P2P-Zone  

Go Back   P2P-Zone > Peer to Peer
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Peer to Peer The 3rd millenium technology!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 08-01-20, 08:19 AM   #1
JackSpratts
 
JackSpratts's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New England
Posts: 10,013
Default Peer-To-Peer News - The Week In Review - January 11th, ’20

Since 2002































January 11th, 2020




Change or Die: 50% of Media and Entertainment Execs Say They Can’t Rely on Old Biz Models, Survey Finds
Todd Spangler

With media and entertainment sectors continuing to be whipped by winds of digital disruption, many industry execs believe they need to change the ways they’ve done business — or see their companies perish.

About 50% of M&E executives said their company cannot rely on traditional business models to survive the shifting landscapes, according to a new survey by consulting and professional services firm EY. Indeed, 34% of those surveyed indicated that their company will no longer exist in five years unless their business undergoes reinvention.

The survey identified three key factors driving change across M&E industry subsectors: responding to a new competitive landscape; struggling to keep pace with technology as businesses evaluate digital innovations, such as artificial intelligence and 5G; and dealing with challenges associated with changing customer expectations. Nearly two-thirds (63%) of execs embarking on change say optimizing the operating model will be truly transformational – but at the same time, 28% said they don’t know what steps to prioritize in pursuing such a strategy, according to the EY survey.

But the leadership for business change doesn’t necessarily come from the top: Only 20% of the execs EY surveyed cited current corporate strategy and their CEO’s vision as a leading driver of innovation

The survey results show that there’s no single path for M&E businesses to change for the future and that “media and entertainment companies remain upbeat about change,” said John Harrison, EY’s global media and entertainment sector leader. However, he added, “with such diversity of business models and revenue streams, the starting point is often unclear.”

To compile the results, EY polled more than 350 global industry executives. It released the findings this week at the 2020 CES trade show.

Of the execs surveyed, 41% cited business-model changes and 39% identified operational delivery and execution as their top transformation priorities – with 62% agreeing that the increasing availability of data is an opportunity for transformation. Notably, 56% of execs indicate that they have prioritized building first-party data, compared with just 13% who prioritize third-party data sources. In addition, 46% said automation is the single most important tactic for achieving cost savings.

Meanwhile, talent development – as it relates to business transformation – remains a key strategic priority among media and entertainment companies. One-third of executives surveyed identify the need to close the talent gap and build skills as a driver of change, and nearly a quarter (24%) see the talent gap as a threat. About half of respondents (49%) prioritize upskilling their existing workforce as the best way to develop talent.

Interestingly, the need to tap into the “gig economy” varies depending on the size of the enterprise, the EY survey found. About 61% of execs at companies with $250 million-$500 million in annual revenue see the gig economy as relevant to their talent strategy – compared with 20% among those at companies with revenue over $5 billion.

EY’s study is based on a survey of more than 350 media and entertainment executives, taking a representative view of companies by scale, geography and industry subsector. For each question, respondents were asked to select their top three responses from a predefined list of options; for example, a response of 50% means it was selected as one of the top three answers by half of respondents.
https://www.newstimes.com/entertainm...t-14958168.php





Old Musicians Never Die. They Just Become Holograms.

Companies are making plans to put droves of departed idols on tour — reanimating a live-music industry whose biggest earners will soon be dying off.
Mark Binelli

In preparation for his first American tour in a decade, Ronnie James Dio spent months sequestered in a modest office suite in Marina del Rey, in Los Angeles. The office was on the second floor of a strip mall, above a vape shop and a massage parlor. I visited at the end of May, only a couple of days before the opening date of the tour, and among Dio’s team, there was a tangible air of anticipation. Dio never became a household name, but he is considered one of the great heavy-metal vocalists of all time, up there with Ozzy Osbourne (whom he replaced in Black Sabbath) and metal-adjacent rockers like Axl Rose and Robert Plant. Beginning in the 1970s, Dio took a lead role in codifying a number of his genre’s most ludicrous, yet utterly foundational, conventions. He sang of wolves and demons, toured with an animatronic dragon and supposedly introduced the splay-fingered “devil horns” headbanger’s salute, which he claimed his Italian grandmother used to flash as an old-world method of warding off the malocchio and other forms of bad luck.

Opinion among the Dio faithful, nonetheless, was divided on the subject of his “Dio Returns” comeback tour, largely because Dio has been dead for almost 10 years. The Marina del Rey office suite was the site of a visual-effects company creating a Dio hologram. The hologram would tour with a living backing group consisting, in large part, of former Dio bandmates.

If you missed the tour, you might want to take a moment here and call up one of the fan-shot videos posted on YouTube — say, “Rainbow in the Dark,” Dio’s 1983 hit, filmed at the Center Stage Theater in Atlanta on June 3, during which the Dio hologram prowls a central portion of the stage, bobbing, weaving, twirling his microphone cord to the monster riffs and occasionally using his free hand to air-conduct his most operatic vocal flourishes. (“His” — would “its” be more apt? Neither word feels quite right.) At one point, the bassist, Bjorn Englen, takes several very deliberate steps to his left, allowing the hologram to dance in front of him and adding to the illusion of a three-dimensional conjuring.

The hologram itself has an uneasy pallor, a brighter shade than the humans onstage but at the same time insubstantial, like a ghost struggling to fully materialize. One crucial decision that had faced the animators was choosing the right age for their creation. Dio in his MTV-era prime tempted them, of course, but then wouldn’t it be strange to watch him perform alongside band members who were roughed up by the ensuing years like the rest of us? Then again, Dio’s actual age in 2019, were he alive, would be 77, which is not ideal for a heavy-metal frontman. The creative team ultimately settled on a spry, middle-aged Dio, outfitting him in black leather pants, a studded leather wristband and a bell-sleeved white tunic embossed with a silver cross.

A start-up called Eyellusion produced “Dio Returns.” It’s one of a handful of companies looking to mold and ultimately monetize a new, hybrid category of entertainment — part concert, part technology-driven spectacle — centered, thus far, on the holographic afterlives of deceased musical stars. Eyellusion also toured a hologram of Frank Zappa in the spring, in a show overseen by Zappa’s son Ahmet. The tour kicked off in April at the Capitol Theater in Port Chester, N.Y., about an hour north of Manhattan in Westchester County. A few hours before the show, I talked to the owner of the venue, the 47-year-old concert promoter Peter Shapiro. In 2015, he was a producer of the Grateful Dead’s 50th-anniversary “Fare Thee Well” concerts. The five shows grossed more than $50 million, becoming, according to Billboard, “one of the most successful events in live-music history.” We met at the Capitol Theater bar, which is called Garcia’s and serves as a sort of secular reliquary devoted to the Dead’s frontman, Jerry Garcia. The décor included one of Garcia’s banjos and a Chuck Close-style portrait of Garcia made entirely of Lego bricks. Shapiro, who attended a preview of the Zappa concert, said, “What I just saw felt closer to seeing Zappa than seeing a cover band do it,” adding that, based on ticket sales alone, he would definitely book another hologram show. The theater, which holds 1,800 people, was close to sold out for opening night.

“But here’s the headline,” Shapiro went on. “Look at who’s gone, just in the last couple of years: Bowie, Prince, Petty. Now look who’s still going but who’s not going to be here in 10 years, probably, at least not touring: the Stones, the Who, the Eagles, Aerosmith, Billy Joel, Elton John, McCartney, Springsteen. That is the base not just of classic rock but of the live-music touring business. Yes, there’s Taylor Swift, there’s Ariana Grande. But the base is these guys.”

Shapiro’s calculation might be morbid, but he isn’t wrong. According to the trade publication Pollstar, roughly half of the 20 top-grossing North American touring acts of 2019 were led by artists who were at least 60 years old, among them Cher, Kiss, Fleetwood Mac, Paul McCartney, Dead & Company and Billy Joel; the Rolling Stones, Elton John and Bob Seger took the top three slots. Using technology to blur the line between the quick and the dead tends to be a recipe for dystopian science fiction, but in this case, it could also mean a lucrative new income stream for a music industry in flux, at a time when beloved entertainers can no longer count on CD or download revenues to support their loved ones after they’ve died. “If you’re an estate in the age of streaming and algorithms, you’re thinking: Where is our revenue coming from?” Brian Baumley, who handles publicity for Eyellusion, told me. Some of those estates, Baumley bets, will arrive at a reasonable conclusion about the dead artists whose legacies they hope to extend: “We have to put them back on the road.”

Tupac Shakur became one of the earliest test subjects for the new technology 15 years after his murder, when his hologram made a surprise appearance at the 2012 Coachella festival. To actually project a person-size holographic image into three-dimensional space, à la Princess Leia in “Star Wars,” would require powerful, prohibitively expensive lasers that would also burn human flesh. The Tupac hologram was created with a combination of C.G.I., a body double and a 19th-century theatrical trick known as Pepper’s Ghost, some variation of which has been used for almost all the hologram musical performances of recent years.

As the magician and magic historian Jim Steinmeyer recounts in his book “Hiding the Elephant,” John Henry Pepper, the director of the Royal Polytechnic Institution in London, popularized the technology with a dramatization of a scene from the Charles Dickens novella “The Haunted Man” on Christmas Eve 1862. To call up his ghosts, Pepper projected a bright light onto an actor in a hidden, cutout space beneath the stage, something like an orchestra pit, casting a reflection onto an angled pane of glass. The glass stood upright on the stage but remained invisible to the audience. The spectral image appeared slightly behind the glass, “moving in the same space with the actors and the scenery,” Steinmeyer writes. “If all the players were perfectly synchronized, the ghost could interact with the characters onstage, avoiding sword thrusts or walking through walls.” Pepper intended the original display, which took place at the Polytechnic Institution, as a scientific lecture, but the audience’s riotous response persuaded him to go the magician’s route, and soon he began touring the illusion in British and American theaters.

The Tupac hologram performed only two songs, shouting, “What the [expletive] is up, Coachella?” and rapping “2 of Amerikaz Most Wanted” alongside Snoop Dogg. But his digital resurrection worked as a proof of concept. A handful of one-off stunts involving other dead musicians followed: A Michael Jackson hologram performed at the 2014 Billboard Music Awards, and the Mexican pop superstar Juan Gabriel made a holographic appearance at his own memorial concert after his sudden death in 2016. Still-breathing musicians also made use of the technology, including the rapper Chief Keef, who in 2015, as a means of avoiding outstanding legal warrants, beamed a hologram performance from California to a music festival in Hammond, Ind. But the outstanding question remained: Would audiences turn out for an entire hologram concert?

Marty Tudor, chief executive of Base Hologram Productions, is an entertainment-industry veteran whose multifarious career has included, among other things, managing Paula Abdul and Jon Cryer, producing a series of exercise videos with a trainer from “The Biggest Loser” and running an independent record label. When he saw footage of the Tupac hologram at Coachella, Tudor had a hunch that there might be potential for the new technology beyond gimmicky festival cameos.

Tudor took the idea to Brian Becker, the former chief executive of Clear Channel Entertainment, which was the largest events promoter and venue operator in the country during Becker’s tenure. For Becker, live entertainment was a family business. In 1966, his father, Allen Becker, a life-insurance salesman from Houston, helped found a regional events-promotion company called Pace Entertainment that eventually became a major national promoter. When Brian joined the company after college, he helped to start Pace’s theatrical division, which soon came to dominate, and largely invent, a regional touring market for effects-laden Broadway spectacles like “Cats,” “Miss Saigon,” “Les Misérables” and “The Phantom of the Opera.” The technical innovations of those shows, Becker told me, “evened the score,” signaling to regional audiences that they would be seeing a production with all the same bells, whistles and helicopters as a show in New York or London. “We’re always cognizant of seams in our industry that might allow us to do things differently,” Becker said. After hearing out Tudor’s hologram pitch, Becker wondered if the technology might represent such a seam.

In the wake of the Tupac performance, a somewhat motley assortment of newly minted hologram companies were asking themselves the same question, and soon a scramble to lock down exclusive deals with music estates ensued. Digital Domain, the visual-effects house that created Tupac, wound up declaring bankruptcy not long after the Coachella performance, but one of its owners, a Florida investor named John Textor, quickly started a new company, Pulse Evolution, which produced the Jackson hologram and soon after announced that it had also cut hologram deals with the estates of Elvis Presley and Marilyn Monroe, as well as for the band Abba, which broke up in 1982. An eccentric British-Greek billionaire named Alki David, meanwhile, started a rival hologram company, Hologram USA. An heir to a Coca-Cola bottling fortune, David, along with his partners, announced that he would be producing holographic images of Patsy Cline, Billie Holiday and Jackie Wilson, among others. (In September, David and Hologram USA were charged by the Securities and Exchange Commission with “making false and misleading statements to investors and potential investors.” David has said he intends to countersue.)

Base Hologram, which was founded by Tudor and Becker, started out by securing rights to produce holograms of Maria Callas and Roy Orbison, debuting each show in 2018 with performances in Europe and America. Orbison’s estate, which is controlled by his three sons (via a company called Roy’s Boys), approached Base after a deal with another hologram producer fell through, Tudor told me. “Roy was a fairly static live performer — most of the movement you have onstage is him strumming his guitar — so he was the perfect first performer for our purposes,” Tudor said. (A 58-date Orbison-Buddy Holly hologram tour began in San Francisco in September.) The Callas hologram was necessarily more emotive. At a brief demonstration I attended at Sotheby’s in New York, the hologram wore a white gown and a long red shawl. After performing “Melons! Coupons!” from Act III of “Carmen,” a scene involving fortune telling, the hologram tossed a deck of cards in the air, which briefly froze alongside the music before drifting to the ground. “Though a melodramatic touch, it worked,” Anthony Tommasini wrote in his New York Times review of the Lincoln Center performance, in which he described the show as “amazing, yet also absurd; strangely captivating, yet also campy and ridiculous.” In February, Base will unveil the dead-celebrity-hologram sector’s biggest marquee name thus far, at least for a full concert: Whitney Houston, whose tragic, relatively recent death has made the planned tour the most controversial of any on the books. (Shortly after the announcement, Questlove tweeted: “& hell begins.”)

Deborah Speer, a features editor at Pollstar, which covers the live-entertainment industry, told me that based on the numbers she has seen for the Orbison and Zappa tours, “obviously, there’s a market” for hologram shows. According to the trade publication, the solo Orbison tour grossed nearly $1.7 million over 16 shows, selling 71 percent of the seats available, while Zappa sold an average of 973 seats per show, nearly selling out venues in Amsterdam and London. Whether such tours can cross over from clubs, theaters and performing-arts centers into arenas remains to be seen and will depend largely on the success of bigger-name stars like Houston.

Early one morning in May, I visited a soundstage in the Griffith Park neighborhood of Los Angeles to observe a motion-capture shoot for the Whitney Houston hologram. The soundstage was a cavernous, warehouselike space, moodily lit, aggressively air-conditioned. Several of the Angelenos on hand complained about the cold, including Tudor, who sat in a nearby director’s chair wearing a puffy vest over a striped dress shirt and jeans. Fatima Robinson, the director of the production, wore a head scarf and a winter jacket and cupped a rechargeable electronic hand-warming device between her palms. Robinson is a choreographer whose credits include Kendrick Lamar’s 2016 Grammys performance, the Weeknd’s 2016 Oscars performance, the film version of “Dreamgirls,” NBC’s live broadcast of “The Wiz” and music videos for Michael Jackson, Mary J. Blige and Aaliyah. Robinson also choreographed Houston herself — the living Houston — in 1993, for the “I’m Every Woman” video. “She was pregnant at the time and in a wonderful place,” Robinson told me.

Veterans of pedigreed Hollywood postproduction houses create the C.G.I. holograms in the same way they would make characters like Gollum or Thanos: Motion-capture photography records the performance of a body double, which becomes the basis for a three-dimensional digital model, a block of clay animators proceed to modify — in the case of celebrity holograms, most drastically by augmenting the body double’s features with a digitally sculpted likeness of the artist, which can lip-synch to an existing vocal track.

The Houston body double took the stage and began to run through the moves for the first song of the day: “Step by Step,” a jaunty, affirmational gospel-dance track from the 1996 soundtrack to “The Preacher’s Wife.” The double had freckles and wore her hair in dyed cornrows but possessed Houston’s approximate build. She wore black tights, a black T-shirt and a baggy white cardigan (costumes created by Houston’s former stylist would be worn in a subsequent shoot) and stood atop a sort of oversize lazy susan, which crouching tech guys, who referred to the device as a turntable, slowly spun as she lip-synched to the song.

Robinson sipped tea and watched the pantomime intently. After the first run-through, she said, “We need to go a little slower.” The body double had been chosen from a pool of 900 applicants, and she was clearly a talented performer in her own right. (Base requested that The Times not reveal her identity.) “Step by Step” remains an underappreciated Houston song, cloying but oddly irresistible, and as I watched it mock-sung over and over, I felt freshly reminded of Houston’s skill at putting over mediocre material, not just in the obvious way — that is, through the power of her voice — but with her presence, that way she had of conveying joy, supreme confidence and the ecstasy of the choir all at once, and at the same time letting us know, even back then, that she wasn’t as sweet as her songs’ lyrics might suggest. This complexity came through in the body double’s performance, in the way she worked her shoulders or flashed a hard look at the nonexistent audience. Houston wasn’t much of a dancer, but “she had a serious strut,” noted Robinson, who had studied her performances like game tapes.

Lit for the filming, the double cast a horror-movie shadow on the soundproofed wall of the otherwise darkened soundstage. There was something eerie about the way Houston’s voice and the mid-’90s dance beat echoed through the vast space — music being played at club volume to a nearly empty room, with no one dancing, not even the avatar pretending to sing. But despite the workaday setting and the unconcealed artifice, by the third or fourth time I heard the song, I couldn’t help feeling … something. Would I describe myself as moved? I’m not sure. But I also found myself wondering if, despite how fundamentally wrong the entire concept for this show felt, there might be some crazy way it could actually work. The future hologram moved her mouth around Houston’s voice:

Well there’s a bridge
And there’s a river
That I still must cross
As I’m going on my journey
Oh, I might be lost

In the final show, Tudor whispered to me, the turntable could be digitally removed or made to look like something else. The creative team hadn’t settled on anything yet. But if they wanted to, they could make Houston look as if she were floating on air, spinning, ascendant.

I met Ronnie James Dio once, when he was alive. Tenacious D, the parody band that gave Jack Black his start, had recorded a gently mocking tribute song called “Dio,” in which Black demands Dio’s cape and scepter and informs him that he’s too old to rock (“no more rockin’ for you!”). Dio had been a good sport about the whole thing and agreed to make a cameo in the Tenacious D movie, which premiered in 2006 at Grauman’s Chinese Theater. I remember standing around the after-party, nursing a drink and feeling awkward, when I spotted Dio, chatting in a corner of the ballroom with his wife. I decided to introduce myself. He was quite short, even for a celebrity, and exceedingly gracious. He told me Black had personally called to pitch the film, insisting that they wouldn’t make the movie unless he agreed to “play the part of Ronnie James Dio.” Smiling, Dio continued, “Then he said: ‘Well, we will make the movie. But it’ll be [expletive].’ ”

Across town in Marina del Rey 13 years later, I sat in the office of Eyellusion’s creative director, Chad Finnerty, as he digitally manipulated a photorealistic 3-D image of Dio’s face. Finnerty grew up in Pennsylvania with dreams of becoming a Disney animator — old-fashioned cell animation, like what they did on “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs” — but by the time he graduated from college, the world had gone digital. He spent years working as a C.G.I. animator at Digital Domain, on movies like “Flags of Our Fathers” and “Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End.” When Jeff Pezzuti, a Westchester-based vice president of finance at a cloud-computing consulting firm, decided to start his own hologram company, Eyellusion, he reached out to Finnerty, asking if he wanted to talk. Pezzuti loved heavy metal — he wore a Dio T-shirt for his seventh-grade class picture — and after seeing the Tupac hologram, he wondered, “Can we do something like that in the rock world?” Eyellusion has since received a $2 million investment from Thomas Dolan, whose family owns controlling interests in Madison Square Garden and AMC Networks and whose father founded the New York-area cable-television giant Cablevision.

Finnerty supervised the creation of the Zappa and Dio holograms for Eyellusion. “I’m a bit rusty with this program,” he apologized, pecking at his desktop keyboard. Soon a hideously lifelike digital rendering of Dio’s face appeared on a large-screen monitor hanging on the wall. For a moment, it bobbed in front of a black backdrop, which made me think of the old “Charlie Rose” set. I briefly thought about pitching a “Black Mirror” episode in which a Charlie Rose-type character interviews the cryogenically preserved heads of rock stars. “We collected all of our data in 2017,” Finnerty explained. That’s when they filmed the body double and did the facial capture, is what he meant. During the facial capture, hundreds of eye, mouth and facial-muscle movements of a living subject (not necessarily the body double) are recorded. Imagine a puppeteer, Finnerty said, only with thousands of puppet strings to manipulate.

He clicked his mouse, manipulating a digital lever on the screen, and “Dio’s” eye suddenly, eerily shifted to the left. You couldn’t do this two years ago, Finnerty went on, moving another lever. “Dio’s” eyes shifted right, up, down. Finnerty said he had done lots of work on “The Walking Dead,” but that was forgiving, because it’s zombies. Having a person look real while performing a song for six minutes, with no cutting away or other editing assists that would be available in a film or television show, that was something else entirely.

“Dio” winked, puckered his lips, raised an eyebrow.

I stared at the image’s mottled skin, textured and painted with a level of detail down to the pore. “Hair simulation is the most difficult part of the entire process,” Finnerty said, adding, “My hair guy is also my fire, water and ice guy.” His lighting team had done the skin. Had Dio submitted himself to a full-body scan while alive, the process would have been much easier. Finnerty thought it would be great if more living musicians and actors were proactive about being scanned. Any actor who has starred in a movie involving significant amounts of C.G.I. has already been scanned, he pointed out.

The more bullish hologram boosters envision all sorts of uses beyond the second coming of music deities major and minor. Finnerty just made a hologram for the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library of the former president. Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India has campaigned holographically, and a circus in Germany uses holographic projections of elephants and horses instead of live animals. Base, meanwhile, has cut a deal with Jack Horner, the paleontologist who served as a scientific adviser for “Jurassic Park,” to create dinosaur holograms that will travel to natural-history museums. Imagine, Becker said, a dialogue between holograms of Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King Jr. Or a Julia Child hologram teaching a cooking class. Or a Derek Jeter hologram teaching you how to bat.

As for concerts, in the not very distant future, Finnerty predicted, the technology would evolve to the point at which a puppeteer sitting in the wings with a laptop could work the digital strings live — allowing the hologram to react to the crowd or to members of a live band. Imagining this future as he watched “Dio” on his screen, Finnerty referred to him as the “asset,” as in: “This asset is ready for any other adventure we want to put him on. We could beam him into a bar. A coffee house. Not that Dio would play a coffee house.”

Whenever I wondered aloud whether fans might find the shows unsettling or disrespectful, the hologram-industry representative I happened to be speaking to would grow defensive. It’s stagecraft, part of a larger production, the person would tell me. We respect these artists, and we take what we’re doing very seriously. And as these representatives point out, people see tribute acts all the time. An Australian Pink Floyd, Tudor said, just played in Los Angeles! Pollstar’s Speer told me that well over 175 tribute bands reported numbers to the magazine; one of the better performers, “Rain — a Tribute to the Beatles,” often turns up in the top half of the Concert Pulse chart, averaging 1,833 tickets and $95,955 per show over the past three years.

For what it’s worth, the crowd at the Zappa concert seemed utterly charmed — cheering when the hologram Zappa materialized in the center of the stage during the opening number, “Cosmik Debris.” I was sitting about eight rows from the front. It looked like Zappa up there, more or less, though his form radiated the paranormal brightness that holograms can’t help emitting. Eventually, “Frank” addressed the audience: “Good evening. You won’t believe it, but I’m as happy to see you guys as you are to see the show. I’m your resident buffoon, and my name is Frank.” The artificiality of the canned banter had a “Weekend at Bernie’s” aspect to it, making me hyperaware of the sunglasses covering the lifeless eyes of the corpse propped up between living people (in this case, a hot backing band composed predominantly of musicians who had toured with Zappa over the years).

In certain respects, Zappa’s psychedelic jams and goofy, satirical lyrics lent themselves perfectly to the experiment, allowing the creative team to deploy the Zappa hologram judiciously (“like the shark from ‘Jaws,’ ” someone backstage told me) in and around trippy visuals that reminded me of old screen-saver graphics: animated dental floss, a penguin being punished by a dominatrix, Zappa as a leisure-suit-wearing Ken doll.

As I watched the show, my mind drifted, and I began to imagine more dubious ways corporate entities might exploit their particular assets. With artificial intelligence and voice cloning, there would be no reason to limit the shows to recordings made when the artist was still alive. An Aretha Franklin hologram could shush a noisy audience member, banter with her drummer and cover “Shallow.” Chris Stapleton and Sturgill Simpson could form a supergroup with holograms of Merle Haggard and Waylon Jennings. Kurt Cobain, sporting the same faded green cardigan he wore on “MTV Unplugged,” might turn up at a surprise appearance with Billie Eilish at the Grammys. A one-off Beatles reunion in Hyde Park, live Paul and Ringo, hologram John and George. Hologram Biggie takes the Thomas Jefferson role in “Hamilton.” Bob Marley interrupts his performance of “Exodus” to plug the new season of “Curb Your Enthusiasm.”

On the stage of the Capitol Theater, a grotesque claymation version of Zappa had materialized, and the guy sitting next to me began air-drumming alongside the live percussionists. Before the concert, Ahmet Zappa had pointed me to a passage in his father’s 1989 autobiography in which he seemed to predict the technology that would allow him to return to Port Chester 26 years after his death: a digressive riff about his “idea for a new device, potentially worth several billion dollars,” one that would “generate free-standing 3-d images, in any size (on your coffee table at home, or on a larger scale for theatrical use).” So maybe Zappa would have appreciated his 2019 tour. And maybe holograms will make the leap from ridiculous-seeming technology to ubiquity, like podcasts or e-cigarettes.

Ahmet was 15 when his father received a diagnosis of prostate cancer and was given three months to live. One way to think about the show, he told me, is as “a very childlike way of dealing with loss.” For a couple of hours every night, Frank is up there onstage again, playing with his guys, and Ahmet can almost convince himself that he has his father back. You’d think there would be a market for something like that.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/07/m...musicians.html





Mystery of Rolling Stones Tracks Posted Briefly on YouTube

Vintage recordings may have been published in attempt to extend copyright protection
Alex Hern

A mysterious YouTube account that posted, then hid, a collection of 75 rare and unpublished Rolling Stones recordings may have been a canny attempt to avoid EU copyright laws and keep the tracks out of the public domain on the 50th anniversary of their creation.

Shortly before midnight on 31 December, the YouTube account 69RSTRAX posted a collection of recordings including studio out-takes and live performances to its public page on the video-sharing site, with no commentary or explanation. Hours later, on 1 January, again with no warning, the account made all the videos private.

69RSTRAX only joined YouTube on 29 December, and offers no clues as to its identity – save a YouTube-mandated email address, which directs business enquiries to ABKCO, a music publishing company that owns the rights to a substantial chunk of early Rolling Stones recordings.

According to Variety magazine, which first reported the brief publication, the explanation could lie in the European Union’s copyright directive. Under EU law, sound recordings are covered by copyright for the first 50 calendar years after they were made – unless they have been “lawfully communicated to the public”, in which case the copyright term extends a further 20 years.

At the end of 2019, then, ABKCO would have faced a “use it or lose it” conundrum: if it did not publish the tracks it held, it would find it difficult to monetise them in the future, as the copyright for the recordings (though not the compositions) would lapse.

Some publishers, faced with similar issues, have released collections of recordings – of interest to super-fans only – such as the Beatles’ 2013 album Bootleg Recordings 1963. Others, perhaps less eager to share early, unfinished versions of songs with the world, have pushed what it means to “publish” tracks: a Bob Dylan compilation, literally published as “The Copyright Extension Collection, Volume 1”, was also released in 2013 in an edition of 100, and only sold in Europe.

But this would be the first time a label has taken such a minimalist approach to publication. Even while the Stones tracks were available on YouTube, they were reportedly tampered with to make them less appealing to fans who might rip them and share them elsewhere. “The rarest recordings – ie the ones not previously available on bootlegs – have a dial-tone-like sound as loud as the music,” reported Variety’s Jem Aswad, making them “a truly miserable listening experience”.

It remains unclear whether a publication of a single day, on one internet video platform, will be enough to satisfy European judges that the tracks were indeed “lawfully communicated to the public”.

ABKCO declined to comment.
https://www.theguardian.com/music/20...fly-on-youtube





People Are Seeing ‘Cats’ While High Out of Their Minds. These Are Their Stories.

It was a Broadway fixture. Now it’s a big-screen fiasco. Could it become a stoner classic?
Maura Judkis

It was her roommate’s idea, and at the time it seemed like a good one.

“She said, ‘Let’s do edibles and watch ‘Cats,’ ” says Sarah, a 26-year-old audiovisual producer from Louisville.

The big-screen adaptation of Andrew Lloyd Webber’s famous feline musical had been making news for all the wrong reasons, causing a gleeful feeding frenzy of criticism. As a cinematic fiasco, “Cats” became alluring in unintended ways: Sarah and her roommate decided that the movie could be worth their while, with the right preparations.

So, they each ate a chocolate candy infused with 5 milligrams of cannabis. They didn’t feel anything after a while, so they smoked a bit, too.

The pair arrived at the theater and settled into their seats.

“I’m feeling kind of okay” at that point, Sarah says, “like maybe I can get through this.” Then, just as the first frame of the movie came up, “I feel, like, a spot on the center of my forehead light up and start tingling, and it radiates throughout my whole body.”

Uh-oh.

To be clear, The Washington Post does not endorse illicit drug use. And for most people, “Cats” is unnerving enough sober. It tells the story of a group of singing, dancing alley cats who compete for the chance to go to the Heaviside Layer, a metaphor for death and rebirth into the next of their nine lives. Critics have described the movie adaptation — which features a parade of superstars (Judi Dench, Ian McKellen, Taylor Swift, Jennifer Hudson, James Corden and others) rendered as uncanny human-cat hybrids — as a feverish drug dream, a bad trip. It is expected to lose as much as $100 million, according to Variety.

But those reviews have been a siren call for people who believe they know how to salvage an irretrievably weird movie, at least for themselves: by doing drugs first.

Hundreds of people told The Post their stories about seeing “Cats” while high — some on marijuana, others on psilocybin mushrooms, LSD and other mind-altering substances.

Here are their reviews:

“The most incredible cinematic experience of my life.”

“The most terrifying experience of my life. I swear to God my soul escaped me.”

“Cried both times. Planning on going two more times.”

“Vomited four times but ultimately understood the film on a deep level.”

“Had a panic attack in the middle of it . . . right after Taylor Swift sang ‘Macavity.’ ”

“When Judi Dench turned and looked me directly in the eyes to let me know that a cat is not a dog, I was terrified.”

It was unclear, on balance, whether getting high made “Cats” better, or much, much worse. Certainly, it seemed to raise the emotional stakes. One person reported bursting into tears before the film even started, during a trailer for “Trolls World Tour.”

Recreational marijuana is legal in 11 states and the District, and a number of the people interviewed for this story asked that their full names be withheld — either because marijuana was not legal in their state or because they worried about professional repercussions. But going to “Cats” stoned seemed to be something people were doing, and sure enough, an open call on Twitter yielded a deluge of testimonials.

Annaliese Nielsen, who owns a cannabis brand in Los Angeles, used a strain of weed calibrated for relaxation, but found herself unable to relax in a dark theater illuminated by the ghastly cat face of Corden. “I’m 36 and announced, ‘I’m scared!’ to my fellow moviegoers at least seven times,” says Nielsen, who called the film “a special kind of evil.”

Charlotte Clymer, 33, an LGBTQ activist in Washington, ate THC-infused gummy candies before her screening, and also found the movie terrifying. “Three-quarters of the way through the movie,” she says, “I was like, ‘I hope I don’t hate my own cats when I get home.’ ”

Raina, a 25-year-old from South Carolina, also ate gummies. She could not get past the mismatched proportions of the cats in the film. Sometimes they were cat-sized, sometime they were human-sized, and sometimes they appeared to be the size of mice.

She made it 10 minutes, she says, “and then I went to the AMC bathroom and threw up.”

Soon after the tingling feeling started in her forehead, Sarah, the 26-year-old from Louisville, realized that she and her roommate had made a miscalculation. The humanlike cats (catlike humans?) were grotesque. Sarah couldn’t stop staring at their feet. Er, paws. No, hands. “Where their fur ends and their human hands start, it would move in a weird unnatural way,” she says. At one point, Jennyanydots, the cat played by Rebel Wilson, eats dancing cockroaches who have human faces, in a “horrifying” scene.

“I felt like I was losing my mind,” Sarah says. “I was just concentrating on taking deep breaths.”

But then there are the people for whom “Cats” under the influence was positively moving.

“I was so delighted,” says Kat (yes, her real name), a 32-year-old in Los Angeles. “I was like, ‘Is this genius? Is this the best thing I have ever seen?’ ”

“I had a realization partway through that I am the only person in the world who understands ‘Cats,’ ” says Kate, 31, a medical researcher in Chicago, who soon found herself plotting a “Cats”-based doctoral thesis while still in the theater: She would examine the class dialectic of 1930s London (when T.S. Eliot wrote the poems that inspired “Cats”), the late ’80s heyday of Webber and police brutality in 2019.

“It doesn’t sound as groundbreaking now,” Kate says, “but please remember I was very stoned.”
“I had a realization partway through that I am the only person in the world who understands ‘Cats.’ ” (Universal Pictures)“I had a realization partway through that I am the only person in the world who understands ‘Cats.’ ” (Universal Pictures)

In New York, a 26-year-old man named Ryan, who messaged The Post while still high on the edibles he took for that evening’s screening, expressed his lust for “a particular cat I would love to do bad things to me.” (It was Munkustrap, played by chiseled ballet dancer Robbie Fairchild).

In Michigan, a 33-year-old man named Zachary, also on edibles, wrestled with his own attraction to the cat version of Swift. (“Her face still looks like Taylor Swift,” he tells The Post — and also, it seems, himself. “But no, she’s a monster.”)

A 40-year-old Washingtonian named Danielle found herself confounded — first in an academic way, then in a giggling-uncontrollably way — by the below-the-belt anatomies of the creatures on-screen.

In Seattle, a 26-year-old teacher named Dan ate a 20-milligram THC caramel and popped on his headphones to see if “Cats” would sync up with Pink Floyd’s “The Dark Side of the Moon,” like “The Wizard of Oz” is supposed to do, according to stoner lore. If you spin the album twice, Dan reports, McKellen’s performance of “Gus: The Theatre Cat” aligns perfectly with “The Great Gig in the Sky.”

In Los Angeles, a 23-year-old actor named Davis, who went to the movie with some friends, took a huge hit of amyl nitrite (i.e. “poppers”) at a key moment. “It was literally as Jennifer [Hudson] screams out, ‘Touch meeeeee, it’s so easy to leave meeeeeee,’ the poppers for all three of us kicked in,” he says. “I felt myself hit the Heaviside Layer like Grizabella, the glamour cat.”

Could “Cats,” dead on arrival with critics and mass audiences, ascend to the Heaviside Layer to be reborn as a stoner classic? There’s talk that the movie could be the next “Rocky Horror Picture Show,” a cult film from 1975 that still inspires audiences to dress up as the characters and yell at the screen. On Twitter, someone posted video of an audience member in a cat suit dancing along to the credits. Some theaters, like the Alamo Drafthouse, are hosting “rowdy” screenings of “Cats” where people — many in various states of inebriation — are encouraged to yell at the screen. Other screenings not explicitly designated as “rowdy” are becoming communal experiences nonetheless — or, perhaps, mass trauma events.

One “Cats” viewer who ate a THC-infused caramel, a 43-year-old Tony-award-winning Broadway producer in New York, described a “bonding experience” with other attendees in the sparsely populated theater: “Just like, okay, we’re doing this together, this is a thing that is transpiring, and we are bearing witness.”

The precise moment when he “punctured the looking glass” happened toward the end of the movie, following the kidnapping of Old Deuteronomy, played by Dench. When Mr. Mistoffelees, the magician cat, “conjured Judi Dench back, and she sang his tune for the 900th time,” he says, “I lost touch with what we understand is reality. At that point, the rest of the audience was in gales of laughter as well, and then it was just a slide down the chute of hysteria to the end.”

When they left the theater, “there was just silence, no one had words,” says the Broadway producer. “No one could name what had happened to us.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifes...92f_story.html





NYC Internet Plan Aims to provide all New Yorkers with Broadband Access

The city is set to partner with private internet service providers to increase connectivity around New York City.
Laura Hautala

New York City unveiled an ambitious plan Tuesday to bring universal internet access to its 8.5 million residents by partnering with private internet service providers, a move Mayor Bill de Blasio says will help close the digital divide. The Internet Master Plan would create partnerships between the city and ISPs to facilitate permitting processes and developing infrastructure, such as fiber optic cables.

"Every New Yorker deserves easy, affordable access to the internet," de Blasio said in a statement. "Providing equitable broadband service to all New Yorkers regardless of where they live or how much they make is vital to ensuring everyone has the basic tools they need to succeed."

Providing high-speed internet access is an important policy objective in many cities and towns, as services and education are now online. Communities in low-income areas often don't get adequate coverage because ISPs are often unwilling to upgrade infrastructure unless they're confident of returns. The absence of reliable internet connections can make it difficult for people to apply for jobs online or get services, such as driver's licenses. Children often can't do online homework assignments.

The announcement doesn't mean New York will be creating its own internet service, which cities like Chattanooga, Tennessee, have done in order to attract young people and businesses. Instead, the mayor's office is hoping public-private partnerships will help address a problem that's dogging cities around the country. Market research shows almost a third of US households don't have broadband connections reaching even 25 megabits per second. Chattanooga's service, by contrast, is 40 times faster than that.

Rural households are particularly hit by the digital divide -- about one in five rural households don't have a broadband connection. It's an issue that's been taken up by Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who's called for an $85 billion rural broadband program.

Cities are affected too, though. More than a third of Bronx residents don't have broadband at home, and nearly half of all New Yorkers living in poverty lack home broadband access, the mayor's office said. What's more, 1.5 million New Yorkers have neither a home broadband connection nor a mobile connection on a phone or other device. That prevents residents from accessing job and employment opportunities, and holds back the economy, the mayor's office said.
https://www.cnet.com/news/nyc-intern...adband-access/





US Finally Prohibits ISPs from Charging for Routers they Don’t Provide

Yes, we needed a law to ban rental fees for devices that customers own in full.
Jon Brodkin

A new US law prohibits broadband and TV providers from charging "rental" fees for equipment that customers have provided themselves.

Even by the low customer-service standards of the cable and telecom industries, requiring customers to pay a monthly fee for equipment they own is pretty rude. But that's exactly what Frontier Communications does to its customers, as we wrote in July 2019. Frontier customers who use routers they own themselves must still pay Frontier $10 a month in a "Wi-Fi Router" fee, even if the router they use is fully compatible with the service and requires no additional work on Frontier's part.

As Frontier's website says, its customers are forced to pay "a monthly lease fee for your Frontier router or modem—whether you use it or not." That statement makes it sound like Frontier automatically provides the device to all customers—but the customer in Texas we wrote about never received a router from Frontier and was still required to pay the fee.

In mid-2020, Frontier should be forced to change its ways. A US government spending bill approved by Congress and signed by President Trump last month includes new requirements for television and broadband providers.

A new "consumer right to accurate equipment charges" prohibits the companies from charging customers for "covered equipment provided by the consumer." Covered equipment is defined as "equipment (such as a router) employed on the premises of a person... to provide [TV service] or to provide fixed broadband Internet access service."

The companies may not charge rental or lease fees in cases when "the provider has not provided the equipment to the consumer; or the consumer has returned the equipment to the provider."

The new law is an update to the Communications Act and is scheduled to apply six months after passage, which would be June 20. The law gives the Federal Communications Commission an option to extend the deadline by six months if the FCC "finds that good cause exists for such an additional extension." As we've previously written, the FCC hasn't done much of anything to protect customers from bogus rental fees.

Frontier says it will comply

Frontier told Ars that it will comply with the new law, but it apparently won't give customers a break on rental fees until it's actually in place. "Once the new law is effective, Frontier plans to comply with the requirements," a company spokesperson told us.

Of course, the law doesn't require providers to give back the money they never should have charged in the first place. And TV and broadband providers are notorious for randomly raising prices, even when customers are under contract, so companies may adapt by raising base prices or by inventing some other fee that isn't outlawed yet. We asked Frontier if the company will raise its prices to compensate for the revenue it will lose because of the new consumer-protection law, but Frontier didn't answer.

Frontier has claimed it charges the fee because non-Frontier routers cause "increased complaints and more difficulty with troubleshooting." But Frontier also said it "cannot support or repair the non-Frontier equipment," so it's charging $10 a month despite not providing support for non-Frontier routers.

Frontier offers residential and business services in 29 states over its fiber and copper networks. Frontier has 3.8 million residential customers and makes an average of $88.45 per month per customer. The company reported a net loss of $345 million in the most recent quarter.

Hidden fees still a big problem

The new law isn't just about rental fees for equipment that doesn't exist, so it could become harder for providers to mislead customers about prices in general. A new right to transparency requires TV and broadband companies to provide customers the total monthly charges, including all company-imposed fees and a good-faith estimate of all government-imposed fees and taxes, before they enter into a contract. This notice must also specify the amount of promotional discounts and when those discounts will expire.

The initial notice can be made by phone, in person, online, "or by other reasonable means." Companies must also send that list of total charges to customers "by email, online link, or other reasonably comparable means" no later than 24 hours after they enter a contract, which triggers another 24-hour period in which the customer can cancel "without paying early cancellation fees or other disconnection fees or penalties." The new law also requires itemization of all the fees in each monthly bill.

But the right to cancel without penalty only applies when customers initially sign up for service, so it doesn't prevent companies from raising prices later on, even when customers are under contract. For years, TV providers have been charging "Broadcast TV" and "Regional Sports Network" fees that ostensibly cover the rising cost of programming. But providers generally exclude those fees from their advertised prices and raise them regularly regardless of the customer's contract status, so in practice, the fees are used to hide the full cost of service and hit in-contract customers with unexpected bill increases.

Still, the prohibition on rental fees for equipment that doesn't exist, and the required itemization of all fees should help customers out a bit. Legislation sponsors Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) and Senator Ed Markey (D-Mass.) hailed Congress' action last month and blasted cable companies for repeatedly duping consumers with hidden fees.

"Cable companies habitually blindside customers by selling a service for one price and then tacking on hidden fees and extra charges at the end of the month," Eshoo said in a press release. "These 'below-the-line' fees add up to $28 billion a year at the expense of the American people."
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...-dont-provide/





Verizon will Finally Sell You TV Without a Contract
Jordan Valinsky

Verizon is changing the way it sells its internet and cable packages as customers are increasingly seeking ways to cut the costly cord.

The company is eliminating bundles and contracts, Verizon announced Thursday. Instead, it will sell its Fios TV and internet services separately. Long-term contracts are also being trashed in favor of charging customers month-to-month. That is similar to how streaming services charge customers.

Verizon (VZ) is calling the new offers "Mix and Match on Fios." There are now three internet packages and five Fios TV packages. Notably, Verizon will continue selling Google's YouTube TV for $49.99 per month as a TV option under an agreement the two companies signed last year. A home telephone package will also be sold for $20 per month.

The new bundle-free packages offer more price transparency for customers, Verizon claims.

"Customers are tired of having to buy a bundle with services they don't want to get the best rates, and then discover that those rates didn't include extra fees and surcharges," said Frank Boulben, Verizon's senior vice president of marketing, in statement.

But not all surcharges are going away: Verizon will continue charging a $15 monthly fee for routers in some of its internet packages and a $12 set-top monthly fee in most of its Fios TV packages. But other fees it previously charged, including for regional sports networks, will now be included in the total Fios TV price.

Verizon, like its competitors such as Comcast (CMCSA), has been stung by customers ditching high-priced cable packages for streaming services. Verizon lost nearly 70,000 video subscribers in its most recent earnings report. However it did add 30,000 internet subscribers.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/09/media...ice/index.html

















Until next week,

- js.



















Current Week In Review





Recent WiRs -

January 4th, December 28th, December 21st, December 14th

Jack Spratts' Week In Review is published every Friday. Submit letters, articles, press releases, comments, questions etc. in plain text English to jackspratts (at) lycos (dot) com. Submission deadlines are Thursdays @ 1400 UTC. Please include contact info. The right to publish all remarks is reserved.


"The First Amendment rests on the assumption that the widest possible dissemination of information from diverse and antagonistic sources is essential to the welfare of the public."
- Hugo Black
__________________
Thanks For Sharing
JackSpratts is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Peer-To-Peer News - The Week In Review - July 16th, '11 JackSpratts Peer to Peer 0 13-07-11 06:43 AM
Peer-To-Peer News - The Week In Review - July 9th, '11 JackSpratts Peer to Peer 0 06-07-11 05:36 AM
Peer-To-Peer News - The Week In Review - January 30th, '10 JackSpratts Peer to Peer 0 27-01-10 07:49 AM
Peer-To-Peer News - The Week In Review - January 16th, '10 JackSpratts Peer to Peer 0 13-01-10 09:02 AM
Peer-To-Peer News - The Week In Review - December 5th, '09 JackSpratts Peer to Peer 0 02-12-09 08:32 AM






All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© www.p2p-zone.com - Napsterites - 2000 - 2024 (Contact grm1@iinet.net.au for all admin enquiries)