll more as a starting point of an iteration that aims at perfecting the generation of pop stars than a revolution. Shows like American Idol demonstrate that we have arrived. However, meanwhile people slowly get sick of casting shows. So by borrowing some marketing vocabulary you could say that a star became a cash cow and now turned into a poor dog I am not sure how things will pan out in the world of physical goods, though. While it is true that we will increasingly be able to manufacture stuff ourselves there is also this need for exclusivity. People enjoy owning iPhones and Beats headphones because they are portioned out by some sort of authorities.

cJ0th 11y ago

> I feel that that the article often mixes cause and effect. That was also my impression. I certainly agree with your observation that it is the ease of distribution which influenced the development first and foremost. It doesn't really take a prophet to point out that stuff which is predestined to become "tap water" will be tap water one day. Mass markets (and thus the pop music industry) have always wanted to sell stuff in huge quantities. From a business point of view, I see rock and roll more as a starting point of an iteration that aims at perfecting the generation of pop stars than a revolution. Shows like American Idol demonstrate that we have arrived. However, meanwhile people slowly get sick of casting shows. So by borrowing some marketing vocabulary you could say that a star became a cash cow and now turned into a poor dog I am not sure how things will pan out in the world of physical goods, though. While it is true that we will increasingly be able to manufacture stuff ourselves there is also this need for exclusivity. People enjoy owning iPhones and Beats headphones because they are portioned out by some sort of authorities.