Tech Tantrum

Why Can't I Stream Shows From Local Music Venues?

2013-03-07T18:56:47Z

So the older I get, the harder it seems to get myself to shows. I still LOVE the music, but I hate what a pain in the ass it is to get to a venue, pay for parking, pay for gas, deal with stupid drunk people etc. There are a good handful of local bands that I would pay (at least) double if I could stream the show from my living room. So why don't clubs do this? I know that with label bands the red tape will keep those pro musicians from getting this money for a few years to come, but what about the local scene?

So now I will single out my favorite local venue. Just because I am using Louie G's as an example though, doesn't mean I am only asking them to do this. If that were the case I would just send him an email or give him a call. I am posting this because I would love all venues to do this! There is this amazing place about an hours drive from my house called Louie G's though. They are an all ages pizza place that serves the best food of any live music venue I have ever been to. The staff treats customers great instead of treating them like they are above you. The owners (a wonderful husband and wife team) seriously preach that although this is their dream, we are all in it. Come to find out that means that their dream is to do everything they can to help and support the dreams of others. The only problem is that they are a county away and it is a pain in the ass to get there. On a Friday night it can take two hours due to traffic! Half of that is just getting out of Thurston County!

But my point is not how great this venue is, it's about asking why all venues don't offer a paid stream!

Now I would still go out there when I could because the food and vibe there is better than any other venue. However, I miss out on a ton of music because I can't bring myself to make the trip. On Friday night I get off work about 30 min AFTER the music starts. By the time I got to the venue it would be almost over. I would spend more time driving than I would enjoying live music! However, if it was live streaming I could enjoy most of the show from the comfort of my own home. It would mean extra money for the artists as well as the venue. If I am charged 3 times the amount, the bands make double and the venue takes the other third of my money to make up for profits lost not selling food and drink. Deal?

So what venue in my area will be the first to try this for even one night? Maybe try it for four weekends? If you really give it a serious chance let me know what I can do to help promote it. Below are links to get you started. You can either CLICK HERE to use Ustream or CLICK HERE to use Stickam.

Now if you labels want to pull your head out of your asses, this could save your bands! I have lost count on how many times I see a legendary artist play to an empty venue because they hit my town on a weekday. Most of the time the fans would love to see the show, but they work in the morning. Start seriously pushing and encouraging venues to do pay per view streaming over the internet and you will have way more people paying to see your artist on tour! You are letting this money just fly away because you want to hold on so tight. Stop being so paranoid about the internet and start making money off of it. One of the most popular lines on the web is "Just take my damn money!" That line fits here.

* Note: Louie G's is the classiest live music venue I have ever been to in several decades of going to shows. You should seriously book your band there if you are planning a tour. This venue was used as an example because they have proven themselves as the best example. If anyone could pull this off it would be them. You other venues are encourgaed to use this idea as well. Oh yeah, can you try and be at least half as classy as Louie G's? For more info go to
facebook.com/LouieGsPizza or louiegspizza.com

How Roku gave a middle finger to their biggest cheerleaders

2013-03-03T06:10:24Z

So I have been a very outspoken fan of the Roku player since I bought several for our home 2 or three years ago. However recently they have announced a feature that kind of pisses me off. It shows a total lack of respect for their customers. This is the multichannel search. I know what you are thinking, "That's a great idea! How could that piss you off?" Well, they give zero options to those that own the older models. Yes, I understand they need to keep bringing in new money. But if selling new hardware is the only way to do this, they are going to have some serious problems.

So what would be the better options for them to use while still bringing in new money to pay for these types of services?

Charge people $5 for a pay version of the phone app that has the search option.
Charge a monthly fee of $5 a month to search all channels on their website
Make people watch a pre-roll commercial before search results are displayed.
Charge $5 a month to add a premium app to all channel search on an older Roku player.
Add a line of "This search sponsored by ____" at the top of the screen if we go to the Roku website to do the all channel search (this assumes the older machines don't have the ability to run this specific software for some strange reason).

Out of all of those I would most prefer a simple pre-roll commercial. people buy Roku players because they are either cheap or poor. So adding monthly fees might not go over too well. But Roku does need to find a way to bring in money other than selling what amounts to adding a tailfin on the back of a car. They still have a product I love. If I didn't love them, I wouldn't have bothered to write this rant in the first place. They really need to figure out whatever is holding back a YouTube app, but otherwise I think of them as the product of the future. They really just have those two issues. Other than that the Roku is truly an amazing device.

Why We Are Green

2013-02-26T23:56:26Z

So let me get this straight. The top tier visual effects companies in Hollywood are filing for bankruptcy, shutting down offices, and laying off people, while the movies they helped make are winning Oscars? We at Rock My Monkey have SEVERAL friends in this part of the industry. There is a really cool guy (who will go unmentioned until he informs me it is ok to mention him in this) we hang out with in the photo pits at shows all the time who recently left working for movies and now works on visual effects for video games. Why? He told me (in person, not through the internet) that it was because of the money. He has worked on productions many of you have purchased. This friend spends his free time and cash covering Metal bands left and right for another website (who we will plug as soon as he tells us this will not hurt him).

This is NOT about downloading. If you try and blame downloading you are a short sighted moron. These people work on major flicks that are bringing in millions of dollars. One of the most important groups of people that helped these movies win Oscars, rake in major cash, and make these movies something almost every living person in America has heard the name of, are going broke. This is not cool.

So we at Rock My Monkey are going green. The background on our main site (that you might be reading this article from) is already green, but we are changing the main header graphic on our Facebook to a flat green graphic as well. Please share this image on every social network you know of and take a stand with our friends in the VFX industry. You people worked hard and deserve to get paid a respectable slice of the pie you helped bake.

This is why we are green!

http://io9.com/5987131/why-the-visual-effects-industry-protested-the-oscars-and-how-the-academy-insulted-them-in-return

http://thebigsocialpicture.blogspot.com/2013/02/the-oscar-protest-that-you-didnt-know.html

http://youtu.be/PRE1Ot1sLTc

https://www.facebook.com/VfxSolidarityIntl

http://vfxsoldier.wordpress.com/end-vfx-subsidies/

Jesse Silverberg is an insult to any real scientist

2013-02-13T19:42:49Z

So Cornell University has pissed me off this morning with THIS ARTICLE. Some might think that it is because they have painted Metal fans to be the same silly clique they have always been painted as. Well, that is a small part of what ticks me off about this. The part that pisses me off the most however is that they have insulted science! Now if this study looked at things in a truly scientific way they would have looked at the bigger picture. How did this extremely small sample compare to the people at a Slayer show in general? Why does this one small sample act so differently than the crowd at a Slayer show as a whole? How does this compare to the scrimmage in a football game? How does this compare to Skank dancing or pogo dancing? The problem with this study is that it seems to have no reason. So I'm not even sure what direction a more legit study should take. You might as well do a study of how leaves fall to the ground with the result that it is similar to how a cotton ball falls.

The first band listed isn't even a Metal band! 36 Crazyfists? NOT METAL! It also must be pointed out that what is shown in the first video is not actually a mosh pit. It's a Wall of death. Sure, those two things are somewhat related, but they are not the same. This shows that this scientific study had a pathetically small amount of research. How about we watch The Little Mermaid to study scuba diving? Hell, if this is what passes for science we might even be able to use this iconic footage to research desert animal behavior.

I know it is easy to talk about how Metalheads are nothing but a bunch of knuckle dragging, inbred, moronic, meatheads, but that is lazy. Sure, there are bands that promote this idea like 5 Finger Death Punch, Exodus (after 2005), Hatebreed, and to some extent Pantera, but that is laziness. Of course there are similarities with the behavior of this one extremely specific section of an extremely specific crowd and this other very specific situation in nature. You can find all kinds of things like this since we are all moving and in nature. This just stinks of agenda and laziness. This seems less like the work of real scientists and more like kids in a high school science class goofing off. Now there are floods of Metalheads out there that are way more intelligent than I am. So I would love to hear their feedback on this. Greg Davies of Blendover, I am looking at you especially. Should Jesse Silverburg replace Buster on the Mythbusters for a few episodes to pay penance for this slight on the otherwise noble task that is scientific research?

You are Cornell University. You need to either kick Jesse Silverberg to the curb for his insult to science or risk harming the great reputation of your prestigious institution. If this type of junk science, laziness, and moronic behavior continues, you might end up being compared to something more like University of Phoenix. So pull your head out of your asses.

Where Can I Stream Who Framed Roger Rabbit‽

2012-08-05T04:10:16Z

So why is the entertainment business losing so much money to downloading? Is it because it is free or because they have trained so many to think of the legit way of buying stuff to be a pain in the ass? Tonight I made a reference to the movie Who Framed Roger Rabbit. It is one of my all time favorite movies. It was the first movie I bought on VHS in the late 80's. So it doesn't take much to get me in the mood for the flick. I think I annoy my wife by how often I am unable to resist the urge to speak the lines with the characters (yeah, I know. It's a horrid habit and I should be ashamed).

So I go to start looking for the movie. Knowing that I do not own the movie on physical DVD, I started surfing through my Roku player. First I went to Netflix to see if it was streaming. Nope. No sign of it there. So then I go to Hulu. Well, can anyone ever find anything on the god awe full menu Hulu has on their interface for devices like the Roku? So I don't think it is there either. So then I go to my default for movies that have a hard time getting fair licensing deals, Amazon Prime. In case you have not ever used this service, it is awesome. It is a little more expensive than say a Netflix because it is a la carte, but there is a good side of that. You can "buy" the movie and it remains in your library for future viewing. So since I watch a ton of movies while working on the computer, I love not having to get up to hunt for a physical disc. I just click a few buttons on the remote and the movie is playing. It is pure awesome! After hunting for awhile I discover that the movie is available for "rent", but not for purchase to my library. At $3 a pop I would have paid the purchase price ten times over in just a couple years (it's a sickness I know). So there is no way I am doing that.

So after spending a good chunk of time hunting for a way to legally stream this movie favorite of mine, I give up. Then I remember that I saw the movie on YouTube a few years ago when I was stuck somewhere with nothing to do for several hours. I watched the movie on my phone through the YouTube app. So I go to YouTube on my desktop computer and not only is it still there in 9 minute parts, but there is a version that is the entire movie all in one file! So I was able to get my fix. I didn't even need to mess with the pain in the ass that is bit torrent. The movie was just as grand as I remember it. I loved every bit of it and didn't feel a bit guilty about not paying for the viewing. Why? Because I went to the three biggest outlets for streaming and they wouldn't take my money!

When Napster first came out did you know that they tried very hard to make deals with the music industry for a pay model? This model would have paid the labels even more than the first deals they made with iTunes? Then the industry made it so that if you bought a disc it would give your computer a Trojan worm (Sony). Then when you could buy music online they gave it all kinds of DRM (Digital Rights Management) that would only allow you to play the song you purchased on one specific device. This was at the same time that the music pirates would let you download a straight up MP3 that would play perfectly fine on all your devices. So the free version was the better product. So they then spent well over a decade training the youth that the stolen version was more versatile. When you make the stolen version piss you off less, it is not the price that makes people steal. It is because your product sucks!

Now things have improved massively from when the internet first became mainstream. I now hate to bit torrent because it is a pain in the ass compared to Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon Prime. But there are still reminders that the people behind the suits are losing money because they don't get it. Stop working so hard to get people to stop stealing and work harder to make sure your product is better than what the pirates offer. Ask Louie C.K. It can work really well when you're not a total moron.

Now next time would you please just take my damn money‽

http://youtu.be/Hv_NvAY7B0Y

Why The New Digg Will Fail

2012-08-02T01:22:10Z

You have to feel sorry for the new Digg team. Here they are taking on a sinking ship, starting everything almost from scratch, and they have millions of eyes looking for something to pick at. Now most people are picking on things that can be explained quickly with one line. "They just launched and are starting from scratch." This means that they will be low on features.

Why launch before every bell and whistle is ready? Well I would assume three answers for that. The first being that they need to strike while the iron is hot. People are still talking about them buying the Digg domain. Being able to relaunch a website of that caliber from scratch is pretty impressive. The second reason they launch before every bell and whistle is ready is because a website like this is never fully ready. It needs to constantly evolve and keep moving or it will die just like the old Digg. If it makes a wrong move (Digg 4 anyone) it dies too. So why not start when you at least have a functional skeleton? The third and most important reason is to keep people talking. If you blow your entire load all at once people have no reason to blog about you anymore. That is when you die in a forest with no one around to care. But people love to bitch, so they will always find something to complain about. Which brings me to my next thoughts.

They come from a company that leaned very hard to the iOS side of things. So hard it seems that they have no clue as to how big Android is now. I can deal with them launching an iPhone app before an Android app, but they don't even mention they are working on it in their FAQ! It's like Android is the redheaded stepchild instead of the fastest growing mobile OS in the world (and by many numbers already the biggest).

My second complaint is that everything is one big clusterfuck. Tech news is mixed in with world news. Entertainment is mixed in with sports. It's all one big sloppy mess. Yeah, I understand that you just launched but this could have been solved in a few minutes. You don't know how to start a new table within a database? I can't program worth crap and I can do that! Again, they could have at least mentioned something in their FAQ.

So will those three things make the new Digg fail? Not really. What will make the new Digg fail is that they seem to be so stressed about being the new Digg that they are not thinking straight. Their priorities seem to be out of whack. Things that are not as important are being focused on while things that will make people dismiss this new project and not return are being put aside. Stop thinking about making the old Digg fans happy. They are part of what killed the old Digg and made it not able to move forward. Stop trying to make the tech bloggers happy. If you want to go mainstream you need to leave them behind. Think about what the stupid mainstream wants. Sure they are idiots, but cater to them and you have billions of eyeballs. How do you get them in? Most importantly, work on that FAQ because it is missing some major questions that floods of people are going to have.

P.S. I hope I am wrong and wish you the best of luck proving me and all the rest of us negative bloggers wrong.

http://digg.com/