A very scary prediction!!!

[beeger]

Do any of you music and equipment lovers dread to see this prediction come to pass as much as I do? Look down to paragraph five on CDs and see if you don't start to tremble. Or just curse the greed and ineptness of the music industry.

http://www.ecogeek.org/content/view/1252/

I feel some hoarding coming on....

[Nordic]

Won't happen for long.. was reading an article covering the Radiohead release ... btw, they are even relesasing on LP...

Even they agree Bands want an "artifact" something physical, does it mean there wont be online distribution? No.... 70 to 80% of people still buy music on physical media....

[Luke]

My little 13 yo niece didnt know it was illegal to download mp3s from limewire. She honestly thought I was teasing her, lines like oh yeah, why do they sell mp3 players and everyone does it, I cant afford cds. Now she knows but I wish I hadnt spoilt it for her.

[abzug]

Too bad DVD-Audio and other uncompressed 24/96 or 24/192 formats didn't manage to get a good hold. It pains me when I see people thinking 16/44.1 is the standard for audio quality

[myglaren]

I'd like to think that the worst it could get would be to release albums on flash memory chips (uncompressed) as these are increasing in capacity and decreasing in price at about the same rate.

On day I'll see how much uncompressed music I can cram onto one of my camera's 2 gig cards.

[OzMikeH]

uncompressed? a standard cd completely full is about 72 minutes of music, that is 640MB. so about 3 CDs or 225 minutes (for 2000 MB)

44.1kHz at 16 bits in stereo is 1141 kilobits per second. Calculate away...

Now if you use Lossless compression? different story.

[abzug]

Originally posted by OzMikeH
44.1kHz at 16 bits in stereo is 1141 kilobits per second.

44100 * 16 * 2 / 1024 = 1379.126 kb/s

[analog_sa]

What's so scary? I am a lot more concerned with the prediction for smaller cars. Hopefully not in my lifetime.

[abzug]

Cellulosic Ethanol is also a dumb one. Algae can produce ethanol at a density a couple of orders of magnitude higher than any crop.

LED lights? That's stupid--they're inefficient compared to fluorescents, let alone HID. Plus, it's easy to forget that the eye likes the continuous spectrum of incandescents, not the spiky garbage produced by all other types of light, so there will always be a place for filtered incandescent light to produce daylight-equivalent lighting in many museums etc.

Electric cars? Where are you going to get enough copper to wind motors to replace all gas engines on the road? Yeah right.

Solar... by the time it pays for its production, it's not that energy cheap. Also, there will never be enough solar, wind, etc. that can produce enough energy for unrestricted progress (not to mention the 10x increase of energy use by developing and undeveloped countries as they become fully industrialized).

This whole article is nothing but more environmentalist ******** propaganda.

[Shoog]

The problem is that these issues will not just g away because we don't have viable solutions for them. They are still problems that need resolving quickly. and burying our head up our own bottoms is not going to help.
Everyone likes to think that the problems aren't as big as described. Everyone also likes to believe that science is going to come prancing over the hill with a magic solution that will allow us all to carry on as if nothing had happened. Dream on. The real issues are resource over exploitation, and the real solutions are to dramatically reduce our level of consumption. A very difficult ask when we live in a world where almost the only reason to exist is to consume.

These problems are big and getting bigger by the day. I'm sorry if an environmentalist pointing that out makes you feel uncomfortable.

I don't personally think that the human race has the maturity to carry us forward into a viable future.

Shoog