Comments for Harry Stotle's Weblog

Comment on In Defense of P2P by Harry Stotle

Harry Stotle — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 11:22:26 +0000

I am sorry to neither see how a theory is not an idea, nor understand how a scientific discovery can avoid being a product of the mind. Even if you consider with Plato that Einstein’s formula was located somewhere in the realm of eternal ideas before he discovered it, this applies to all products of the mind. As a matter of fact, Plato – consistently- viewed beauty as being in the same situation than truth. The logical implication of your assertion is that no product of the mind should be protected by intellectual property, unless it is too weak to correspond to any value such as truth or beauty. Interestingly, Plato and his master Socrates where very much against intellectual property as defended by the Sophists. They would not ask for any payment of their lessons, and yet would happily pay for a concert, or the material product of craft.
To answer your questions: yes, I suggest that musicians can earn money through concerts. Yes, I have some (limited) knowledge of the economy. Yes, I have been to a concert. Yes I know how expensive a ticket can be (that’s why artists can make money out of them). No I do not know ‘ how many times more expensive it would be if artist couldn’t get money out of the concert’, according to your expression. On the other hand, I know how many times less expensive a concert would be if artists did it for free (which they usually don’t). Yes I expect my poor idea to convince that another business is possible, for the good reason that such other business model is already in place in music (hurting not musicians but obsolete music production companies)
As to sculptures and paintings, they ARE easily reproducible: there is basically no material limit to a bronze cast, and most contemporary art pieces, being conceptual, can be reproduced at very little cost. The very same ‘Marylyn’ by Andy Warhol that would cost millions at an auction can be acquired for a few dollars over the shelf. The thing is many amateurs are fetishists, and want the original at all cost. Please note that they pay for the original picture and not for the rights attached to it.
No, the reality is not that P2P is piracy at all. It is a reproduction of an immaterial good, that only opponents of P2P call ‘piracy’. No it is not killing the music artists (there has never be as many new artists and as many publicized musical creations as now) and it is not even killing the movie industry (which has never be more prosperous than today, thanks to movie theaters, TV, cable, VOD, and HD media).

Comment on In Defense of P2P by jjlm13

jjlm13 — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 18:44:23 +0000

I strongly disagree:
1- There is a big difference between an idea and a theory. Einstein didn’t create E=MC2, he just discovered it.
2- You suggest that artists earn money only throught concert? Do you have any knowledge of economy? Have you ever been to a concert? Do you know how expensive a ticket is and how many times more expensive it would be if artist couldn’t get money out of the concert? If you want to convince people that another business model is possible, we are going to need a lot more than just this poor idea.
3- If any sculptures and any paintings were perfectly and easily reproducible for free (like a dvd or cd) what would be your business model?

The reality is that P2P and all kind of piratery are killing the musical and movie industry, killing artists and creations in consequence.

Comment on Corporation, MD by chicagoadam

chicagoadam — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 23:21:44 +0000

I would imagine you are correct Harry, that no organization can last forever. There are so many random events, so many things for which you cannot plan, that even the most resourceful and prepared organization is bound to be surprised. But if we could just move to where the upset surprises were all we had to worry about – instead of struggling with bad leaders who’s heads in the sand keep them from undertaking fairly obvious actions to improve their business. Everyone benefits from better management, and those who keep doing what they always did cannot qualify as better managers!

Comment on Reflation – the basics by chicagoadam

chicagoadam — Thu, 25 Dec 2008 06:37:07 +0000

Harry, throughout your recent postings there is something of a refrain. Most people expect that tomorrow will mostly be like yesterday. When they invest with Maddof, they expect that tomorrow he will produce like yesterday — just as they expect from all the many investing groups they interview. For those who are evaluating massive reflation programs, the view is “get past this crisis, for if we do tomorrow we can return to the way things used to be.”

People do not like to accept that things irretrievably change. When an enormous meteor hit the Yucatan Peninsula a few millenia ago the dinosaurs would only hope that the resulting cloudiness and cold would yield – and the world would return to the climate which made them earth’s kings. So too, today, those who have run capitalism long for a return to what resulted at the end of their 200 year reign as the allocator of resources on this planet.

But things have changed. We are now awakening to the reality of instant, incredibly cheap global communications. We must awaken to the reality of massive shifts in power based upon access to global resources – including not only fossil fuels and manual labor but highly trained and well educated skilled workers (such as engineers).

While historically we know who exerted global power – we can now see that is shifting. Geologically, religiously and nationally things are shifting. Those who look to the past will be unable to compete – to thrive – perhaps even to survive in the future.

Keep up the postings good Harry.

Comment on Maalox for Madoff by Stocks and Bonds » Blog Archive » Maalox For Madoff « Harry Stotle’S Weblog

Sun, 21 Dec 2008 19:49:44 +0000

[...] Absence of alignment with the client‘s interests was hidden, as most banks would prefer to cash-in their fees and rather than include such products in their own portfolio, or simply denied (‘the managers have their own money in the …[Continue Reading] [...]

Comment on Elements of Speleology by harristotle

harristotle — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 11:01:42 +0000

Sonofobatuta is tackling the most painful issue.
Before the end of the deflationary process, and after having exhausted the current resources of national as well as international treasuries (IMF), after central banks have lowered interests rates to zero or even to negative, we’ll start recreating public deficits and printing money to fill the huge remaining gap between existing public means and the amount of wealth taken out of the economy over the crash.
It is not possible to simply adjust the monetary mass to the new amount of lower priced assets, and limit oneself to moderate monetary injections aiming at fostering a natural growth, for certain categories of assets (e.g. labor) cannot be lowered as much as others.
Theoretically, in a global world with advanced communications and therefore little regional specialization, salaries and pensions should even out. This cannot happen however without the most dire political repercussions: people in the developed world are simply not ready to be paid like the Chinese.
Inflation comes as a necessary consequence.
Inflation, as we are too well aware, is dirty business: each economic zone is tempted by competitive devaluations, trade wars start afresh , pensions get wiped out.
The remedy is another illness, but no one to this day has had a better solution to offer.

Comment on Elements of Speleology by sonofbatuta

sonofbatuta — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 20:35:23 +0000

Excellent and sobering series of posts by Harry Stotle. We are seeing the begining of social unrest globally as the ‘average’ person begins to realize that there is less in their pension, their stock option plan and in the value of their homes. In the US a looming problem of unfunded pension funds is looming and pensioners will become increasingly agitated and vocal that this hole in their supposedly safe retirement plans are funded. The buck will be passed around with increased tensions created between states, federal authorites and the pension plans play out as to where and from whom such money can come from. Even in oil rich kuwait people have taken to demonstrating to demand government intervention to shore up local stock markets. democratic countries western countries will face bigger problems as they cannot resort to repression, cannot appease everyone and simply do not have the required reserves to through money at these social problems.

I am curious to what Harry Stotle in saying ‘there is little limit to what can be invented in terms of money creation to soothe social injuries and calm down unres’?

Comment on Elements of Speleology by nntaleb

nntaleb — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 08:15:20 +0000

Hi there
It was great meeting you last week in Paris. I like the comment “it is not going to be very tough… just 80% lower for a start”.
Ciao,
Nassim of Amioun

Comment on Good Sunday by chicagoadam

chicagoadam — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 21:05:16 +0000

Excellent series of posts Harristotle. The problem with the too-committed faithful is they often overlook the depth of the teacher’s thinking – and shortcut to merely the most obvious applications. Such shortcuts inevitably leading to disaster. And the modern day “conservatives” are in this band. They have no clue how economics works, especially globally, but they are quick to rigidly codify behavior nonetheless. Houses built on false assumptions quickly fall.

Tomorrow always brings another day. Eventually things right themselves. That this is true was not much of a benefit to those Europeans living in the dark ages, or pilgrims willing to challenge religious dogma in early day America, or any free thinker in 1760 France. There can be a very long period of very great unpleasantness – with a lot of death should we forget – until those who indoctrinated false assumptions are forced to give way to those who will think.

Much value has been lost in the last year due to collapsing paper assets overlaying overly priced real assets. Unfortunately this value destruction was not necessarily delivered to those who created the despair. In most cases, it will be large investors of other people’s money – in other words those who invest for pension funds and other mutual environments – who will find the high-yield assets they purchased destroyed. So the big losers will be the individuals who trusted their investments to others – professionals – who sought high returns without caring sufficiently about the risk. Those who created the products have already been rewarded, and suffer merely the loss of stature (possibly) and future easy income. Those who managed the investments get their fees, regardless of outcome.

The solution will require tremendous economic reflation. This will benefit not the pension funds – but those who are quick to move to capitalize on the favored investments which rise with the reflactionary program. This will be a directed effort, with designed winners, implemented by governments. Those who sit on the sideline will not only wait a long time to retire, but probably see inflation eat the heart out of nonfavored investments. So it will require additional risk-taking now to “catch-up” with the lost value destroyed by those taking risks with “other people’s money.” When risk is least desirable, it will be most desperately needed if we are to once again “get whole.”

The most interesting observation is that the big economic winners today are not the “free capitalist” countries. Rather, it is the countries with highly planned governments that participate in the open market systems made available to them. The players who are planning – the Chinese, Indians and lesser extent Japanese – have seen the biggest gains from the “free market” policies of the neo-conservatives who had no clue what their laissez faire approaches were causing to happen. In that irony we can take some solace – for it assures the balance will shift away from the religiousity of “free markets” and toward the behavior of the clear winners. Whether we like it or not.

Comment on Dealing with socialist leaders in Latin America by Practical Utopian

Practical Utopian — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 21:21:11 +0000

The United States would have to out-legitimize Latin American socialist states. It cannot claim a monopoly on human rights as it does versus the former Soviet Union . . . it’s track record in Latin America is by leaps and bounds worse than any left-leaning Latin American leader, Castro included. The U.S. was responsible for the violent overthrow of many Latin American governments, such as Guatemale in ‘54, Chile in ‘73, etc., and the support of military juntas such as Pinochet, as well as right-guerilla groups like the Contras. In short, the U.S. record on democracy and human rights is so obviously blackened by the actions of the U.S. itself that they cannot win an ideological struggle. The only thing the U.S. can do is to lose. Something, I might add, we deserve.