An Acerbic Look At the Future of Reading 318
theodp writes "Using Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos' own words against him, Mark Pilgrim offers his chilling take on The Future of Reading with a mash-up of Bezos' Open Letter to the Authors Guild, the Amazon Kindle Terms of Service, Steven Levy's Newsweek article on the Kindle, 1984, and Richard Stallman's 'The Right to Read.'"
Huh? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
It's a computer science concept for accessing a hard drive or other device. Has nothing to do with people per se.
Duh! (Score:2)
Dunno why it's still an option these days, why not the iPod Railway or the Cellphone Yapping Railway?
Re: (Score:2)
Nice! (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Seeing as how the writers are on strike, I wouldn't go and give them any ideas...
Ok, but... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They already did this, remember? What was it now? Subscription music? It's all well and good, except that the licenses will expire at random, and then what are you left with? A half-read book that you need to buy to read the rest of. No, people rather own the books than depend on a shaky subscription service.
I disagree. Generally music is something you want to listen to over and over and over again, so your entire collection expiring at some point in the future if you stop paying is a huge problem. Video rental, on the other hand, are mostly shows you want to see once, then never see again, which is why NetFlix does so well compared to DVD sales. I don't want to own the first season of "Transformers" I just though it would be fun to watch some night while drunk off my ass with a bunch of hooligan bikers. I'll
WTF? That's incredibly stupid! (Score:4, Insightful)
You've never heard of a "public library?" Damn, just when I'm starting to like the 21st century* some bozo reminds me that the mamon worshipers are trying to take away every good thing I've taken for granted all my life.
-mcgrew
*click the sig for explanation
Re: (Score:2)
Thank goodness we have a comfortable couch
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Too bad, really: public libraries don't get enough attendance given their resources (though peo
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
eBooks are also a benefit of membership to the ACM [acm.org].
Re:WTF? That's incredibly stupid! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
1. Decide what to read (maybe based on good
2. Log onto library's website, and find the book on the interlibrary loan network.
3. Request it, and have it droppe
Re: (Score:2)
I already buy e-books at the regular Fictionwise.com prices. I didn't really mind the DRM much, till last week when I realized that while all non-DRM e-books I have will run fine on my new cell phone (N95), eReader doesn't seem to have bothered releasing their software for S60 3rd edition, and the older editi
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Genius!
Re: (Score:2)
Lets make it really cheap...say $1/month to get all the books you could want. Everyone signs up because after all it is so cheap!
Why would anyone buy a physical book? Oh sure there are some people that would prefer holding a book, but lets just wait them out. The next generation would grow up with a subscription model because it
Re: (Score:2)
Another option is advertisement-based datapads that the library hands out. At the end of every chapter, you're subjected to an ad for another book you might like (to buy), x-ray glasses, or sea-monkeys.
Re:Ok, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's way to much for something that has no physical presence, that you can't share, give away, or resell. It's a money grab. The publishing industry needs to learn from the music industry. You cannot charge an insane amount of money just for the content. At least with a printed book there is a recognizable investment in printing plant, paper, ink, and distribution. With an ebook there's just distribution. Amazon has a significant infrastructure for distribution already in place so adding ebook distribution is really only maximizing use of their existing assets.
Publisher formats the manuscript then sends it to Amazon for distribution. That's a one time expense for them.
Amazon's distribution costs...well how much does is cost to send 100k of data over a network? Storage costs? A 200GB hard drive will hold approximately 400K books given each book is 500k in size (which is insanely generous for essentially a text file with no compression.)
Let's see, refunds for unsold books? None. Expenses for additional print runs? None. Sales lost because a book is out of print? None.
$10 for the e-version when even the paperback isn't that expensive? Get real. Everyone loves to hate on Apple, but thanks to them I don't have to spend $20 to buy one track anymore. $1 gets me just the song I want, legally.
Kindle will do more to kill print media than help it. $5 for new releases I would consider. $2 once it's in paperback I would do. But only if you scrap the DRM, and don't charge me for web sites or loading my own content. If they did that then the only thing that would still keep me from buying it is the absolutely horrible industrial design. Hello platinum colored speak and spell...no thanks.
Re: (Score:2)
Try reading better books?
I rarely have the time to indulge the luxury of reading like I used to, but there isn't a book I've owned that I've not re-read at least once. If the Classics aren't your kind of thing, I'd suggest starting with something like a hard cover edition of Douglas Adams 5 book trilogy [amazon.com]. If you don't read that at least a few times, consider turning in your Slashdot card at the door.
I re-read things whenever I can. Being able to quote some poet
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Act V: The act of remembering (Score:2)
(for those of you who didn't RTFA, which is everybodyt but me and that other guy, the links are to Orwell's 1984 and Newsweek's "the future of" something or other.
Isn't this sort of like (Score:2, Insightful)
When a thing becomes outmoded, don't we always let it fall to the side? I mean I don't see many people beating their steering wheel with a buggy whip. electronic reading materials and electronic readers are beginning to be more popular. The MPAA and major networks want you to watch a movie version of the book rather than read it. It's going to be a hard sell to get people to keep turning pages on a paper book. Does anyone reading this post have a set of e
Re: (Score:2)
Mod parent offtopic.
Re:Isn't this sort of like (Score:5, Insightful)
You know, I see this sentiment on Slashdot quite a bit. Apparently a lot of people around here think the printed word is archaic and is in the middle of being phased out as obsolete.
I can assure you, that books in their physical, paper form are nowhere near being obsolete, outmoded, or about to be left to fall by the side. This isn't about abandoning an old file format of a word processor. To many people the actual physical book is still the preferred method of reading. Hell, send me a long enough document, and I'll print the damned thing and keep it on my desk.
I buy a tremendous amount of books, I don't want an electronic reader of any form, and I'm fairly sure that a larger proportion of the populace does their reading against the old-school dead-tree formats than any form of electronic format.
While your assertion that "electronic reading materials and electronic readers are beginning to be more popular", might be somewhat true, they're only more popular than they used to be. They're simply not more popular than paper.
I would say that people who argue that paper books will go away in the short term have their heads so far up the ass of technology as to not really have a clear view of the world any more. I would say it would be years, if not decades, before we actually see electronic formats really supplant paper. And, you can have my physical books when I'm dead and gone -- I don't personally foresee giving them up any time soon. Books have a warmth and tactile feedback that a cold, digital screen will never offer to me.
There will be people who want electronic books, and they're welcome to them. But, I and countless others want real actual honest to goodness books. Don't look to see them fall by the wayside for a long time.
Cheers
Re: (Score:2)
I don't need an electrical outlet or batteries to read the dead-tree edition of a book. I can just open the blinds or, heaven forbid, go out into the bright sunlight.
Remember the old question: what ten books would you take to a deserted island? You better make sure they are dead-tree editions. :)
Re:Isn't this sort of like (Score:4, Interesting)
I used to feel the same way about books, until I started one of the Baen.com [baen.com] ebooks online and found myself reading the whole thing in front of my computer. It turned out that this particular book had a sequel that was also part of the Baen's free library and so I downloaded that too. This time, however, I spent a little bit of time coercing the ebook into the plucker format so that I could read it on my palm.
Next thing I knew I had purchased the entire series, including the final version of the book as a $20 advanced reader copy so that I could get it before it came out in print. What's more, I realized that what I really liked was reading, not books. All of a sudden I saw used book stores for the creepy, smelly places that they really are instead of the magical place of wonder that I had built them up to be in my head.
I liked being able to fit an entire library in my pocket. I liked being able to read in the dark without waking my wife. I liked being able to search my book collection with grep. I liked the fact that I no longer got ink on my hands from a cheap paperback, or had to worry about breaking the spine of a book. Most of all I liked the fact that I no longer had to plan time to read. I always had my palm with me, and so whenever I got a bit of time, even just a few minutes, I could make progress on whatever it was that I was reading. You can't do that with a book, unless you happen to be a security guard.
What's more, even including the price of the pda ($70) I was actually saving money by reading ebooks. I did this by only purchasing unencrypted ebooks, which are generally priced at paperback prices (or less), and by utilizing resources like Project Gutenberg [gutenberg.org]
The real reason that ebooks have not taken off to this point has nothing to do with the format, and everything to do with the price of ebooks and ebook readers. The Kindle is a perfect example. Seriously, who wants to pay $400 for a dedicated ebook reader? I will grant Amazon.com that the price of the books for the device are mostly reasonable. They are still a little steep, considering the fact that they will be delivered digitally, but not as bad as most ebook vendors. However, $400 will buy a large pile of hardback books.
Eventually, the ebook folks are going to get things right, and that will be that for books. Oh, there will still be some folks that stick to their books in the same way that some music lovers still purchase vinyl, but the mainstream will move on.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
joking aside
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, and get off my lawn!!!
Support CC authors and related publishers. (Score:4, Informative)
I'm considering licensing the majority of the content on my educational resources site under a CC license. Seriously, support these kinds of effort at (1) making high-quality published works accessible to a broader audience, and (2) supporting authors who are willing to try new business models to earn a living.
Re: (Score:2)
License? I have to get a licence to read now? WTF??? Of course, I guess it's like a driver's license; my grandpa didn't need one, but when everyone got on the road it became dangerous. Now that the internet is here, reading is dangerous. To governments and the corporations that control them, at least.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't pick software besed on the license, at least software I only intend to use, not distribute. In fact, as a user, I have the same respect for software licenses as I do for marijuana laws [slashdot.org] or prostitution laws [slashdot.org] or laws against gambling.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm afraid I may not have been clear enough.
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000FI73MA/?tag=urlbind-20%E2%80%99ve%20tried%20to%20narrow%20down%20why%20I%20think%20it%20will%20fail%20to%20once%20sentence:%3C/p%3E%3Cp%3E...%3C/p%3E%3Cp%3ELast%20night%20I%20set%20an%20%3Ca%20href= [amazon.com]
But then, "Why Kindle Will Fail" is at:
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/technologyevangelist/bkxI/~3/187822521/why_the_kindle_will.html [feedburner.com]
Maybe it's being amazon-dotted, or slashdotted... I can't see the page... The
Re: (Score:2)
also fails to load... a few more of these and I'll start to wonder whether Amazon is nailing pages that might be negative about Kindle..
http://www.google.com/search?q=why+kindle+will+fail+mirror&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a [google.com]
So, I went to:
http://www.linuxchix.org/live?page=5 [linuxchix.org]
and nothing. Then, i just searched it, and STILL nothing...
is Amazon paying off or forcing people to end their anti-Kindle p
Re: (Score:2)
http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:XAingkqLSAYJ:bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/11/19/amazon-pitches-a-wireless-ipod-for-books/%3Fref%3Dbusiness+why+kindle+will+fail+mirror&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=18&gl=us&client=firefox-a [209.85.173.104]
But, we'll see for how long THAT site will host/display content...
What future of reading? (Score:2, Funny)
Fair compensation in a digital world (Score:4, Insightful)
The issue with all electronic media is the ease of duplication. That's what all the DRM stuff is trying to address, and making such a mess of everything in the process.
This is nothing new: there was never any physical impediment to sitting down with a paper book and a Xerox machine, or even writing it out by hand. But it was laborious and time-consuming, sufficiently so that few people bothered. It was easier and cheaper to just buy a copy of the book.
So how you you do it? If I'm going to sit down and write a book I expect to be compensated for my efforts. How can you ensure the author's rights to fair compensation in a world where files are so easy to duplicate? It's clear that there is a business model issue here, so how would you fix it?
...laura
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Fair compensation in a digital world (Score:5, Interesting)
1st Objection - How does an author get started? Who is going to pay a penny for an unknown author to write something?
1st Answer - New authors just have to suck it up, the way the majority already do today and give away some of their work in order to develop a reputation.
2nd Objection - How is an author going to make a bazillion gazillion dollars if their book is super-duper popular? The price is fixed before release, what if they under-price it?
2nd Answer - If the book is super-duper popular, by definition that means there will be lots and lots of people who liked it enough to pony up for the NEXT book. So the author can increase their asking price for their next work based on the popularity of their previous work.
3rd Objection - How can millions of people all pay a dollar each to an author's escrow account?
3rd Answer - They can't, at least not without a lot of overhead. Today. But that's just a business opportunity waiting for the right person to come along and start the next paypal.
4th Objection - What if nobody is willing to pay the author's asking price?
4th Answer - That's business. Either lower the price, or cancel the offer. At least this way very little time and money gets spent on creating a product that no one wants to buy. It ain't a perfect system but at least the feedback comes from the actual consumers rather than some intermediate businessman whose only purpose is to sell eyeballs for advertising dollars.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why would anyone bother paying for the content when they can just get it out of the public domain? I wouldn't.
You presume all content is equal. It's not.
Let's compare CNN's free content to the Economist with subscription costs of over $100/year with discounts being few and far between. If your premise were true, no one would purchase subscriptions to the Economist because CNN's content is free. Yet clearly that is not the case. The Economist's content is obviously worth it to the people who are paying for it, despite CNN's 'free' content.
Creative works are very similar. If what you said is true, then the majo
Re: (Score:2)
They have a downscaled version that is complete without all the frills that is totally free.
They have premier product that costs money, looks nice, but includes everything that the free version has.
Heck I can even use current libraries as an example. Frequently I've read a book at the library and then turned it around at Christmas time buying the same book for all my friends. The free no frills product above serves the same function...a filter to find the ge
Where's the video? (Score:2, Funny)
In other news... (Score:2)
You can't write this shit.
My hope... (Score:2)
Nerd = luddite. (Score:5, Interesting)
Part of the nerd world tends to be life on the "bleeding edge" of technology. While a nerd may not always own the latest and greatest, he or she will tend to at least follow the news and allow that to influence their purchases. They probably got involved in the internet, BBSing, mobile internet, and any number of other technologies before their non-nerd friends.
But today, we have DRM. I've bought DRM, and I've skipped purchases because of DRM. DRM really annoys me, because it interferes with my interest in the latest techology. While the Kindle might not have been a "must-buy" item for me at its current price, if it were to be subsidized below $100, it would have entered my consumer radar, had it not been afflicted with the restrictions Amazon has placed. While I currently subscribe to a music service, (Rhapsody, if it matters) I tend to buy music that I wish to keep on old-fashioned CD. I'll rent DVDs, but I'll seldom buy them because I don't want to violate the DMCA to get them on my PMP.
Blu-Ray? HD-DVD? I have no idea; who's farting on my pizza less?
When I go out to eat, I don't have someone screwing up my food on purpose, and when I'm getting a haircut, they don't reserve the right to shave areas I'm not supposed to be able to see - why is it then that all of these great technologies have to come with a little "oh by the way..." restriction?
Re: (Score:2)
Why would anyone be worried about violating the DMCA with something so minor? Hell, there are so many laws these days that you can violate dozens just by going about your daily business, being caught and proven in a court of law is an entirely other matter.
In all seriousness... (Score:3, Insightful)
He seems to draw the conclusion that this capability will lead to such a situation. I think it's got a long way to go before getting there. If the government begins censoring everything *other than* remotely editable E-Books, I'll begin to worry. Until then, there's plenty of media other than that where you can find out what's really happening.
Reading free books on these things? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The Kindle (Score:3, Informative)
So for me, the Kindle should be judged as an electronic reader. Like the Sony, it has a large format, high res, gray scale screen (no color). There's a pause displaying a new screen, but once there, power drain is minimal to keep it there. The batteries last a long time. Books can be text, PDF or web pages. It does WiFi and USB. It can play audio, but at the expense of consuming the batteries. You don't have to play audio. It can display images, but, they are gray scale.
On the down side, it doesn't scroll well (there's that pause). It's larger than a shirt pocket. I prefer the Palm form factor. Portability is important. The Kindle is something like $400, which i consider outrageous.
My old Handspring Visor Platinum has an LCD screen, works well in direct sunlight, ambient room light, and darkness (with backlight), runs more than 20 hours on 2 AAA batteries (10 with backlight), spares can be carried for more endurance, does USB, turns pages quickly, has two font sizes to optimize readability with it's small screen, fits in a shirt pocket, was $110 new (closeout), and can run other apps, like a calendar, memopad, planetarium, and games. There are DRM readers available. I happen to like weasel better. 8 MB RAM/file store allows apps and at least a couple Bible sized books on line. On the downside, it doesn't display images, and it is no longer available. For long battery life in black and white, LCDs rock.
I'm now using a Nokia 770. It fits in a shirt pocket, has stunning color but it is weakest in direct sunlight, does PDF, and web, the text reader: FBReader offers fonts, sizes, and colors, runs 5 hours on a charge, a spare battery can be purchased, was $150 new (closeout), can run other apps including a Palm emulator, does WiFi, Bluetooth and USB. It runs Linux. It comes with a 64 MB flash card, for huge libraries online. A 2 GB flash card allows audio and video, or this stuff can be streamed over WiFi.
I get the problems: (Score:4, Interesting)
This kind of juxtaposition is what I had in mind when I expanded a /. comment in this piece on the Kindle [wordpress.com].
I think the Kindle gets so much press because it's technologically so damn impressive but legally so damn irritating. Until there's a way of solving the hurdles to distributing books, I wouldn't even consider buying the Kindle.
Re: (Score:2)
Is this really news? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'll tell you what is happening here. It's the same thing that is happening on other fronts - precisely the same thing.
The constitution was written with the idea of the government serving and protecting the people, watching out for their welfare, arranging things so that this was first and foremost concern in those areas the government operated.
This emphasis on copyright benefiting the business interests any any expense to the citizen's interests is the exact same change in emphasis we have seen for the takings of land, the decreases in freedom of speech, the ridiculous idea that software can and/or should be patentable, the intent to force you to wait through commercials, the powers allowed to the insurance companies to pre-qualify applicants, the insane readings of the commerce clause that allow the government to attack the citizen for any act at all, the outright hijacking of the news outlets by commercially oriented entities — the problem is that it is like the tale of boiling a lobster. It's all annoying, but none of it is annoying enough, by itself, to really get the citizens up in arms.
America is degenerating quickly. If you think your vote counts, you'd better start using it differently at every level. Because the "same-old, same-old" is what got us here.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Is this really news? (Score:5, Insightful)
I certainly hope you mean by that that you should STOP voring for the Republicrats. Because face it, when that great American corporation Sony gives ten million to the Republican and ten million to the Democrat, no matter who loses, Sony wins.
Re:Is this really news? (Score:5, Insightful)
I meant what I said, which was fairly general.
For me, it means looking for a mix of libertarian and social service ideals. They're tough to find in one package. I think this is because the libertarians have a lot of trouble understanding certain things. Such as, that people need safety nets in extremis, good "roads" for goods, communications, data and themselves, sewage and other utility infrastructure, a uniform and detailed general education, medical care and a stable currency everyone uses, and that they inherently need all these things regardless of their economic condition on the one hand... While on the other, the republicrats can't seem to understand that the the right to tell someone else what to do outside of as it addresses directly interfering with one another or government's legitimate service to the people was never delegated to the government in any form, nor should it be.
But that's just me. Certainly elections resulting in this type of candidate being elected would represent a huge change; and it approximates what I'd like to see. Others have to answer the question of what they'd like to see and vote accordingly. What I'm suggesting is that if we really look at our current situation, what is going on is not what we'd really like to see.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
No it's not. That pretty sums up my own political leanings, which is why I usually split my vote between the Greens and the Libertarinas.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Mod parent up! My earliest memory from Grade 1 was being given my Dick & Jane type reader, which I (having an older sister and a librarian mother, I learned to read at 4) read through in about 2 minutes. (IIRC, the book contained less than 60 words.) When the teacher asked me about the boy on the first page, I eagerly ratted
that's pretty cynical (Score:3, Insightful)
how truthful that cynicism is or not, i can defeat your point of view with an even more cynical observation: if a third party appeared, killing off the republican or the democrats, that party would merely replicate the previous party's level of degeneration and corruption
so the issue is structural: a law must be passed that must seal off the involvement of money in politics. anyone who gets enough signatures gets a pool of money t
Re:Is this really news? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Fact of the matter is, all those things you mention are there for a reason.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No. I didn't say that, and I don't want that. Your assertion is groundless. Software patents are wrong, but copyrights are the correct tool for source code protection.
No, I'm fine with commercials. What I'm not fine with is forcing me to accrue time to them when they're irrelevant or not interesting. I won't tolerate that, and they can't
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm really sorry to poke the obvious hole in your populist bullshit, but I'm sure you'll ignore it anyway and move on.
Re:Is this really news? (Score:5, Interesting)
One sad element is that the technician class, of which almost everyone here at Slashdot is a member, has a tendency to the mistaken belief that they will be a part of the plutocracy, just because they can work on the plumbing of the information network that increasingly belongs to the real plutocrats. In reality, they are no better off than the car valet, who believes himself the equal of the jet setter, simply because he is allowed to drive the luxury car from the garage to the curb. The ugly secret is that their salaries, even $100k/yr, in support of their $150k per year lifestyles, is locking them further and further into digital serfdom.
How often I see these newly minted Web 2.0 masters, with their adjustable rate jumbo loans and 42" HDTVs and >$25k in credit card debt, who are convinced they are in charge of their lives and that they are somehow superior to the working-class when in fact the only thing that separates them from the young women sewing shoes in a Vietnamese factory is their enormous debt and high-calorie diets.
I think before the end of the next decade, long before the US sees its first black president, we will come to realize that we have more in common with the illegal-alien day laborers and the North African immigrants who are rioting in France than we do with the Mitt Romneys and George Bushes of the world.
Having become familiar with the plight of the upper-middle or middle-class American who has the ill fortune and bad manners to become sick and require health care and be unable to work, (a story eloquently, and only a tiny bit hyperbolically, told in Michael Moore's "Sicko"), and the middle-aged, advanced degree worker who found himself on the butt-end of the sick joke known as "outsourcing", or the two-income/two kids young professionals who have found that losing one's job to corporate "consolidation" doesn't come with one of those solid-golden parachute exit package, the last decade has served to radicalize me. I no longer see being an enthusiastic consumer as being the same as a loyal citizen, nor do I believe that "what's good for GM (or Microsoft, or AT&T, or Citicorp, or Haliburton) is good for America". I have peeked behind the curtain to find that the free-market orthodoxy that whispers in our ear that 9-figure "performance bonuses" and exploration subsidies to oil companies who have just enjoyed record profits, and a 13000 Dow, and "globalization" will all somehow "trickle down" to the rest of us, and the working-class families who will lose their homes to foreclosure while Countryside gets a nice fat bailout is all part of how a healthy economy works, is really little more than a dodge by those teflon "leaders" who seem to get rich no matter how their corporations perform or how badly the economy tanks.
It's all degenerating quickly. And like battered wives, we continue to pretend that another election is going to "turn things around", and we believe the politicians and their enabling media that it's somehow going to be different this time around. That's why I'm using the little bit of breathing room that my decades of hard work and frugal living have gotten me to do everything I can to subvert the meat-grinder of our corporate magesterium.
Re:Is this really news? (Score:4, Interesting)
Nicely said.
I personally think that one of the most life-changing decisions you can make (and I have made) is to live without debt. I saved until I could afford my home, then I bought it. I didn't buy something I had to borrow for. I own my vehicles, and I don't accrue credit card or other revolving debt. In this way, my earnings serve my family and I first, my charitable efforts second, and our tax burden third.
Plenty of decisions there that might not be palatable to some; for instance, my house used to be a church, and I had to build an interior for it by hand. I didn't know how - so I learned how and did it. And re-did it, in some cases. I found it quite difficult, but I still have all my limbs and digits, so technically speaking, it went ok. :-) The end result isn't a palace by most people's standards, but by mine, it's a castle. Lots of space, all of it doing just what I want it to, extremely low total cost of ownership, no debt. Plus it looks just a little like a castle, so there are a couple of fringe benefits.
If you don't pay interest, you've really put yourself in a different position as far as supporting the problems this nation has with predatory lenders and all the ancillary hangers-on such as credit agencies and middle-persons. I highly recommend trying this if you think you can pull it off. It takes some of what appears to be sacrifice, in that you don't get what you want when you want it; but then again, you don't get lenders of various stripes taking what can amount to many times the value of the the things you got to have when you wanted them, later on... sometimes interminably if you get too far into the debt loop.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
For most of recorded history, the vast majority of the worlds' population have been little more than serfs. A thousand years from now, this (approximately) 200 year old experiment with universal human rights and democratic ideals will be a paragraph or two in the history books. The extremely small minority to whom this history will be available will shake their heads in wry amusement as the vast numbers of serfs supporting their survival go unheeded.
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't suggest a revolution. I said that the level of annoyance wasn't sufficient to get the citizens up in arms, and I suggested people use the vote. Not exactly a "revolutionary" strategy. Perhaps you need to polish those reading skills a little.
Oh, I don't know. I think the British found their relationship with us slightly changed due to revolution. I think simply voti
Re:What the constitution actually says (Score:5, Informative)
There's no irony in it at all. You see that "limited time" clause? That's what is changing to the public's detriment. I would know - I own a literary agency.
What I said was "emphasis on copyright benefiting the business interests any any expense to the citizen's interests is the exact same change in emphasis" which is not the same thing as blaming copyright for problems. I don't think copyright, per se, is a bad thing at all. What I think is specifically a bad thing are the changes in copyright law that provide rights far beyond the period where most material will be germane to the culture that has evolved since the material was produced. If the material is no longer germane, it is, by definition, no longer promoting the "useful arts."
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Pity we don't have a Sup
Re: (Score:2)
They may not break it, but they sure are bending it.
Yes, it is. (Score:2)
If you can't see that the post is on-topic, then you should go read the FA. You might find some vague reference to the effects of copyright interpretation and enforcement on reading, which, you may recall, is something a person, a citizen, does. You also, if you work *really* hard, might recall that copyright is enforced top down by the feds. Using the constitution as the base authority. Go ahead. Read. Or work for comprehension. Or both. We'll wait. [ whistles ]
Re:Yes, it is. (Score:5, Insightful)
Tell me something, then. DRM (Digital RIGHTS management) is managing exactly what rights?
C'mon, Bob, ten seconds, The question is, what's your name? Eight seconds Bob, you can do it... you know this one, Bob... [ a nod to Cheech and Chong ]Oh. I see. You think slashdot moderation works, therefore you think that posts are designed for the approval of these moderators. Well, sadly, slashdot moderation does not work, and never will, until or unless it provides for (a1) recovery of posts lost to bad mods, or (a2) stops downgrading good posts (moderator accountability is key here), and (b) actually uplifts all the posts worth reading. In the meantime, all savvy slashdot readers read at -1 so they don't miss all the great posts that the manifestly broken slashdot moderation lets fall by the wayside. So, no, not posted for any reason to do with "karma." Bzzzt.
And try not to be so homophobic, eh? I know it's tough, but you can probably manage it if you try. Because being homophobic is boilerplate for declaring one's self an unvarnished idiot.
Re: (Score:2)
It was an enligtening (if short and non-exciting) read.
Re: (Score:2)
This article really has little/nothing to do with reading, and more to do with platforms like Kindle.
Honestly, some of the points don't even work - the second to last would only work if the government forced everyone to use something like Kindle, and only that one product for reading. Reading by dead-tree will dissapear with things like Kindle much like moving by foot dissapeared with the horse (and later, car), and dead tree reading dissapeared with the computer.
Effectively, it wont.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
http://ptech.allthingsd.com/20071129/amazons-kindle-makes-buying-e-books-easy-reading-them-hard/ [allthingsd.com]
Re: (Score:2)
There are plenty of people who would rather read paper than a screen because it is gentler on the eyes.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Heh (Score:4, Insightful)
Among people who were willing to spend $400 for a device that offers few objective benefits over a free public library membership, maybe.
The rest of us are quite happy reading the ink-and-paper volumes that have been the standard for millenia.
Re: (Score:2)
But, I carry my shoulder bag on my right shoulder, and even when using just one strap of my backpack I do so. So, with a load on my right shoulder, I find it hard to read books and mags of any size from left to right. Must b
Re:E-Book trading (Score:5, Insightful)
Not a license (Score:5, Insightful)
That is *not* what you buy.
You purchase a copy. That copy is yours. You don't "use up" a license. You use a copy.
The whole idea of copyright is simple: allow the creator of a work to provide limited licenses on *copying.* The only rights the author has is the right to control copying of the creation. That's why it's called a "copy right."
This whole idea of licensing copyrighted works is from the software industry. It involves the *license* to create copies of the work. Of course, in most cases, the work is useless without copying onto a hard drive, so it kinda makes sense, in a strange way.
However, when you purchase a book, you are not making a copy. You are purchasing a copy, and that copy belongs to *you*. You may sell it, lend it, and even copy small sections for purposes of academia or research or review (SEE fair use). You can do anything you want, as long as you don't make a copy, because only the author has the right to authorize ("license") copies.
Please resist the urge to voluntarily give up your rights. Don't let them convince you that sharing is bad. It isn't. That book is yours. That console game is yours. You can sell them, lend them, or do anything else you can do with a physical object. Those are your *rights.*
At least, those are your rights in the United States, and in many other nations. Check with your local government to be sure.