291–300 of 445 posts
I always thought Daft Punk figured out the perfect solution to the how to be famous problem. Everyone recognizes their artist name and their artist costume, but virtually no one knows their real name or would accost them on the street.
ZZ Top figured this out a long time ago.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Both artists are under 50. I would not be at all surprised if you get the chance to see them perform together again.
And with the added advantage that as they are electric they'd sound as good in the future as they did in the past. You wouldn't even know if it wasn't them under the masks. The counter point being that I saw Velvet Underground live and they sucked badly :D
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The word 'sheltered' is still misapplied here.
How so? Having never experienced things outside of your "comfort zone" or your upbringing seems like the culturally accepted definition of sheltered. Whether that was overbearing parents never allowing you to listen to music other than prescribed by religious beliefs or parental personal preference or just one's own personal preference all seems like sheltered to me. Being culturally unaware of events that occurred o…
Not being well-versed in the others isn't necessarily being sheltered, but a consequence of having a limited set of interests.
I always thought Daft Punk figured out the perfect solution to the how to be famous problem. Everyone recognizes their artist name and their artist costume, but virtually no one knows their real name or would accost them on the street.
I wonder if any groups have stand ins ready to don the mantle for live performances if there were ever, for whatever reason, a double booking.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I guess it depends how rich you aspire to be. If you have a a million social media followers, it's trivial to cash in on that attention to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars a year.
except if you try to sell t-shirts? https://www.insider.com/instagrammer-arii-2-million-follower...
Make ten deals like that per year, that's $100,000k.
Anyway, au revoir to a legendary group nevertheless.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a pretty damning statement to make. Can you provide some citations to back that view up?
Without links ready, and not being the OP, I have seen many articles saying that "this ML recognition/analysis system has racial bias because the targets it finds are more {insert trait} than average." It struck me how such an unscientific thing made it to so many articles. It's a symptom of a cause that a specific group has greater representation in something, e.g. crime. You can't call factual observations, racist.…
People already know the root cause, and it is overpolicing and discretionary enforcement of crimes like drug possession.
The broken-windows policy has been disproven, despite disproportionately impacting "the specific groups" (black Americans) that now pollute the dataset that ML uses.
And even in the concept or drug possession and drug consumption, all groups have been shown to use them in the same distribution. For example. These kinds of things start a cycle that means the second and third minor infractions cause greater consequences in court, which further reduce opportunities that lead to the dangerous crimes being committed.
So we already know the dataset is polluted.
Pointing to the top of the iceberg and saying "well they commit the crimes no need to spend any energy on this mystery why don't we all just admit they're the problem" is a complete deflection promulgated intentionally and you should really check your peer group and media sources if this is the extent of the comfortable worldview you (or anyone passing by) have, the problem and solution is already known.
The solutions are being implemented in a patchwork and slowly, which is not incorporated in datasets that ML use, largely due to apathy and lack of awareness of engineers and the management of the tech companies involved, and lack of representation of the affected groups in engineering and management of tech companies.
I don't believe it yet. But I can see the logic. They're kind of in a Half Life 3 situation with regards to Random Access Memories. At this point, there's almost no way imaginable they could top it, and anything they do come out with will probably be compared unfavorably.
I thought RAM was already on the downturn. They peaked with Discovery and Alive 2007 in my opinion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I went to a smashing pumpkins show and was so turned off that I stopped being a fan. I have met several others with the same experience
What was the issue? Was it the length of the show, the aura of Billy Corgan (and his horrific aesthetics), renditions that somehow made the original versions worse? Guy was obviously talented but I don't think he's the best judge of his strengths. There's a couple of songs from Adore and Machina where the music videos manage to make the songs drastically worse for me.