> My view is that it'll keep with the 95/5 rule... that is, 95% of the
> users will post crap, but 5% will have cool obscure tracks. As long as that
> 5% is suitably large, the obscure stuff selections are good. I think last
> night I saw there were like 10,000 users on Napster at that time... 5% of
> that is 500 freaks, which is a good pond of weirdness to fish in. But if it
> splinters apart, to where you're on networks with only 1,000 or less users,
> that lowers the freak quotient quite a bit...
But perhaps the new 'alternate networks' will contain higher
freak-pond ratios? This presents the problem of context, and of
*finding* freak-pond free napster-clone networks -- IMO a serious problem
that napster has always had (though their integrated web browser
thing attempts to deal with this). It's not an environment, just
By trying to settle with the recording giants, and make the big bucks,
Napster Inc will, as you say, dilute their userbase, their only asset,
and drive the majority onto alternate networks. I predict some
lawsuits as well....
Reed Hedges reedATzerohour.net http://zerohour.net/reed
email me for my public PGP key.
[an error occurred while processing this directive] N© Detritus.net. Sharerights extended to all.