Clear Thinking

If you are at all interested in the current battle of us those who want to control our behavior (and charge us for it), here's an excellent article from Adam Engst at TidBITS.com TidBITS: Why DRM Offends the Sensibilities.

Completed step one

Well, over the weekend I managed to sort through most of my music files. I found album art for most, which is cool.

Still left to do:

1. Review CDs and make sure everything is ripped in
2. Find a way to organize all of the “singles”
3. Back the damn thing up.

As of this telling, I have 30 gigabytes of music, over 7,000 tracks – 21 DAYS of solid music.

See more progress on: organize my music collection

You'll take it the way we give it to you, and you'll like it!

Yet one more columnist that has bought the party line from the music industry.

"Seems to me that one thing the shuffle movement does prove is the average music fan's preference for the song over its traditional home. The shuffle option is essentially killing the album, which has long been the music-industry standard for popular music releases."

First of all, there are very few artists that have delivered an entire album worth listening to in exactly the order it was delivered. And if you're talking pop, you're lucky to get more than one or two decent tracks in the whole thing. Then we get to the whole part of calling your typical pop musician an "artist".

Now I'll admit, I'm not your average music purchaser. There's no way I can put my new 60 gig iPod into shuffle mode. I have over 30 gig of music on there - almost a solid month of listening. And shuffle would produce a shocking mix of jazz, classical, bluegrass, pop and rock, even ambient and electronica. When I buy music, it's either something specific - an individual track, or an entire album of classical, which typically represents a cohesive work, like a symphony or opera. I'd buy a hell of a lot more music, but what I want isn't easily available. And no, I don't want the whole album, thank you very much.

I do have a large collection, thanks in part to a friend that has complied what the people here at work call "The history of rock" - one of the ultimate mix tapes. Of course, it's neither a mix or a tape, but you know what I mean. But think of a top 40 song from the past 50 years and more likely than not, it's on my iPod.

Which is part of the reason I've named the new iPod "LOC".

Hedwig will know what that stands for.

Wither The Safety Net?

The Owl and Every Fool has posted today on Social Security, so I suppose I should join in as well!

The Owl's Perch - You Bet Your Life

Privatization of the fund is a horrible idea. Hedwig is dead right - most will lose - the rich and powerful will get richer.

And the most important part: it disconnects the individual from our shared destiny. The entire idea of "it's my money" is flawed and a serious rearrangement of society. The entire purpose of Social Security is to provide a basic level of support for all. The entire notion of the safety net is this: we as a society won't let anyone live in poverty. OK, so it doesn't work as well as we intended, but that doesn't mean it's fundamentally broken. Private accounts will break it.

I'm in favor of the following reforms:

1. Pay back the fund. The government has balanced its books too long on the SS surplus. Time to pay EVERY PENNY BACK. Yes, that may require raising taxes, but it's a debt, so pay it back.

2. Lock box the fund - stop borrowing it. Period.

3. Limit who can receive benefits. This is a tough one, but again, key to the idea of the safety net: if you make over $100,000 per year, you get nothing. You don't need it. I've planned my retirement without Social Security. If my plans work out and I have a comfortable retirement income, I plan on donating the benefit I receive. Think of it more like insurance than a retirement fund. It's there if you need it, but if you don't need it, good for you.

4. Increase the base benefits. If you make less than $40,000 a year you'll receive benefits to take you to $40,000 - which is a livable income. Benefits will be tied to the rate of inflation and current wage numbers so the purchasing power remains the same.

Give me leaders that can make the case - we need to care for every American. Social Security is part of the way we do that. If I personally don't need it, great. It's not welfare, it's part of our commitment to our fellow Americans.