Slashdot Mirror


'Americans Own Less Stuff, and That's Reason To Be Nervous' (bloomberg.com)

Bloomberg's Tyler Cowen writes about "the erosion of personal ownership and what that will mean for our loyalties to traditional American concepts of capitalism and private property." An anonymous Slashdot reader shares the report: The main culprits for the change are software and the internet. For instance, Amazon's Kindle and other methods of online reading have revolutionized how Americans consume text. Fifteen years ago, people typically owned the books and magazines they were reading. Much less so now. If you look at the fine print, it turns out that you do not own the books on your Kindle. Amazon.com Inc. does. I do not consider this much of a practical problem. Although Amazon could obliterate the books on my Kindle, this has happened only in a very small number of cases, typically involving account abuse. Still, this licensing of e-books, instead of stacking books on a shelf, has altered our psychological sense of how we connect to what we read -- it is no longer truly "ours."

The change in our relationship with physical objects does not stop there. We used to buy DVDs or video cassettes; now viewers stream movies or TV shows with Netflix. Even the company's disc-mailing service is falling out of favor. Music lovers used to buy compact discs; now Spotify and YouTube are more commonly used to hear our favorite tunes. Each of these changes is beneficial, yet I worry that Americans are, slowly but surely, losing their connection to the idea of private ownership. The nation was based on the notion that property ownership gives individuals a stake in the system. It set Americans apart from feudal peasants, taught us how property rights and incentives operate, and was a kind of training for future entrepreneurship. We're hardly at a point where American property has been abolished, but I am still nervous that we are finding ownership to be so inconvenient.

17 of 554 comments (clear)

  1. Millennial murder spree! by Pseudonym · · Score: 5, Funny

    What have Millennials killed this time?

    --
    sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    1. Re: Millennial murder spree! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Their parants overconsumed is all.

      100 years you didnt have all of these entertainment options to waste your money on and probably felt it was more important to save for a rainy day

    2. Re: Millennial murder spree! by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Reading books is much more important than owning them. EBooks eliminates waste.

      Owning DVDs doesn't strike me as an important thing in life.

      Still, despite these two things, I own a crapload of stuff.

    3. Re: Millennial murder spree! by cas2000 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When Social Security "runs out of money," retirees will be paid from the General Fund. If that doesn't happen, there is no place on Earth that the Senators and Representatives can hide to escape the wrath of the retirees.

      no place on earth? of course there is. it's called "outside the concentration camp walls" - because a concentration camp is where the outraged pensioners will end up if they don't shut the fuck up to avoid getting labelled "terrorist".

      what, you thought all those fascist "anti-terror" laws were about suicide bombers and angry white men with guns? get real! it's preparation for when the general public finally realise how badly we're all being fucked over by the corporate kleptocrats and their servant politicians.

    4. Re: Millennial murder spree! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The SSI trust is backed by the full faith and power of the US Federal government, if it goes bust, then we're going to have much bigger problems than the loss of our entire retirement savings. We likely won't have a functioning military or law enforcement either.

      And yes, I mean entire retirement savings as those stocks and bonds, assuming that one is lucky enough to have any, will also lost nearly their entire value.

      The real issue is that the government, especially under GOP administrations, likes to borrow from the trust with no particular intention of paying the money back and when those tax bills come due, it's going to result in significant inflation as you know damn well that neither party is committed to doing the things that are necessary to make it work, namely increasing the ceiling on social security tax collection and taxing the wealthiest individuals and corporations, the ones that got rich in part by stiffing employees on pay and retirement benefits.

    5. Re: Millennial murder spree! by MartinG · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Retaining access to books in a form that :

      1) Can't later be withdrawn by the owner.
      2) Guarantees the contents can't later be revised after publication.
      3) It's possible to give to or share with others in future.
      4) Reading can't be monitored or controlled by others.

      These things are not often important, but sometimes they can be _very_ important.

      --
      -- MartinG To mail me: echo kewyjlcxyzvjfxbqwh | tr bcefhjklqvwxyz .@adgimnoprstu
  2. Hardly by nospam007 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    " I worry that Americans are, slowly but surely, losing their connection to the idea of private ownership. The nation was based on the notion that property ownership gives individuals a stake in the system. "

    Hardly. It made us into a bunch of hoarders.

    I know I don't own my kindle books, I'm using Kindleunlimited for a couple of bucks a month and I read a book almost every day. (I'm retired) Much cheaper than buying them.
    After my first kindle (I'm on my 6th) I donated almost 5000 books to a local library and now I got a full new room I can use.
    I also got rid of my music tapes, my music cassettes, my music vinyl, my music CDs, my super8 films, my betamax, Video2000 and VHS tapes, my Laser-disks, DVDs and blurays,Ditto for my photo albums.

    A small server does all that now.

    Good riddance.

    1. Re:Hardly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It made us into a bunch of hoarders.

      Same here. When they stopped selling things I could legally play, I simply stopped buying. That doesn't mean I switched to rentals, though. And I don't abstain, either.

      Netflix didn't kill owned media. DRM killed owned media. It changed the most reasonable consumer approach from buying to pirating.

      You should pirate too. You. The person reading this. Stop paying money until they are willing to sell you something that you are allowed to play.

      Your life will be easier, have almost no ads at all, you'll have massively more selection, and shit is just overall all-around nicer. You also might save a little money too, if that matters.

    2. Re:Hardly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You make good points. But the OP left out on important thing - take for example pieces of history than can (and have) been altered over time such that changes are made en-mass to all know copies at the touch of a button. Recently "little house" has original has fallen out of favor because of certain language. All CURRENT copies have been edited. The only way to read the original is if you find it in a REAL book.

      To your point, I do find it more convenient, but future generations may pay dearly for that convenience when history as _THIS_GENERATION_ knows is ceases to exist and is replaced by whatever the content holders wish.

      Need another example - Original version of Star Wars where Han shoots first. Can you stream that anywhere (legally)? didn't think so - the story has been altered, and future generations are none the wiser.

    3. Re:Hardly by Jetstream · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I may be wrong (or old-fashioned), but isn't it the possession of those actual CDs & cassettes that give you the license to listen to the content on them? Once you pass those on to someone else, aren't you technically also giving away the license to listen to the content? (Not that anyone's going to be knocking on your door to check that all the content on your server is properly licensed. ......... probably.....)

    4. Re:Hardly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Also be aware of the attempts to turn computers into locked-down content rental/consumption devices. Support open hardware and software platforms where available, if you want to continue to own your own computing devices and software. The idea of ownership doesn't have to give way to rental, but too many people are ignorant and willingly chaining themselves within the walled gardens of large corporations. These entities desire to rent all works in perpetuity, and will continue to strip your rights until none remain. If you haven't already, please spend a few minutes to absorb The Right to Read.

      We have choices. Support creators that use a donation model, or at least sell their works in DRM-free formats. Paying for works that strip or violate your rights should be avoided if possible. Violating copyright is the moral option in these cases, or avoiding such works entirely. Publisher's including Disney have effectively stolen the public domain, and people should resist, or it will only get much worse. Copyright should be reformed or preferably abolished, as "intellectual property" is a highly regressive concept. See Everything Is a Remix and Against Intellectual Monopoly.

    5. Re:Hardly by Stormwatch · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It didn't take an EMP to destroy the Library of Alexandria.

    6. Re:Hardly by Powercntrl · · Score: 5, Interesting

      For the few pieces of media I want to own, I get a digital version, and I'm done. No extra piece of plastic in my house, nothing had to be manufactured or transported, and I still get to enjoy it.

      You get to enjoy it until something happens to the DRM server, then like that South Park meme, ...and it's gone!

      I have a bunch of paid iOS games that died during the 32-bit purge. It's a bit ironic that I can fire up Windows XP under VMware and play Worms Armageddon (which I bought almost two decades ago), but my copy of UNO (yup, the card game) for iOS has gone to Apple's digital graveyard.

      Don't even get me started on Netflix removing content. It was what finally motivated me to set up my own server at home, and bought Fire Sticks to run Kodi, for each TV. Content providers can shove their "kill switch" up their ass.

      --

      ---
      DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
  3. I’ve never owned most books I read by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 5, Informative

    There’s this place called a “library” which let’s you take out books for weeks at a time. Apparently the author never heard of it.

    I do have a Kindle. But I don’t often buy books, since that “library” place actually lets me check out Kindle books same as printed ones. Plus there are programs like “Kindle Unlimited” which will let you borrow lots of stuff too.

    There are very few books I want to read more than once... but those I do buy - and, when I buy a Kindle book, the first thing I do is strip the DRM off of it and save a backup copy.

    Same thing with movies... there aren’t that many I want to ever see more than once. Those few that I do, I purchase (and rip a DRM-free copy so I can stream them from my media box).

    Besides, the DVD/videocassette argument doesn’t really support the author’s premise. For most of the time movies have been around, people did not own them... that’s only the past few decades.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  4. Re:Having less junk around sounds good to me by SeaFox · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A lot of the new Millennial hipster types don't even own their house or car.

    I feel like that has more to do with the ballooning price of new cars and homes verses the stagnant growth in wages the last few decades than anything.

  5. Re:Most people don’t even own their own home by jensend · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As the other commenter said, your definitions have nothing to do with any standard use of these terms and everything to do with your personal screed.

    What they're calling "crony capitalism" is not just capitalism; indeed it may be said not to be capitalist at all. The entire point of Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations, which launched capitalism as an economic policy, was to oppose mercantilism - the system where the government granted special rights and benefits to particular companies to attempt to increase the government's power - by pointing out that such favors were not only unethical but also tended to impoverish the nation. From every problem with IP law (Eldred v Ashcroft, the patent mess, etc) to the closed-door 'tax incentive' discussions between cities and large corporations, there are a thousand ways in which people who sit on corporate boards or Chambers of Commerce or legislative bodies purport to support capitalism but actually work against a legally level playing field.

    Rent is not a market distortion. Your ideal of socialism and your notions of class are a century out of date as well as far removed from reality.

    The closest thing to what you're calling "market socialism" is called distributivism. Many bright people have thought about the problems of centralization but no one has found a practicable or just way to put real correctives into practice.

  6. That's funny... by Hallux-F-Sinister · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Reading books is much more important than owning them. EBooks eliminates waste.

    Owning DVDs doesn't strike me as an important thing in life.

    Still, despite these two things, I own a crapload of stuff.

    Did you know that there has been a trend to reduce or even eliminate the savings that you, as a consumer, could realize by buying the electronic book as opposed to the physical one, despite how much more waste making and selling physical books creates?

    When I asked a customer service rep at a company that shall remain namelesz, why in some cases the phsycial book is CHEAPER, NEW than the ebook when this retailer sells both, the response I got was that people are still buying physical books. (Inasmuch as that's not really an explanation why something that by rights SHOULD be cheaper ISN'T,) I replied with something like, "but... don't you have to pay the same royalties on both, based on intellectual property, but NOT have to pay to print the book itself, nor pay for the physical storage space of each in warehouses, on trucks, and ultimately on bookshelves in actual, brick-and-mortar stores whenever you start opening those for books, for the electronic books you DO sell? Why not make it easer to buy THOSE?"

    The response I got basically was that they make more money pricing them this way, so this is the way they price them. (Sigh.)

    --
    Our reign has gone on long enough. Indeed. Summon the meteors.