Byrne gives an interview to The Talks. He discusses how he writes songs differently, why he hasn’t made more movies, and his book about music.
I had done a couple of articles for magazines and newspapers and I realized that I was drawn to the idea of how the various contexts affect how music sounds. So I was interested in how music is molded by the acoustics of a space, by the economics, by the technology, and I thought, “Oh maybe I’ll write a whole book about all these different ways music is influenced from the outside, not from the inside.”
In a blog post, musician David Byrne discusses issues regarding Swartz arrest and suicide:
I don’t disagree with many of Swartz’s points. I can certainly see the point that much academic data, when freely available, can have a greater chance to spur insights and creativity from researchers and scientists around the world than if it is locked up behind paywalls. Withholding cancer research from academics who can’t afford access because a big pharmaceutical company “owns” the data doesn’t seem like a very morally defensible position—even if it is what the law might say is perfectly legal.
But who then decides what data “deserves” to be stolen and “liberated”? There are all sorts of data. Some of it is—though I hate to admit it—possibly essential to our security, and some is strictly personal and deserves to stay that way. It’s complicated, and this particular case seems messy—though Swartz’s points are mostly valid… but maybe his method was sloppy.