Spell writing involves creating unique names for spells and magical effects by cutting a word, sometimes adding a Latin sounding end, and sometimes adding a random Latin sounding ending. This process can be more ethical and easier than changing others around you. When writing your own spells, consider how your attitudes, beliefs, thinking, or behavior could be influenced with energy work to solve your problem.
Generate random names for spells and abilities for your fantasy or sci-fi world, choosing from over 2.7 billion combinations of elements, virtues, forces, and more. Learn how to customize your spells and manifest your intentions with magic by following five steps: defining your intention, choosing tools and ingredients, and experimenting with different names.
For example, if you hate your boss, instead of using ‘Total Obliteration’, you could use ‘Oblitegra Totalis’. To create an incantation, break it down into three sections: past (or trouble), present (or request), and future (intention/desire).
Make a simple magical grammar and flesh it out, then decide on the language family you want to emulate. The best magic system can work as long as it is internally consistent. Try to name spells, items, weapons, etc. in a way that is unique to your game, combining practical, logical sounding names with insane or misleading names coined by dark sorcerers with a sense of humor.
Inventing your own language is the best way to create imaginative and unique names for spells and magical effects. Ideal for fantasy writers, RPG enthusiasts, and game developers, this method allows for the creation of imaginative and unique names for spells and magical effects.
📹 Banishing Spells – Banish Toxic People, Harmful Entities, Bad Habits, Obstacles
A cornerstone of the craft, banishing spells are incredibly useful in ridding yourself of unwanted people, habits, entities, negative …
What is the language of magic?
In works set on Earth, the language may be a real but now-obsolete language like Latin, often written in the Old Norse runic alphabet. Hermetic Magic, on the other hand, employs real-life occult alphabets like Enochian or Paracelsus’s Alphabet of the Magi.
What language is used for magic spells?
The etymology of spells is complex, with some spells using Latin and others distinctly English, such as Wingardium Leviosa and Scourgify, which are believed to be newer and from the UK. Greek spells like Episkey follow the same history. Alohomora, a diviner or luck device in geomancy, comes from Arabic and is spelled alahamora in Madagascar. The original practice aimed to illuminate knowledge, not necessarily open locks but reveal secrets.
The recorded history of Arab influence in Madagascar doesn’t begin until the seventh century, so it would take centuries for the new variant to return to the British Isles around the time Hogwarts is founded.
The spell’s origins may be based on spoken incantations and wands, which is not the norm worldwide. The original Arabic meaning could have been the foundation of the spell, as it traveled through northern Africa around the seventh century.
What are magic spells called?
An incantation is a magical formula used to trigger a magical effect on a person or objects. It can be spoken, sung, or chanted and can be performed during ceremonial rituals or prayers. In medieval literature, folklore, fairy tales, and modern fantasy fiction, enchantments are considered charms or spells, leading to the terms “enchanter” and “enchantress” for those who use them. The English language borrowed the term “incantation” from Old French in the late 14th century, with the weakened sense “delight” first attested in 1593. Words of incantation are often spoken with inflection and emphasis, and the tone and rhyme of the words and placement of words may differ depending on the desired outcome of the magical effect.
What is the oldest magic word?
Magic is a powerful force that can be manipulated through various words and phrases, including abracadabra, which has been around since the second century BCE and has been featured in the Harry Potter series. These words, including hocus-pocus, alakazam, and voila, are used when magic is at work, even in card tricks at home. Some of these words have crossed over into entertainment magic or originated from older commands that called upon higher powers to influence the material world.
Whether called hexes, hymns, prayers, or spells, these words require an intangible force that can be universally described as magic. A magical quiz can help determine if magic is real or if it’s just a bunch of hocus-pocus. By examining these words and phrases, one can determine if magic is truly a powerful force that can work its will.
How did J.K. Rowling make the spell names?
J. In the Harry Potter series, author J. K. Rowling employs a unique method for creating spell commands. She selects the desired action and translates it into Latin words, such as “Expelliarmus,” which translates to “push away weapon.”
What is the meaning of magical spell?
A magic spell is defined as a verbal formula believed to possess magical force, often spelled with the synonyms “charm” or “spell.”
What are the 7 types of spells?
Casting spells is a crucial skill for all witches and wizards, as it allows them to perform various magic tasks. In the Harry Potter universe, there are seven types of spells: charms, curses, transfigurations, healing spells, jinxes, hexes, and counter-spells. Each type has its own properties and purposes, all able to be cast with a single wand.
A charm, or enchantment, gives an object or organism new properties, such as levitate or affect appearance or emotions. When cast with the intent of lasting within a person or object, the receiver becomes bewitched. Dark charms, or curses, can cause immense pain or even death. Despite their potential, charms can be harmless and even helpful for wizards, making them essential for mastery of magic.
What is true name magic called?
The Law of Names, a folklore practice, suggests that knowing a person’s true name gives them power over them. This concept is evident in various tales, such as the German fairytale of Rumpelstiltskin, where a girl can free herself from a supernatural helper by learning its name. In Saint Olaf’s legend, a troll built a church for the saint, but he was able to free himself by learning the troll’s name. Children who were not baptized at birth were at risk of being kidnapped by fairies and left with changelings.
In Scandinavian ballad Earl Brand, the hero can defeat all enemies until the heroine pleads with him by name to spare her youngest brother. In Scandinavian beliefs, magical beasts like the Nix could be defeated by calling their name. Significant objects in Germanic mythology, such as the legendary Sword Balmung, also had their own names, indicating their intrinsic personality.
What are the 5 magic words?
The “Five Magic Words” activity is designed to instill in children an appreciation for kindness and good manners, thereby fostering a respectful and positive environment. This is achieved by teaching them to utilize specific verbal expressions, including “please,” “thank you,” “sorry,” “excuse me,” and “may I.”
What are the 7 magic words?
The most significant challenge humanity faces is effective communication, regardless of socioeconomic status, intellectual capacity, or age. The seven most efficacious words for facilitating enhanced communication are “yes,” “but,” “because,” “their name,” “if,” “help,” and “thanks.”
What is the name for a magic spell?
A magic spell is a supernatural power that is used to influence or predict events. One example of this is the casting of a spell to transport oneself from one place to another.
📹 What do MP3s and Magic Spells Have in Common? | Idea Channel | PBS Digital Studios
Ah, the MP3, everyone’s favorite friendly musical file format. But there’s something you might not know about the Mp3 – it has a lot …
It’s amazing how people aren’t willing to pay 99 cents for a song that took many, many stressful hours to create, large sums of money to record and distribute, and will be with them forever, yet people are willing to spend $5 on a cup of coffee that took minutes to brew, pennies to create, and will be gone forever within the hour.
I find this topic amusing because as people talk about whether are not it’s right to get free media and yet many of us grew up on “free” media. It’s called TV and Radio. They earned their money through advertisement and not through the direct payment of their customers. File Sharing sites do the same thing so they have incentive to it even if the end users and uploads themselves don’t get any of the money. The artist who can’t afford to feed themselves due to file sharing is a myth. The more popular someone is the more money they are making through concerts, merchandising, and etc but also the more their stuff will get downloaded. The reality is many artist get screwed out of their fair share by publishing houses who lock them into crappy contracts. It’s really these corporate giants that are more concerned about their bottom line. Even when artist come out against File sharing it’s kind of hard to see their side of things and feel sorry for them when they live in million dollar mansions and live out of expensive hotels. It doesn’t look like they are struggling all that much, and no I don’t buy the “they need that money and you don’t know their finances”. The ease of freely available media does not diminish our culture but instead enhances it. Look at all the free content creators out there, like this show, that would not be possible with the advent of technology. But even when it cost people have shown time and time again they will pay for convince. Sites like iTunes and Netflix are prime examples of this.
No, music should NOT be available freely unless the artist(s) choose to allow that. People think that all musicians are swimming in cash, but we’re not. For many small bands touring does not bring in a profit, any money gained while touring is spent to keep the tour going. There are even some venues which ask you to play for free to “promote your music” and won’t even let you play unless you advertise the show, when it should be the venue doing the advertising.
I am against pirating article games BUT not against any other types of media! The music industry makes money from concerts, youtube views and MTV views. The movie industry makes money from cinemas, DVD’s and TV broadcasting. The only profit for developers are the digital platforms and the physical discs. They make money from dlc but you still need to have a legal copy of the game which means that pirates cannot buy the dlc which results in dlc being a little bit useless. A small part of the article game pirates are pirating the game to have no DRM and to try the game because there is no demo available for it.
The thing is, these companies that make music and distribute it are pretty much giving people the opportunity to share and remix their work. They won’t be happy about it, but there is talent out there that isn’t seen by the industry and in the spotlight. Probably why I listen to remixes or mash-ups more than the actual songs. THOSE people are making their music for free for others to listen and share their creations.
I think we’re on our third transition of the way we make goods. Originally we did everything ourselves: Hunting, gathering, tool making. Then we began to specialize into farmers, potters, traders, and things decreased in cost while increasing in quality, leading to better lives. Then we figured out mass production (more setup = cheaper per item) and the same thing happened to an even greater extent. We’re now on the final verge: Things only cost to setup, not to reproduce.
I think sharing culture is exactly what we should do. Isn’t it human nature to share what’s important to us? I also think that those awesome people out there making good content need to be supported financially. If they can’t make a living on what they’re doing, they’re likely to stop. With things like DFTBA records, there’s places to share culture AND pay the awesome people that made it. I think moving towards this distribution plan is part of the solution and it’s success proves it works.
Share, as in Amazon e-books: Say I download an e-book (perched with a licence) and my mother wants to read it, I end up having the e-book deleted from my archive and she would have it on her e-book reader for a set amount of time where it would be then deleted from there and restored back to mine. That would work.
This is why I fully support Bandcamp, and encourage everyone to use it. It’s cut is fair, I’m totes cool with them taking 20%, (unlike iTunes, which takes a ridiculous cut from the sales). It’s format is great, people can listen to a whole album before deciding wheteher or not they want to listen to it on the bus, and that’s great, because then they never feel like their getting swindled, plus you can set up a personal merchandise store with T-shirts and any crazy shit you want to sell.
Sharing culture is a tricky subject to cover. Since most things are copy-able now, I’m akin to the idea of commission-based media where the original artist doesn’t create the art unless money is provided ahead of time by those who want it most. So costs are already covered, and stealing doesn’t become an issue. At that point, the public should be free to do as they please with it. I buy most of my music, but I personally don’t purchase it unless I feel the artist truly deserves my money for it.
We most certainly are, BUT! Doesn’t the fact that spells are collected in books and on websites, were once bought and sold on eBay, are used by people to accomplish a purpose/goal prove a posteriori that they “exist”? If “existence” is predicated upon physical presence, then doesn’t that mean MP3s are also non-existant? Eh? Eh? HMMMMM?! hmmm….
I’ve noticed lots of bands going independent these days, and they will use websites like Kickstarter to fund an album. This gives the musicians free reign over their own music, and also ensures that when you pledge money to the project, it’s actually helping the people who are responsible for its existence. Personally, I’d love every band or musician to work this way, because I think it would change the way media works for the better. People would pay directly for what they love.
i guess its late and this article is old, but about freely available media, Childish Gambino makes this point that charging for music now-a-days is like charging for smelling bread in a bakery. thee “smell” is already out there, everyone can smell it. so he seeks to use his music as part of his image and part of his “brand”. Plus, his proyect Because the Internet intended to be made in such a way that you had to experience it whole and through different mediums, and so you would invest yourself in the idea and want to go to the concerts and such. I think there are plenty of ways to go around the culture industry and the “freeness” of things now. p.s. Because the Internet and Marshall McLuhan might go very well together.
Piracy is a tricky subject. My personal rule is that if I like a song or a CD, I will make a reasonable effort to buy it. If it is unavailable for purchase due to being obscure, foreign, or whatever else, all bets are off. I didn’t always adhere to this code, but now that I actually have an income, I make it a point to support the artists I enjoy.
Piracy actually encourages sale of music. Not only is it effective in making a product more accessible to the general public, but it essentially advertises the artist’s work. If someone really likes something then they’ll go out of their way to buy it, but no one is going to spend 20 dollars for a little round disk with music they haven’t heard.
I think culture should be spread freely, but those who spread culture also have duty to support it and if there is a single source of culture they love and spread more then others they should pump more into it. This is why donation buttons are a must have in this day and age, sometimes people already have your product just want you to have more money to make better/more products or to live good enough to make better products/more.
Mike, you should do a article about pinball. I’m not sure what the idea would be. But they’re very unique styles of games that cross both physical space with gravity and matter and digital universes. Also they’re sort of compact worlds in themselves, wherein the adventure of the game never moves beyond the box. Maybe not enough for a whole article, but it’s worth considering. XP
This seems like something that might be answered by the formation of kick-starter and the return to a made to order type economy in some areas. Where we as consumers put up the cash and wait for the product rather than vice versa. The bands or artists produce a demo tape and then kick start a record, or release everything for free but make a donation button on their web page. Much to my surprise good work is actually rewarded. To see this in action please refer to humble indie bundle.
The culture it’s self is always free, it’s the access to the culture that we end up paying for. Music will always be created but having access to that music is always going to be some thing we have to pay for in someway. Even if the world get’s all “The Book of Eli” we’ll still be exchanging battery charges for wet naps 🙂
I just recognised the Sword and Sworcery LP on the wall! I wanted to buy that on iTunes. On the U.S.A. version it was $8 but on the Australian version it was $16. Twice the price for no damn reason. The Aussie dollar is more valuable than the US dollar too so it’s even worse than it looks. I went and found the artist on Bandcamp and bought it direct. As an added bonus Bandcamp takes a smaller cut than iTunes so not only did I get the joy of not paying Apple but I gave more to the artist. 🙂
The thing about culture is that it is created through the shared efforts of everybody participating in the culture, before and after its creation. Many songs have lyrics that were pulled from earlier movies, just like many movies are built off of older folkloric tropes, just like most of these tropes were symbolized through paintings, much like these paintings were inspired by the life of a particular cultural icon. In these situations, who do you pay if everyone took part in that culture?
Interesting comparison concerning encoding and decoding. It made me thing about radio waves and how radio broadcasting actually isn’t that different from MP3 in that matter. As I remember times one was waiting for This One Song to record it on a cassette- here’s another idea! Let’s create a stream on the web where commons could be downloaded for a short period of time and return able every now and then. Wouldn’t that bring back the nostalgia and simultaneously raise the attraction of the files?
sharing is a great thing because it should be that once you own a product you have the rights to do what the hell ever with it other than passing it off as your own. It only makes sense. If you think that the money is going to the right place and the artist isnt making a ba-jillion dollars, consider buying more of his/her products. After that, im all for pirates. Copying is not theft.
I don’t know a lot about spells but at least with media, if you watch/listen to something (possibly use a spell) and you enjoy it for free, you should go out and buy merch for it or buy the CD’s or DVD’s or track down the origaniator of the spell and support them somehow. We need to foster more fan culture so that it’s not shame full for people to show off what they love with reckless abandon. Not to mention there are things like Patrion and GoFundMe and KickStarter that can help creators fund their creations and make livings from said creations. I feel like even more creators should start looking to those platforms as a way to make money from what they love. And that fans who enjoy something for free should be willing to support the thing even if it means buying a teeshirt or a plush or something like that.
I do believe that one should get what they ask for when they decide to share culture. Culture takes time, and time is money. On another note: Open-source platforms are becoming more prevalent now, which allows for the free distribution of culture. A great example of Open-Source platforms is Arduino. Arduino is a special device that can be used in making robotic systems. They sell pre-made ones, but they have free diagrams for how to make them right on the website.
Absolutely! I just think that there needs to be a major shift in the markets, and that this shift in the markets that are compatible may (hopefully it is) be one of the first steps in accomplishing the eventual changes needed elsewhere. I don’t know what those changes are, I’m no economic professional =P
I firmly believe there is a fine line in this matter. On one hand culture via the arts should be shared with the masses to help further man kinds views and spread ideas even if it is in the form of musical tone and lyrics. Although I must concede that many hours of someones hard work which could be otherwise used to support there rent, food, and many other much needed facets of life need to be met. So I prefer the direct monetary value of a song going to the artist.
The current fiscal environment with relation to music in particular is perfect for a musician collective label the type of which Steve Coogan envisioned with Joy Division in “24 Hour Party People”. New acts would be voted into the collective by the members and they would help get new music into ears through the power of their collectivism and the fans they already had. That is the only thing that is really missing in the current model; the publicity and infrastructure that the labels could provide (and charged extremely heavily for) could be taken over by the artists themselves in order to protect their own property. Namely you don’t want the general quality of music to fall so low that your own (presumably ‘good’) music can’t be distinguished from the dross which is everywhere. But how does someone with real talent break out of the thunderous background noise and clutter of everyone being able to post their songs on youtube, etc.? How do we be sure not to have a dozen Beibers be the only ‘popular’ music? Or if you like him, how do we make sure we don’t miss the next one?
My takeaway is: both are basically information. One only has an effect when websiteed through a “wand” (or other suitably arcane item) and the other through a MP3-capable media device. You can tell/show anyone how to do this spell you just learned, just as you can let your friends listen to a song you heard. Now with the net, we’re not limited to magic tomes/a vinyl record to spread the thing. But who gets credit? Who gets money? It’s an (odd) analogy for current intellectual property issues.
Not only that, but 2 more things: 1) Gain incentive usually goes for popularity and not quality. Those two things usually don’t go together. USUALLY. 2) Internet memes which are made and shared freely show that culture doesn’t need a gain incentive at all. If someone wants to make music to get cash good for them, hope it works out. But personally I would prefer my music heard rather than bought.
OK, let’s see if I’ve got this: at 4:10 you said that we should support people who create culture. You also say that MP3s and spells have a lot in common. With you there. But doesn’t that mean we should also support people who cast spells? Would it be fine if I have a spell cast on you, to support spell binding? Maybe a spell that lets you talk in fast forward? That would save you a lot of time as this clip for example would only take 4:47. Bringing Donna Noble into the equasion made my day!
Was there a medieval version of Pandora for spells? They didn’t have computers, so I guess it came in a box of some kind. Oh my God, you’re totally right, Mike! But seriously. I wonder how the profitability of talented performance has A) increased relative to previous periods, and B) how profitability has affected the quality of performances before MP3s existed. I mean, how many albums do popular bands crank out before they snort all their earnings and start churning out gutter-worthy gems.
A hat seems to fit you. Also I’ve been benging on your articles so awesome work and a topic for you… the comparison of old school and new school buisness. I work at a old school buisness i mean they its like time traveling back to an olden time 1970s or so and trying to imput all the new buisness stuff laws etc. So what do you think how does they differ and is one better than the other or does both have good sides and bad. Also the money doesnt comes from the music sales but the all the other stuff like concerts. Keep up the good work.
I hope that crowdfunding services like Kickstarter and RocketHub represent a new style of creative support (and indeed, they seem to have enabled many projects so far). If this is the case, then what we are witnessing right now in creative industries is the removal of (now unnecessary) publishing intermediaries and a direct connection of consumer to creator. This could help avert the crisis of creativity funding you mention.
I wonder if a music market using the same model as, say Kickstarter or the Humble Indie Bundle (For those that don’t know, the pay what you want and get additional content for over the average payment but no legal obligation to pay at all system) would work in the Music market if the musicians themselves could directly sell to the consumer, excluding record labels and managers, etc. By extension, there doesn’t seem to be any reason why this couldn’t expand to the Film industry…
In some cases, giving “something” for free does help with business! For example, Costco samples! There are those who will eat multiple samples from each booth to the point where they ate a free lunch. However, for those who try a sample and falls in love in the product they will buy the product, which in turn supports the business that made the product! Same as Gangnam Style, it was on the Internet for free and the next thing you know, it became #1 in the iTunes chart in multiple countries!
As an up and coming musician myself, I believe that music (as well as other things such as programs and art) should not be freely available. (Without permission from the artist) However, as an animator/video editor, I also believe that once someone buys/has permission to use the music (or art/program/writing) they should be allowed to use it in articles and other things, as long as they credit the artist. Reselling or using it for profit is a different matter, however.
I think there needs to be a shift in the economic method, which you are starting to see occur in both gaming and music, as well as other industries. A change to a system where directly supporting the creator is easier, and the amounts are much lower (or chosen amounts, which sites like humblebundle have experienced success with). In this situation free sharing is more likely to result in direct support of the developer. No third parties!
One way it could change into a free MP3 system is for the music to not actually be the product itself, but more the free prize in the cereal box. Maybe music builds the band name who sells more expensive t-shirts, lunchboxes, tv shows, and so forth. That said, compare the salary of a pro-NFL player to the average endorsement deal. Maybe sales are just the wrong place from which to get the money.
Publishers are in a bind and going through a painful transition, They did two tasks in the past #1 market the music so that everyone can buy it. And #2 paying the artist and funding the project so that the phrase “starve for your art” is less literal. The problem is that “#2” is normally funded through “#1” and with the internet #1 is now free to everyone so this model no longer works. When you’ve make $Millions$ for over twenty years its hard to move away and find a new model.
Speaking as a creator, people do to a certain extent create because of a compulsion and desire to do so. However, they do need compensation in order to make time to create, but the tools of the trade and attend to basic human needs, which are not available without a means of purchasing them. Generally speaking, a creator is happy to live off their creations and make enough money not to worry about money and thus spend more time creating. Getting rich is not the goal.
You could see the connection from creating a form of economics for culture (supporting content creators – Does this apply to you too PBS Ida website?) to PIPA (Protect Intellectual Property Act) and SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) to an official Magna Carta (an agreed standard of freedom and boundaries) for the Internet and Net neutrality. Other question: on what metric(s?) (or measurement) would magic be quantified on? Something metaphysical? Metaphysical to real?
I think that culture should be shared because that is what allows us to learn and grow as human beings. However, the ability to make infinite copies of something ruins the value of it. If you were able to just throw CTRL-D on a dollar, why should anybody sell stuff for them? Why should they work for money if they have no value as people can just duplicate it? The same applies for anything. If I produced an album and sold it to someone, then they uploaded it online, I am no longer making money off music, so why should I make it? I believe that free access to things is good, but it comes at a price. So why not buy something and share it with a friend or two? Go ahead, be my guest. What you shouldn’t do is go and upload it to the Pirate Bay for everyone to see. Everything comes at a price, my friends. So does sharing. Ironically, sharing =/= caring sometimes.
I should point out another entertainment media suffering form piracy (video games) has had some interesting decisions around how to combat it. A comment that stands out is Valve (the ones behind Steam and Team fortress 2) claims that piracy is a service problem and not a pricing problem, They work around the idea that people will pay for the connivance of having the media deliver to them with very little hassle. According to their sale rates in high piracy countries, it has been working.
The media industry has had it pretty easy for a long time. Mostly because they could get exponential returns on a very simple activity. Example: An artist has to make only one chart topping hit in order to make millions of dollars. That’s actually bad for artists because it means there’s legions of artists competing for the attention of the few producers who can create the sort of hype that’ll make that hit possible.. The guy who’s really rolling in dough here is the producer.
I’m an independent musician, but I distribute my music for free because it’s my hobby, not my livelihood. I put hard work into my tracks and try to produce quality music because I just enjoy doing it. Making a little extra cash from donations would be nice, though. But I know that can’t happen everywhere. Most musicians make music because it IS their job, and making less sales due to piracy IS a problem. I wish we lived in a world where people respected art/music enough to care to pay for it.
I used to pirate things all the time, and then services like Zune Music Pass, Hulu, and Netflix became available and since then I haven’t really done any pirating at all. I am however a poor college student and it is very hard for me to give money to all of the content creators that I like and would want to pay for their things. I think sharing content (especially when it is shared freely by the creator) is a good think and makes me, at least, more likely to spend money on that thing.
MP3s are in a way a form of Kaos Majick, or rather, direct manifestation mapped onto the chaos described by chaos theory. Just as a good kaos mage can utilise their brain to create an intended outcome without a directly tracable causal link (the causal links are complex and generally beyond physcial or mathematical calculation) so too can an mp3 recreate from binary information at least a proportion of the absurdly complex, psuedo-chaos that is music.
Part 1: What a lot of modern content creators have done is stop selling the content itself, and start selling the CULTURE of the content. Hence, instead of approaching a novel as selling a story, it’s selling the book as a memoir of the journey through the story, selling merchandise, and selling yourself (interacting with your fans on social media so they feel not only a sense of ownership toward your books, but also toward you, and thus gain a desire to support you.)
Thats pretty much whats starting to happen, bands can even give their albums away for free and make all their money doing live shows, which nets them more money in the long run since most of the profit from album sales goes to the production company anyway and the bands have to split the profits from tours with them as well. Thats the real reason the big music and movie production companies are so big on fighting piracy and censoring the internet, they know they’re a dying breed.
Downloading free music is like seeing the photograph of an sculpture or a painting. It is there, but it isn’t live. As a musician you will not get paid for doing music, you will get paid for playing it live, The real money is in there, concerts, and people will not stop going to concerts. Never. So that is my excuse to not feeling bad for downloading for free the new album from BreakBot, becausa as soon he is in town or nearby, I will be there singing and dancing, sharing culture live.
-(cont.) or the artists could directly give their songs away but still receive money based on the number of hits to their accounts and downloads through advertising. While that more or less works only for similar kinds of mediums there are others for things like gaming. Take a look at the latest episode of ‘Extra Credits’, and heck the whole of them. This kind of topic is one I’m really interested in due to the profession i am aiming for which is a Game Designer. Man this stuff is complicated.
This is a pretty different idea from the other ones. The analogy of MP3s and Magic Spells is harder to take seriously as in reality, magic isn’t real. As such the argument felt disjointed and weak, although I thought it was an interesting thought experiment of sorts. Backing the argument with the idea of “Tragedy of the Commons” was good and I wanted more solid sources to support the idea. To sum it up, not so convincing argument but an interesting idea with fictional magic.
when you took on that first hat, damn you looked like chuck norris xD sorry.. I just saw him in a Polish bank commercial, I’m not polish… anyways, as an artist (not musical though), I feel any kind of feedback is important, to know what the general audience like, if I have a general audience at all, and what they hate. I don’t have to make changes to fit their wishes, but it’s still morally supporting to know you have Xnumber of fans. (and money help with making more of it)
Without sharing, I probably would never have bought most of the music, games or DVDs I have a license for. I’d prefer to see more transactions like the Humble Bundle. You get to pick what you pay, with the minimum price set at 1 cent. Not only can you get it for near-free, you also get to choose who gets paid, the developer(s) or a charity. Sadly, paying 1 cent to charity is still too much for some people, who steal (not pirating, it’s stealing) the games/music anyway.
Having just given up a job working at a Hot Topic, allow me to quote a tank top that we sell at that particular store: “I Wear Band Tees as a Form of Mating Call.” The screen-printed tee (or hoodie or tank, etc.) can, in the modern physical world, should be considered culture-sharing shorthand. Whenever I wear one of these tees that loudly and obviously proclaims my interest in and knowledge of a particular rock group or anime or internet meme I am not only sharing my own personal and personally cultivated culture, but I may also (sometimes unintentionally, other times not so much) be diverting others toward cultivating that same part of my personal experience in their own lives. We use these clothing statements as a quick and easy way to insert a part of our culture into someone else’s life. Music, I believe, just happens to be an extremely easy, no mess, non-bulky digital shareable item – the digital equivalent of putting on a t-shirt in the morning. Sharing a single music file is nothing like sharing even a single episode of your favorite television show or a movie scene.
Way I see it, products should be put out there for free, and then, people are allowed to “tip” them for how satisfied they were. Unfortunately, this would only work in an ideal world where there aren’t D-bags, who don’t tip at all, or tip for horribly low amounts. But, the world of Free-To-Play games are ushering in such an idyllic situation. But then, if everything were free, and you only gave money based on satisfaction…what would that do to the economy? Money becomes a trophy at best.
A lot of musicians I know post their music online for free, and then have them available to buy on Bandcamp. Sure, they’re not megarich, but the money they make are from people that want to see them succeed, and (10% aside) all the money goes directly to them. Besides, iTunes has shown that people are more ready to pay a little for guaranteed, good quality content, instead of going and spending ages finding a decent torrent, especially if they like the artist.
I was just thinking about telling you to discuss this last week. …weird. It’s interesting how actually paying for things is no longer a necessity it’s more of a reward you give to the creator. As if to say, “Good job. I like that stuff. Make more for me.” Kickstarter is a perfect example of this. Artists propose projects and the intended audience backs it. Lots of musician, artists, and writers have embraced the internet economy of giving things away for free to grow fan bases who will pay.