3 ms·
I upvote because it's interesting, but I have the sneaking suspicion that it's all wrong. Home video didn't disappear, it went to YouTube. Browsing still exists
by jeffool 15y ago
I upvote because it's interesting, but I have the sneaking suspicion that it's all wrong. Home video didn't disappear, it went to YouTube. Browsing still exists, as active who has looked through Netflix, Hulu, or any other service can attest to. Having that right image is sill an important conveyance of style.
But yet, I still upvote. I can't help but feel this potential loss of so much film can be avoided. Maybe someone at Archive.org can work to verify rights holders who want to donate their work to the public domain and have their work soured there. So what if most of it's bad?
We live in the first time in history where we actually can save everything. Why not do it?
- neuronotic 15y agoBecause the laws of entropy show that's not quite right? The notion that we have the ability to save everything doesn't seem to account for the placement of such technology in a wider context. For example, take dimensions such as the political and economic - which are themselves subject to physical entropy such as fundamental communication and informational limitations manifested by the physical laws underpinning our 'reality'. It seems to me these are examples of some significant hard barriers to reaching such utopia’s of permanence. So we have a socio-political-economic system that gives rise to things like intellectual property, which in turn leads to allocation of social energy in endeavours such as prohibiting, rather than facilitating, the perpetuation of the content for posterity. Of course this is a gross simplification, but hopefully functionally illustrative. Down with IP!