261–270 of 312 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
HN's guidelines suggest things hackers would find interesting; Bowie's genius, non-conformity, and willingness to experiment with musical form are certainly characteristics hackers would find interesting. His loss is a loss to the entire world of art and music, and he was one of my favorite musicians — my single favorite for a very long time. May he rest in peace.
The same guidelines suggest, "If TV news covers it, it's likely off topic"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People who frequent HN are likely to be part of the set of people who have been influenced by popular culture, which is a superset of David Bowie fans.
This would imply that all/most posts about popular culture figures are highly upvoted in HN but I doubt this is the case (no data, just subjective impression).
[0]https://hn.algolia.com/?query=dies&sort=byPopularity&prefix=...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
so if i rite like this my riting stile is no diffrent r better than urz, rite?!? lol
That's a pretty poor analogy. Writing grammar correctly is an objective measure, whereas food and musical taste is purely subjective.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think Bowie was the antithesis of this. If you'll forgive the hyperbole, he is the archetypal outsider, the patron saint of the dispossessed. So for all those who don't feel that they belong, Bowie's activities provided a message - 'It's OK to be an outsider', and, curiously, through that message provided a sense of belonging - I'm going to get all metaphysical and say that that is alchemical / transformative in a…
I'm afraid I don't buy that. Music follows rules, rules that we all grew up internalizing. There's no "universal music", just music who's rules you are familiar with. Tweak those rules just enough and in the right way and you are innovative (see: The Beatles). Tweak them too much and you are simply avant garde (see: Captain Beefheart). That means that music is without question a social construction. Simply look at ho…
>Music follows rules, rules that we all grew up internalizing. There's no "universal music", just music who's rules you are familiar with. Tweak those rules just enough and in the right way and you are innovative (see: The Beatles). Tweak them too much and you are simply avant garde (see: Captain Beefheart).
I can enjoy music who's rules I am not familiar with. I don't need to know the rules to enjoy tonal and rythmic arrangements.
> That means that music is without question a social construction
That means it's culturally specific, NOT a social construction.
> It's very possible Bowie could have been too avant garde or too much of an outsider, but what he excelled at was tweaking the establishment just enough (both musically and performance-wise) to find a huge audience whilst still being "outside" the mainstream.
Which is perhaps the point I am trying to make. Within a specific culture, his work (not just his music) had a broad appeal that helped people deal with the human condition. However it was achieved, the world is a better place for it.
FUCK YOU, "THE SYSTEM"! DAVID BOWIE JUST RELEASED A STUDIO ALBUM TWO DAYS AGO! TELL ME SOMETHING GOOD FOR ONCE IN YOUR LIFE, "THE SYSTEM"!
Life is not safe. At each moment we tumble forward into the unknown. Can you take comfort in that?
Doesn't this quotation strongly apply to software engineers? I find engineers have more trouble applying the same logic to software engineering, while applying it to artists, especially musicians, without much reflection.
Engineers have always been compensated for custom production. There's nothing new about that. We have more in common with tailors than with tycoons of imaginary property.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not just #1. Right now, it has 863 upvotes; that's a ton for a story that broke in the middle of the night on a Sunday. The next highest has 347, and has been around for a day-plus. This pretty clearly hits home for a lot of people, and I really, really hate the faux-above-it-all "I don't see what this is doing on HN" mini-modding. It's here because people believe it should be here. (edit: 899 points, 18 minutes late…
I am just hearing about him now that he has died. I don't see why it is SO relevant to HN community. I don't see any similarities here whatsoever. Nor do I see a hacker theme. Would appreciate if someone would enlighten me on this.
Bowie Bonds, BowieNet, his foresight regarding the music industry with regards to data sharing, the future copyright battles, his use of electronic instruments, self-production, etc.[0]
[0]: http://qz.com/590957/david-bowie-wasnt-just-an-incredible-ar...
We sure know Mr. Bowie. We sure know.
Doesn't this quotation strongly apply to software engineers? I find engineers have more trouble applying the same logic to software engineering, while applying it to artists, especially musicians, without much reflection.
There's such a pervasive notion, especially among techies and other white collar types, that artists and musicians either don't deserve a good living or should be happy just to get to do what they do, regardless of income. It's a tremendous sense of entitlement on the one hand, to express contempt for the individual while expecting unlimited access to their work. I believe Astra Taylor made an interesting point about…
They don't; that's simply a fact, no one is owed or deserves a living, you have to work for it like everyone else. If there is demand for what you do, monetize it, if you can't, then pick another career because the market has spoken. You can't mandate that X career deserves to be paid, the market does that naturally via demand.
> It's a tremendous sense of entitlement on the one hand, to express contempt for the individual while expecting unlimited access to their work.
Stating facts about their lack of being entitled to anything isn't expressing contempt. If they don't want people accessing their work, they don't have to publish it, but expecting perpetual payment anytime anyone looks at what you put out is absurd; intellectual property is a flawed notion that only worked well when distribution was a challenge. With virtually free distribution, you cannot prevent information being free, i.e. copying, and thus you cannot rely on making money from distribution; you better learn how to make money performing live, as has been done historically.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm afraid I don't buy that. Music follows rules, rules that we all grew up internalizing. There's no "universal music", just music who's rules you are familiar with. Tweak those rules just enough and in the right way and you are innovative (see: The Beatles). Tweak them too much and you are simply avant garde (see: Captain Beefheart). That means that music is without question a social construction. Simply look at ho…
What don't you buy? >Music follows rules, rules that we all grew up internalizing. There's no "universal music", just music who's rules you are familiar with. Tweak those rules just enough and in the right way and you are innovative (see: The Beatles). Tweak them too much and you are simply avant garde (see: Captain Beefheart). I can enjoy music who's rules I am not familiar with. I don't need to know the rules to en…
Most people don't, hence western harmony is what sounds like music to most westerners and anything else sounds weird or like noise.
> That means it's culturally specific, NOT a social construction.
It actually means both. All culturally specific tastes are also social constructs.