Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Louis CK self-produces, self-publishes content on his webpage

buy.louisck.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 170 posts

Re: Louis CK self-produces, self-publishes content on his webpage

#161

Post by dangrossman »

jakobe wrote: post #143
dangrossman wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You haven't needed a PayPal account to pay through PayPal since at least 2005. Unless the merchant disables "Account Optional", it's just a run-of-the-mill credit card payment form with an option to log in to the side.

But PayPal makes it as inconvenient as possible for non-members. The form is extremely long and if I recall correctly, doesn't work with Safaris Auto-Fill feature.

"Extremely long"?

- Credit card number/expiration/code

- Billing address

- Name, e-mail and phone

That's all it asks. That's exactly what everyone else asks for. The merchant can even pre-fill all these fields but the card info before sending the buyer to PayPal if they filled them out on the merchant's website already.

It's especially weak to make such a complaint based on your "recollection" while you're two pages away from the actual payment form for Louis' show.

Re: Louis CK self-produces, self-publishes content on his webpage

#162

Post by tptacek »

gruseom wrote: post #86

Louis CK is an interesting example of an artist who has grown. His stuff from 20 years ago (that I've seen, at least) was really bad; it was timid and boxed in by convention, which is death to comedy. Somewhere along the way he obviously said fuck it and started telling the truth more directly and provocatively. And that is how lead is transmuted into gold. Funniness is almost a side effect. Now he seems closer than…

I like Patton Oswalt and also Chris Rock, but both have gotten schtickier as time has gone on.

The same undercurrent of respect for comedy- as- craft runs through Patton Oswalt's stuff though, which even if that doesn't automatically make him Bill Hicks, I still very much enjoy hearing about.

Louis CK is also excellent live; if you're seeing him live in a given year, you're basically guaranteed to be getting an entirely new show.

Re: Louis CK self-produces, self-publishes content on his webpage

#163

Post by digispaghetti »

onewland wrote: post #99
gruseom wrote: post #86

Louis CK is an interesting example of an artist who has grown. His stuff from 20 years ago (that I've seen, at least) was really bad; it was timid and boxed in by convention, which is death to comedy. Somewhere along the way he obviously said fuck it and started telling the truth more directly and provocatively. And that is how lead is transmuted into gold. Funniness is almost a side effect. Now he seems closer than…

Greg Proops is fantastic, but not everybody will like him. But he definitely ventures into less funny and more socially conscious territory with comfort and without pretension (ok, maybe a little pretension).

Greg Proops is another comedian who also 'gets it' - he releases a free podcast almost every week recorded from his gigs: http://smartest.libsyn.com/

Occasionally he has a sponsor, and it feels a bit forced in but for a free hour of comedy every week it's a very minor inconvenience

Re: Louis CK self-produces, self-publishes content on his webpage

#164

Post by count »

lgeek wrote: post #25

Chromium crashed during my first attempt to download the show and then I ran out of free disk space the second time (yeah, SSDs are a bit too small). Anyway, my point is that starting a download and then only getting a couple of MBs shouldn't really count as using a download slot. On the other hand, I don't know if it's possible to check how much data has been transferred using existing technology. He seems to be usi…

If you buy tickets to a concert, and then something comes up where you can't make it, do you get to go again for free?

I don't see this as being unreasonable, especially for $5 with no licensing or DRM or anything around it.

Re: Louis CK self-produces, self-publishes content on his webpage

#165

Post by collypops »

vacri wrote: post #157
collypops wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd argue that if someone isn't 'quite as good', then they don't deserve anyone's money. The biggest problem with the music/movie/entertainment industry today is that all of the backing is behind 'sellable' artists, not talented ones. Take all that promotion and marketing and brainwashing away, and you have a group of entertainers being judged on their true merits. I think thats fair - I don't really understand how a…

Louis CK spent nearly 15 years in the wild as a hack comedian before he found his voice, according to his own commentary. We wouldn't have his excellence now if it weren't for him being able to keep himself fed through his work while not 'quite as good'.

You're missing my point, completely. Louis CK deserves his place today precisely because he spent 15 years struggling. In my comment above, I took issue with a plethora of entertainers out there today who _didn't_ have to struggle, who leveraged sex, image and brand names to get to where they were. It is this harsh reality that makes so many artists give up while they're not quite as good, so I applaud Louis CK for being one of the few who weathered the storm and eventually found their place. They deserve their success more than most who have it.

Re: Louis CK self-produces, self-publishes content on his webpage

#167

Post by vacri »

collypops wrote: post #165
vacri wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Louis CK spent nearly 15 years in the wild as a hack comedian before he found his voice, according to his own commentary. We wouldn't have his excellence now if it weren't for him being able to keep himself fed through his work while not 'quite as good'.

You're missing my point, completely. Louis CK deserves his place today precisely because he spent 15 years struggling. In my comment above, I took issue with a plethora of entertainers out there today who _didn't_ have to struggle, who leveraged sex, image and brand names to get to where they were. It is this harsh reality that makes so many artists give up while they're not quite as good, so I applaud Louis CK for b…

You're missing my point: if there was no money if you had less than stellar talent, we wouldn't have most of our stellar talent. If there was no money for Louis CK when he was in his crap phase, he couldn't have stuck at it long enough to 'get it' and go stellar.

Re: Louis CK self-produces, self-publishes content on his webpage

#168

Post by collypops »

vacri wrote: post #167
collypops wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're missing my point, completely. Louis CK deserves his place today precisely because he spent 15 years struggling. In my comment above, I took issue with a plethora of entertainers out there today who _didn't_ have to struggle, who leveraged sex, image and brand names to get to where they were. It is this harsh reality that makes so many artists give up while they're not quite as good, so I applaud Louis CK for b…

You're missing my point: if there was no money if you had less than stellar talent, we wouldn't have most of our stellar talent. If there was no money for Louis CK when he was in his crap phase, he couldn't have stuck at it long enough to 'get it' and go stellar.

When I said you were missing my point, I wasn't saying your opinion is wrong. You're actually pointing out another injustice altogether, rather than disagreeing with me. Look back to my original comment. I took issue with the Justin Biebers of the world getting too much of the pie. You took issue with the Louis CKs of the world getting too little. We don't have conflicting opinions here, and they don't need to be mutually exclusive.

Someone (you or another user) is down-modding my comments, and i can't really understand why. I feel they contribute to the discussion (a feeling confirmed by the simple fact that you've engaged with and responded to them). Judging by your profile, it seems like you too are against the idea of down-modding simply because you disagree with an opinion. If you are the one down-modding me, I'd consider that both hypocritical and shameful, but I'm not one to jump to conclusions, and will happily give you the benefit of the doubt.

Re: Louis CK self-produces, self-publishes content on his webpage

#169

Post by danso »

nikcub wrote: post #122
danso wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this email purportedly from Louis in 2009, he sternly but politely asks someone to take down their bootleg taping of his routine: http://www.zeropaid.com/news/86011/comedian-louis-ck-asks-mi... >> HI. I’m Louis CK. Can you please take this down? This show is a work in progress and was not intended to be passed around the internet. I have absolutely no problem, personally, with file sharing, and if you take everyth…

That isn't a copyright thing though, that is a standup thing.

Right, sorry if I implied otherwise. My intent was to show that he's not an asshole in these matters (I guess I should've excerpted more of the post).

Re: Louis CK self-produces, self-publishes content on his webpage

#170

Post by vacri »

collypops wrote: post #168
vacri wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're missing my point: if there was no money if you had less than stellar talent, we wouldn't have most of our stellar talent. If there was no money for Louis CK when he was in his crap phase, he couldn't have stuck at it long enough to 'get it' and go stellar.

When I said you were missing my point, I wasn't saying your opinion is wrong. You're actually pointing out another injustice altogether, rather than disagreeing with me. Look back to my original comment. I took issue with the Justin Biebers of the world getting too much of the pie. You took issue with the Louis CKs of the world getting too little. We don't have conflicting opinions here, and they don't need to be mut…

Fair enough.

On the downmodding thing, the only thing to do is thicken your skin. The moderation system here is bloody stupid, inferior to moderation systems from 10 years ago. I'll not rehash my further arguments against it, you've already found them :)

Post reply on HN