Thom Yorke - Tomorrow's Modern Boxes

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed

http://www.radiohead.com/deadairspace/tomorrows-modern-boxes

Melissa W, Friday, 26 September 2014 15:02 (four years ago) Permalink

Opener is pretty dull on first listen :(

Simon H., Friday, 26 September 2014 15:13 (four years ago) Permalink

is it only in mp3 or is there a lossless versh for people to download this album

nakhchivan, Friday, 26 September 2014 15:21 (four years ago) Permalink

just let me fucking buy it on itunes already

markers, Friday, 26 September 2014 15:25 (four years ago) Permalink

Hate it when Thom Yorke makes Markers angry :(

definite classic, predicting a solid 8/10 from the p-fork boys (Le Bateau Ivre), Friday, 26 September 2014 15:36 (four years ago) Permalink

Thom Yorke - Tomorrow's Modern Boxes

ciderpress, Friday, 26 September 2014 15:37 (four years ago) Permalink

again the delivery system will get more attention than the content.

calstars, Friday, 26 September 2014 16:05 (four years ago) Permalink

Yeah, I don't do bittorrent. Guess this is where I get off the Thom Yorke bus. (I mean, I'm not that gutted considering how terrible that last Atoms for Peace album was.)

Welcome to reality. No spitting, please. (Branwell with an N), Friday, 26 September 2014 16:07 (four years ago) Permalink

He should pay me what he thinks it's worth for me to download it.

Josh in Chicago, Friday, 26 September 2014 16:28 (four years ago) Permalink

stealing that

Οὖτις, Friday, 26 September 2014 16:30 (four years ago) Permalink

I don't get why he chose BitTorrent. Seems stupid, there's no advantage or innovation. Might as well put a rar file behind a £6 button on his website.

definite classic, predicting a solid 8/10 from the p-fork boys (Le Bateau Ivre), Friday, 26 September 2014 16:55 (four years ago) Permalink

https://twitter.com/maura/status/515534301338025986
^this

festival culture (Jordan), Friday, 26 September 2014 16:56 (four years ago) Permalink

Yup. Beyoncé just putting her album in iTunes really didn't need announcements or explanations for ppl unaware of bittorrent.

definite classic, predicting a solid 8/10 from the p-fork boys (Le Bateau Ivre), Friday, 26 September 2014 16:58 (four years ago) Permalink

there are a bunch of advantages to bit torrent, or at least the establishment of it as a licit distro model; if somebody else was to initially host whatever artwork they've made, & could count on even moderate popularity to keep it seeded & accessible, they'd be able to disperse their work with some relief from hosting costs, & while comporting with a generally-democratic-feeling protocol for distributing the files. i don't know how the pay part of this works, yet, but peer to peer sharing has a neat, diffusive, sort-of-microloan efficiency to it.

schlump, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:02 (four years ago) Permalink

Remember when the idea of a Thom Yorke solo record excited people? He's really proving the worth of his usual collaborators.

DavidLeeRoth, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:03 (four years ago) Permalink

like, ok, this way Thom doesn't have iTunes or even Bandcamp taking a percentage, fine. but that only matters if an artist already has a dedicated fanbase that will seek out their record and spend money on it.

xp maybe i don't get the nuances of bittorrent though since i don't use it (and therefore i'm getting a friend to send the album to me, when i would have paid for it otherwise)

festival culture (Jordan), Friday, 26 September 2014 17:05 (four years ago) Permalink

I can see labels loving the idea of cutting hosting cots yeah. Thanks schlump.

but Thom Yorke lol, he'll never win won't he.

Van Horn Street, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:11 (four years ago) Permalink

Or you can shell out £30 for some art-vinyl in a static-proof bag.

Speaking as someone who owns the last two Radiohead albums on vinyl I've never actually played, I'm kind of... over the fetish appeal of such objects.

Just seems like a gimmick to draw attention to the release, and if the album were that good, it wouldn't have needed the gimmick.

Welcome to reality. No spitting, please. (Branwell with an N), Friday, 26 September 2014 17:14 (four years ago) Permalink

What happens if/when the torrent dies from lack of popularity and it becomes impossible to download because only like 6 people are seeding it?

Greer, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:15 (four years ago) Permalink

and to answer Maura's question, the letter was mainly distributed by social media no? that's how I found out. I don't see how that's the old model.

Van Horn Street, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:15 (four years ago) Permalink

i don't totally follow - like that somebody takes a percentage matters in all cases, right, irrespective of whether you have an audience? - but it's still really valuable if somebody's just trying to figure out actual, functional, replicable independent distribution models. the internet is so promising & democratic & it still feels frustrating, sometimes, that the basic logistics of like, indie-ish, old-school-diy-analogous enterprise aren't fully developed yet. it means a lot to be self-sufficient, in principle as well as in terms of percentages, & the idea that people could distribute things very minimally & directly is appealing & empowering. there is a weird cyclical kind of moore's-law-rhythmic thing that means that ello will eventually be garbage, that everybody will periodically have to divorce themselves from once-benign proprietary go-tos, but there's still so much potential. the note about this album seems pretty ostentatious, to me, straining for the voguish feel of a kind of ripply innovative paradigm shifting ~experiment~. but it would be really great if people could avoid paying hosting for a film they made & uploaded! & the general technological landscape of the internet & our isp-afforded bandwidth allowances doesn't inherently prohibit that, & so maybe by using the spotlight afforded to him he gets to push forward a way for people to sell flowers direct from farmer -> consumer.

schlump, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:18 (four years ago) Permalink

I don't think its a gimmick, I think Yorke and co are genuinely interested in new models of distribution, its naive at worst. I mean in that case any marketing idea is a gimmick.

Van Horn Street, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:19 (four years ago) Permalink

06 There Is No Ice (For My Drink).mp3

emo canon in twee major (BradNelson), Friday, 26 September 2014 17:20 (four years ago) Permalink

I was having keming probs on my cell phone and it looked like Thorn Yorke - Tornorrow's rnodem boxes :(

StanM, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:21 (four years ago) Permalink

the letter was also released by nasty little man to the press, who dutifully amplified the signal.

“Bypassing the self elected gate-keepers" indeed.

maura, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:21 (four years ago) Permalink

What happens if/when the torrent dies from lack of popularity and it becomes impossible to download because only like 6 people are seeding it?

― Greer, Friday, September 26, 2014 2:15 PM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

like: this is an imperfection, at the moment, but i'm careful to say above that i'm talking about lower rather than zero hosting costs. archive.org is the only place i'm aware of that uses torrents licitly, to distribute its content, & it runs two trackers hosting its files. in the absence of others, you'd be downloading from archive.org, i think; when something's popular the hosting is widely defrayed & shared by whoever still has it. also just to be pedantic six people seeding it is fine.

schlump, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:22 (four years ago) Permalink

And "Thom Yorke" and "Nigel Godrich" will certainly be more successful at this than "some guy." Does nobody remember the Saul Williams/Trent Reznor experiment, which took place (and struggled) in a less crowded, less diffuse landscape?

maura, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:23 (four years ago) Permalink

using your own popularity and fame to promote an idea of yours? how vile.

Van Horn Street, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:26 (four years ago) Permalink

i don't totally follow - like that somebody takes a percentage matters in all cases, right, irrespective of whether you have an audience? - but it's still really valuable if somebody's just trying to figure out actual, functional, replicable independent distribution models.

true, but for me, the fact that you don't get 100% of the money when someone pays for a download is one of the smaller problems facing musicians these days. if you've reached the point where more than a handful of listeners are willing to give you money for downloads, then you've already cleared the tougher hurdles.

xp

festival culture (Jordan), Friday, 26 September 2014 17:29 (four years ago) Permalink

06 There Is No Ice (For My Drink).mp3

― emo canon in twee major (BradNelson), Friday, September 26, 2014 12:20 PM (7 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

rad het chilly poppers (Stevie D(eux)), Friday, 26 September 2014 17:29 (four years ago) Permalink

maura otm - i basically said the same thing on my twitter only not as well!

jaywbabcock, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:30 (four years ago) Permalink

xxxp what would be the bigger problems musicians are facing these days? i am not a musician and i'd be interested to hear about it.

Van Horn Street, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:32 (four years ago) Permalink

sure, that's fair, jordan. i am glad there are things like bandcamp & kickstarter, &c, & that seems like a good model where somebody taking a cut isn't necessarily inappropriate (idk anything about the numbers involved, maybe somebody disagrees. but it's so satisfying to think that things can be refined & that people can move closer toward control. even with little things. i slowly learned html over the last couple of years, & can now make like, adequate websites, if i need to; a lot of art has always been bound up in the character of its presentation & transmission & the progress in reducing impediments to the platonic-ultimate of that is nice to watch.

schlump, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:33 (four years ago) Permalink

I don't know why I'm experiencing such, well, not just reaction, but revulsion to this idea.

It might be one of my first genuine "I'm old, and I don't get it" moments, when confronted with technology.

But I think it's deeper than that. It's not that I'm not aware of what bittorrent is, it's just that I have a *hugely* negative reaction to it. I'd no more go on bittorrent to get something, even legally, than I'd got on reddit or 4chan to have a conversation. It is, to me, a tainted thing, a tainted concept, associated with deep unpleasantness. And maybe that's unfair, but it's still my association.

And it's like, Thom Yorke wants to make his music available to ~bittorrent type people~ (libertarians in Pirate Bay t-shirts or whatever) but not to "middle aged people who like to walk into a shop and buy a CD" then he's making a deliberate statement about what audience he wants - as he is making a statement about distribution structures or whatever - and that audience feels like it's deliberately excluding me, and people like me. And it feels a gross slap in the face after 21 years of fandom.

Welcome to reality. No spitting, please. (Branwell with an N), Friday, 26 September 2014 17:34 (four years ago) Permalink

So, its basically that the medium is more important than the message?

The medium is the massage, certainly.

Mark G, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:38 (four years ago) Permalink

Thom Yorke will personally burn a copy of this for any old person who wants an actual CD.

Josh in Chicago, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:40 (four years ago) Permalink

i just think "trying to get you to pay for something on a platform built off swapping other people's shit for free" is a funny way to be innovative. it's like some "mafioso trying to go straight" shit.

da croupier, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:40 (four years ago) Permalink

"My new tobacco brand will only be available off the back of stolen trucks"

da croupier, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:41 (four years ago) Permalink

I'd no more go on bittorrent to get something, even legally, than I'd got on reddit or 4chan to have a conversation. It is, to me, a tainted thing, a tainted concept, associated with deep unpleasantness....And it's like, Thom Yorke wants to make his music available to ~bittorrent type people~ (libertarians in Pirate Bay t-shirts or whatever) but not to "middle aged people who like to walk into a shop and buy a CD" then he's making a deliberate statement about what audience he wants - as he is making a statement about distribution structures or whatever - and that audience feels like it's deliberately excluding me, and people like me

feelin this/cosign

(altho tbf full confession I have never listened to Radiohead/Yorke and don't plan to start now)

Οὖτις, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:42 (four years ago) Permalink

Van Horn Street, the point is that TY and NG are touting this as a model that could be easily replicable, which is a stance that's a bit ignorant of their own privilege.

maura, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:42 (four years ago) Permalink

lol croup

Οὖτις, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:43 (four years ago) Permalink

also

http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-thom-yorke-sells-new-record-through-bit-torrent-bundles-20140926-story.html#page=1

The Bundle for "Tomorrow's Modern Boxes" is the first with a gate that collects a payment. Matt Mason, BitTorrent's chief content officer, said "paygates" took this long to develop because "we're not building a Web-based experience that's only going to work in North America." It's easy to add a storefront to a website, Mason said; it's much harder to create a transferable one that works wherever someone might be using BitTorrent.

Yorke and Godrich were enthusiastic supporters of the idea from the start, Mason said. Although Yorke and his bandmates weren't planning on releasing anything for a couple of years, a conversation with Mason in the studio over Christmas changed their minds, he said. "They got it into their heads ... they had to be first, because of who they are."

The feeling was mutual. "We really, really wanted them to be first, because of who they are."

so this album was straight up INSPIRED by the possibility of putting a paywall on bittorrent

da croupier, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:44 (four years ago) Permalink

I don't have enough "UGH" for this right now.

Welcome to reality. No spitting, please. (Branwell with an N), Friday, 26 September 2014 17:46 (four years ago) Permalink

Exit Song (For A Chief Content Officer)

da croupier, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:46 (four years ago) Permalink

well this record certainly sounds made for airplay at a tastefully appointed office

maura, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:47 (four years ago) Permalink

man...eliminating the middle man between user data and the artist...the possibilities....nigel, hand me those bongos...i just had an idea...

da croupier, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:49 (four years ago) Permalink

xxp i don't agree with their intentions, twice they use the word 'experiment' and twice 'if it works'. they have been trying to find new models for a while now, and the fact that they've moved from the in rainbows model show a little amount of self criticism.

Van Horn Street, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:49 (four years ago) Permalink

just to throw this into everything: i remember it being really interesting when whichever radiohead record was released at short notice digitally for pay-what-you-want came out (in rainbows, right?), how afterwards there were weird pitchfork stories of like i think kim gordon & other people saying, WELL: I DON'T THINK THIS BUSINESS MODEL IS GOING TO WORK. & it had felt like such a beautiful, sensitive approach to how people actually behaved at the time, detached from a kind of confused, atavistic procedure that was still being carried out all the time inert to changes in the landscape. like records appear online, always, a little earlier than they're released, & are downloaded, freely, in rar files, & that's become this kind of popular-if-demographically-cliquish preview period; & then a physical or official-digital record arrives subsequently & is or isn't bought. & all they did was attach money to the first part of this, where people were definitely going to download an mp3 version of a record freely. & because that was a new, abstract, difficult-to-quantify commodity - what if you had to buy the leak, separate from the eventual product - they didn't set a price. that feels so intuitive to me! a lot of diy stuff happens along these lines; i am thinking of grouper, say, who is just always pressing five hundred records & selling them & then repressing them if people want more of them. it has awkward dimensions to it - like people are probably excluded, temporarily, from getting the record they want - but at the same time it's a sensitive, responsive, controllable way of doing things that fits with somebody's appetite or means or w/e. this just feels like sensible, progressive experimentation to me; that is obviously not without downsides but cf-winston-churchill-on-democracy neither are any of the other terrible options.

schlump, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:53 (four years ago) Permalink

They should threaten to send people the new U2 album if they don't download the Thom Yorke.

Josh in Chicago, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:54 (four years ago) Permalink

curious if yorke's getting any kind of advance or equity from bittorrent for this. Be kind of ridiculous if they've got top officers of a tech company hanging out over the holidays and all they're getting out of it is the "chance" to experiment and a decent rate

da croupier, Friday, 26 September 2014 17:57 (four years ago) Permalink

The argument that the system works better for already popular acts (which was also used against the pay-what-you-like model for In Rainbows) holds true wrt any other technology available, don't see why it's extra relevant here.

at least bandcamp provides some possibilities for helping newer artists (people can search by genre, location, recommendations by users and artists, and it seems like they're doing some things with the front page & podcasts etc). with bittorrent, someone would have to find out about your record from some other source and then go specifically search for it, right?

i don't really have anything against Thom Yorke giving it a shot, but that's why it's not interesting to me as a new distribution option.

festival culture (Jordan), Sunday, 28 September 2014 22:16 (four years ago) Permalink

i think bittorrent is interesting as a distribution option because it doesn't have to be hosted by a corporation. bandcamp is cool for today but as soon as it gets successful enough it will be bought by some other corp that will inevitably ruin it. it's hard to think of a company that doesn't end up doing terrible things or being bought out by another corp that does terrible things.

with bittorrent, someone would have to find out about your record from some other source and then go specifically search for it, right? right. but it's easy for me to imagine a future scenario where some sort of musician-based organization (non-profit) serves as the hub for publicity and then simply provides links to the torrents. i dunno.

Karl Malone, Sunday, 28 September 2014 22:28 (four years ago) Permalink

If only there was some form of journalism that could alert people to new music releases.

strychnine, Sunday, 28 September 2014 22:34 (four years ago) Permalink

bandcamp is cool for today but as soon as it gets successful enough it will be bought by some other corp that will inevitably ruin it.

all it takes is the owners deciding not to cash out, right? extremely rare but it happens every now and then.

festival culture (Jordan), Monday, 29 September 2014 00:04 (four years ago) Permalink

this is an instant classic that us critics and music buffs will be talking about for years to come. it somehow balances that inhumane steriltiy of the early stuff with a more organic "lived in" vibe that seems very 2014

i'm predicting a solid eighter from the pitchfork boys and a possible bnm award. and why the hell not? we need more artists like this who are willing to push the boundaries of this lil' thing we call "music" - someone like tom yorke deserves more industry recognition. grammy? the coveted mercury prize? let's not speak too soon, but i have a funny feeling that ol' tommy will making space on his mantelpiece this christmas... and i'm not talking about greeting cards!

anyone know if anthony fantando has weighed in on this one yet?

― bryan danielson (missingNO), Saturday, September 27, 2014 9:01 AM (2 days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

A+, lol

marcos, Monday, 29 September 2014 14:55 (four years ago) Permalink

Probably a mistake to put this on immediately after listening to Syro for the first time but this sounds... less essential than any other Yorke-related release I can think of. I can't imagine him putting this record together and thinking the world really needed to hear it.

Matt DC, Monday, 29 September 2014 18:11 (four years ago) Permalink

BitTorrent Inc is promoting that over 400,000 downloads have occurred, but they won't say how many of those were paid without Yorke's permission. Which is kind of hilarious - we'll let you know we're successfully trading someone's work online, but won't say whether the artist is getting paid...out of respect for the artist.

da croupier, Monday, 29 September 2014 18:40 (four years ago) Permalink

http://variety.com/2014/digital/news/thom-yorke-solo-album-tomorrows-modern-boxes-downloaded-400000-times-over-weekend-1201316230/

Album downloads had hit about 408,000 as of 10 a.m. Eastern on Monday, according to BitTorrent. It became available Friday at 11 a.m. ET.

Yorke’s release took advantage of the BitTorrent Bundle feature, and it is the first time users can pay to “unlock” content distributed via the peer-to-peer software. While BitTorrent recorded the total number of downloads, however, it is not disclosing how many of those users actually paid the $6 fee to unlock the eight tracks (with a rep explaining that this info belongs to the publisher of the bundle, and that Yorke is not releasing that).

da croupier, Monday, 29 September 2014 18:42 (four years ago) Permalink

it's a pedantic clarification but i don't think that's quite the contradiction you make it seem like; the potential grey area between 400000 torrent downloads & x number of paid torrent downloads wouldn't represent work traded, just disinterest, like however many people walked through the door of the record store but didn't buy a cd. maybe it isn't super useful data - here's how many people were theoretically curious to see how this would work but it doesn't seem too bizarre or disingenuous.

this thread really bummed me out, i think this is an interesting step toward sustainable self-sufficiency in ways that people are too quick to jump on, however many caveats there are to this specific demonstration of it. i heard some songs from the record online & they sound nice, too.

schlump, Monday, 29 September 2014 18:58 (four years ago) Permalink

no, it represents work traded. it represents someone downloading the file, irrespective of whether they downloaded it through the paywall or a copy placed outside of it.

i think it's ironic that BitTorrent Inc, which profits from all downloads (via advertising, etc) paid or unpaid, is saying it's giving an artist power over the revelation of how many of the downloads of their work were through the paywall, when the artist has no power over whether the work stays behind the paywall.

i'm sorry if people discussing the "specifics" of this "demonstration" bum you out, but i'm not sure why it would.

da croupier, Monday, 29 September 2014 19:13 (four years ago) Permalink

like, sorry we don't just swallow a press release whole and think happy thoughts

da croupier, Monday, 29 September 2014 19:15 (four years ago) Permalink

sorry not everyone can grasp the difference between putting up an album on BitTorrent and putting up an album through BitTorrent Inc

da croupier, Monday, 29 September 2014 19:16 (four years ago) Permalink

sorry, i got confused. i guess bittorrent is saying 400,000 downloaded the free portion of the bundle, but won't say how many people paid for the rest of it. as for how many people used BitTorrent to download the bundle outside of the paywall (and there's been plenty of anecdotal evidence on this thread that the album is getting around), i guess that's outside of the 400,000. maybe?

da croupier, Monday, 29 September 2014 19:23 (four years ago) Permalink

still find it funny that bittorrent is promoting how many people are checking out the free video (if that's what it is) but not saying how many people are actually buying the album

da croupier, Monday, 29 September 2014 19:25 (four years ago) Permalink

fwiw ^this^ is why people discussing the "specifics" of this "demonstration" bummed me out

schlump, Monday, 29 September 2014 19:27 (four years ago) Permalink

probably am using a harsher tone than necessary, but this isn't a case of an artist checking out the big open field of bittorrent and seeing how he can make it work for them. Plenty of folks have been doing that for a while. This is BitTorrent Inc - the tech company that is trying to move away its open source roots, the company that makes its money off of putting advertising and malware protection atop the illegal trading it facilitated - now telling artists they'll let them put a tipcup in there as well. Why am I supposed to shut my brain off and say "hey it's a step in the right direction?" just because the company shares a name with a platform that's interesting?

da croupier, Monday, 29 September 2014 19:35 (four years ago) Permalink

this has nothing to do with making things better for musical artists. it has to do with a piracy-fueled tech company trying to "go straight"

da croupier, Monday, 29 September 2014 19:37 (four years ago) Permalink

For a guy with a supposedly keen "bullshit detector", Yorke sure makes some appalling business decisions.

Welcome to reality. No spitting, please. (Branwell with an N), Monday, 29 September 2014 19:44 (four years ago) Permalink

considering the chief content officer says he pitched the bundle to yorke in the studio I HAVE to assume money changed hands. In which case this really isn't that different from the U2 album, in that a musical act decided to let their album be used to promote tech as a hedge against poor sales. This isn't to say Yorke doesn't genuinely think this is a promising proposition for artists any more than bono doesn't actually think apple is neat.

da croupier, Monday, 29 September 2014 19:52 (four years ago) Permalink

i mean "maybe i can work with tech execs to make the world a better place for singers" wouldn't be the FIRST bad idea Thom shared with Bono

da croupier, Monday, 29 September 2014 19:55 (four years ago) Permalink

This has some of my favorite Yorke song titles at least...

Nose Grows
There Is No Ice (For My Drink)
Guess Again!

LimbsKing, Tuesday, 30 September 2014 02:13 (four years ago) Permalink

The Miracle (of Joey Fatone)

GhostTunes on my Pono (Sufjan Grafton), Tuesday, 30 September 2014 05:07 (four years ago) Permalink

I think the only two songs I don't really like are There's No Ice and Pink Noise. The former feels to me like a distant cousing of Feral or Fast-track and I'm not a particular fan of neither, at least Feral has a nice groove, this just seems too last to long without going anywhere. Pink Noise is supposed to be just a transition track and feels useless on an 8 track album.

Moka, Tuesday, 30 September 2014 06:45 (four years ago) Permalink

Great idea, really hope this model has some success. itunes is apple and spotify is just glorified stealing so we credit to Yorke for doing something.

Raccoon Tanuki, Tuesday, 30 September 2014 14:10 (four years ago) Permalink

“Major labels have really given up on selling music, it seems. Pushing Spotify to an IPO is what most of the senior executives at the major labels are concerned with, which might be something to do with the fact that they own a piece of Spotify, and will participate in that IPO. But it doesn’t bear any relation to an artist trying to make a living from their work on the internet.”

while this is entirely OTM, it takes gigantic balls to say it when your company makes its money off illegal downloads, and is now telling artists they can put up a paypal account among the piracy, as long as BitTorrent Inc gets a cut. Like, WHY IS IT you have an audience of 170 million users? BECAUSE THEY CAN GET SHIT FOR FREE.

da croupier, Tuesday, 30 September 2014 14:44 (four years ago) Permalink

http://www.elephantjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Picture-425.png

“Should we blame Apple for selling you a laptop? Why not attack the guy who invented streaming or HTTP? People misunderstand BitTorrent and think it’s something just for piracy,” he said.

“If you look at BitTorrent, the stuff you’ll be offered in BitTorrent and uTorrent, our clients... If you’re just using our websites and products, there’s literally no way to get any illegal material. That’s not what they’re designed for.

“They point you to – aggressively I might add – licensed, legal pieces of content. We’ve got over 2m licensed pieces of legal content – music, films, photography, books – in the BitTorrent system. And pay-gates is about helping publishers put more stuff on BitTorrent legally.”

da croupier, Tuesday, 30 September 2014 14:48 (four years ago) Permalink

I'd assumed this was some kind of anti-piracy measure but it appears to be as easy to steal as any other album.

Matt DC, Tuesday, 30 September 2014 14:54 (four years ago) Permalink

Hey guys! Guys!

Listen this album is good I swear!

Moka, Friday, 3 October 2014 08:31 (four years ago) Permalink

I really should stay out of this but I am bored:

"They got it into their heads ... they had to be first, because of who they are."

The feeling was mutual. "We really, really wanted them to be first, because of who they are."

I mean, look at the above quotes and contemplate on the levels of delusion that go into thinking like this for a sec.

xyzzzz__, Friday, 3 October 2014 08:39 (four years ago) Permalink

kind of in disbelief that all the predictable news outlets are reporting

Today, Tomorrow's Modern Boxes has been downloaded over 1 million times. This number includes free downloads of the single and video for "A Brain in a Bottle" as well as paid downloads of the entire album.

Like, would you count streams of the "Anaconda" video as sales of the Pink Print?

da croupier, Friday, 3 October 2014 22:58 (four years ago) Permalink

Like if some VOD movie reported

Today, Nicolas Cage's KABOOM RUN RUN has been streamed 5 million times. This number includes streams of the trailer as well as paid streams of the entire movie.

da croupier, Friday, 3 October 2014 23:00 (four years ago) Permalink

rip and read, rip and read

maura, Friday, 3 October 2014 23:02 (four years ago) Permalink

so this has really grown on me.

festival culture (Jordan), Friday, 10 October 2014 13:42 (four years ago) Permalink

yeah, i've been putting it on as i go home from work and have taken a liking to more of it

Karl Malone, Friday, 10 October 2014 14:05 (four years ago) Permalink

also we can all at least agree that thom yorke's solo music is at least 10000000 times better than phil selway's solo music. ugh, his is BAD

Karl Malone, Friday, 10 October 2014 14:37 (four years ago) Permalink

he's like the nephew that sang a cover at last year's thanksgiving and everyone politely clapped, and then the next year he came prepared with 3 of his own songs and an amp and everyone's just like fuuuuuuuuuck why did we encourage him

Karl Malone, Friday, 10 October 2014 14:39 (four years ago) Permalink

two months pass...

Heard "Nose" on a Dixon podcast (in a slightly remixed form, I think) and felt tempted to investigate after a long period of not feeling interested in Thom-y.

"I'd buy this if it was on CD," I thought. (Haven't read the whole thread but is this what everyone else has thought?)

Isn't Thom collaborating with Oxford University students on the distribution of his music?

djh, Monday, 5 January 2015 19:36 (four years ago) Permalink

First four tracks on this are really good.

the joke should be over once the kid is eaten. (chap), Monday, 5 January 2015 19:53 (four years ago) Permalink

I hated it when it first came out, but it has really quite grown on me. Ended up buying it as a Bandcamp thing.

Branwell with an N, Monday, 5 January 2015 20:47 (four years ago) Permalink

four years pass...

This happened, though I didn't see anything in the media about it.

https://thomyorke.bandcamp.com/releases

Lactose Shaolin Wanker (Raymond Cummings), Monday, 8 April 2019 01:36 (two months ago) Permalink

(Unless this is a hoax. It probably is. A cursory listen of the first two songs...not good.)

Lactose Shaolin Wanker (Raymond Cummings), Monday, 8 April 2019 01:38 (two months ago) Permalink

by the cover image I would say it is a hoax

these are not all of the possible side effects (Karl Malone), Monday, 8 April 2019 01:50 (two months ago) Permalink

lmaooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

https://f4.bcbits.com/img/a2861466346_16.jpg

you know who deserves sitewide mod privileges? (m bison), Monday, 8 April 2019 02:16 (two months ago) Permalink

He will be joining the Paris Philarmonie for a couple of nights, debuted some new songs:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpixMcZKgVs

More info

https://www.reddit.com/r/radiohead/comments/bajeeh/thom_yorke_minimalist_dream_house_megathread/

✖✖✖ (Moka), Monday, 8 April 2019 02:49 (two months ago) Permalink

Better video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7PSmkj8J10

✖✖✖ (Moka), Monday, 8 April 2019 02:52 (two months ago) Permalink

Seems he’s still in AMSP/SUSPIRIA mode

✖✖✖ (Moka), Monday, 8 April 2019 02:52 (two months ago) Permalink

dope

you know who deserves sitewide mod privileges? (m bison), Monday, 8 April 2019 03:02 (two months ago) Permalink

:/ I kind of like it, but solo he doesn't have a lot of musical range.

adam the (abanana), Tuesday, 9 April 2019 04:13 (two months ago) Permalink


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.