So you'd need a team of what, a dozen, alright one hundred, people to do the classification? Wouldn't that mean that all libraries in the US would no longer have a reason to exist? Data would be classified, and you could download 300kb self published books from anywhere.
So with the publisher getting cut out, and people self publishing, why are people still concerned with that publishers are trying to do where you're bypassing them altogether. Does it matter, when you go straight to the shop?
So what's the problem then? This is the panacea that everyone's been waiting for: the ease of self publishing, zero barriers to entry. Creating an eBook is dead simple. There are even open source programs to do it.
A publisher trying to reevaluate their business dealings with a library vis a vis the new format of their product has nothing to do with self publishing.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but libraries still purchase books. Possibly at a discount, but they still purchase them. This is the point of contention here. Everlasting electronic versions of books where they'd be replaced every so often in the pbook form.
- "Don't cut my program" - "But we are in the red, we have to cut something" - "Well, find money somewhere else" - "Alright, where?" - "I don't know, but not by cutting programs I'm interested in"
You also shouldn't count costs for a specific book as separate from a company's overall business. A publisher releases many books. Most of them aren't hits and they lose money. Some are hits, and they help to absorb those losses, thereby allowing a publishers to try more writers in search of a hit, thereby supporting the industry. So who are you to tell them what profit on a certain book they should be making?
I don't know that they want to kill libraries, as I'm sure libraries are big purchasers of books. They might simply be trying to find a balance where all parties can be rewarded for their efforts.
The one difference in DRM here is that most people have their purchases tied to one device and they're fine with it. They get an eReader to read books on the go, not on their computer. And as far as their mobile options, there are only a few, and for the most part, they are very similar, so users are fine with that.
This compares to music, where people don't want to be tied to only 3 devices that can play a track, or to have to be online and to authenticate play something, or not being able to copy a track onto a USB stick and play it on their car stereo. There are many more playback devices that remind people how limiting DRM in music is.
I don't think I'd have a problem with that, as long as they analyze the average time for a paperback and a hardcover to require replacement, and that analysis is done independently, and not by a publisher. They do have a point that electronic versions can be around for ever, decreasing their livelihood.
Well, I still don't get the 'whoosh,' and I did see the ginger part before I posted. The GP is drawing some sort of a slippery slope argument, using race as one of the criteria, where, to me, this is strictly a business move, nothing about denying people access. Would Jell-O really care that a kid tries their pudding? Probably not, with a few instances. But they don't want a large number of kids eating it simply because the vending machine says 'pudding,' so they put in a weak control to weed out 95% of undesired customers.
I think that banks pay into various insurance funds, so if the above banks did this just like American banks, then it would make little difference if they're "foreign". After all, any of these create lots of jobs in the US.
A possible outrage would be a bank that got taxpayer money to survive, refusing to refinance or restructure said taxpayers' mortgages. That would be the least they could do, considering that by refusing, all they're doing is adding to foreclosed property inventory and keeping housing and the economy down, prolonging everyone's suffering.
Where do you get "white people" from? Jeez. Maybe the taste of the pudding is not liked by kids (like coffee or beer) and they don't want to forever alienate their potential customers at an early age. Inculcating future customers at a very early age is a well known way that companies build brand loyalty. Do you want to do that by teaching kids right off the bat to dislike Jell-O products?
The fact that this had to be negotiated with the union, and the distinction is being made that this does not necessarily apply to all situation, indicates that the same employer practices are happening on either side of the Atlantic.
But even by the actor's description, it wasn't finished. So if anything, it was just a behind the scenes of how a current movie is made, for those curious enough. Why all the hoopla?
But not even Slashdot refers to him by the new name, but by the old name. So there isn't a "Facebook sues Zuckerberg" headline here, and likely other outlets will do the same.
Maybe, I personally haven't looked into it too much. The usability of Opera wins me over. I just visit known sites, and close any obnoxious sites. They don't deserve any traffic. For anything questionable, I suffer with Firefox.
Firefox and Thunderbird both autoupdate default, unless you configure them not to ahead of time. You don't get asked. The next time you start either up, you get a nice "please wait" screen and you're upgraded.
Their live shows may be more infamous than their music, but that isn't to say GWAR didn't have a few good songs. Don't be shy now, it won't bite. You can have a listen and decide for yourself.
I didn't watch it, no, but I doubt anyone at Amazon thinks this is a direct competitor to the iPad. There is a lot of crossover in customer base for both devices, as there is a lot of crossover from the eInk customer base as well. Maybe that's what they meant. They probably *would* take some potential iPad users that realized that they might not need a full blown 10" tablet, but something cheap for quick browsing while on the couch.
The eInk readers would be motorcycles in the analogy:P
I'm not sure Amazon ever claimed the Fire to be an iPad killer. It was likely only the media. And many supposedly sophisticated tech users took the bait for this imaginary conflict.
I'm a realist. I just don't think eInk lends itself to textbooks. With PDF on an LCD, you can scan across multiple pages quickly, which is a frequent occurrence, as you jump between text and a relevant diagram or illustration 3 pages prior. Things are much slower on eInk. The devices are somewhat underpowered, too, when going between menus can have a delay (separate from the display).
Plus, 8"+ size eInk displays aren't really being made in large quantity, showing that there isn't really a demand (Amazon didn't make a DX Touch, for example). So you have the chicken and egg problem, where eInk devices aren't really in high demand, so then why would publishers designate resources to format ePubs for it where most people use Laptops or tablets and existing PDFs work well enough.
Plus, ePub and eInk have been around for a while, and nothing has happened in terms of using it for school. If anything, tests done by Amazon showed that people disliked using eInk for school. And now, the proliferation of LCD tablets (and their ever lowering cost) might be the final nail in that coffin.
Fair enough. I've been out of school for a while, and only point of reference are ebook novels and such, which don't engender much love for pricing of electronic versions.
Bullshit. When the Kindle had a crap dark gray screen, the 505 was head and shoulders above it in contrast. And it wasn't a placticky toy with a keyboard. Sony also was the first to put touch on their readers, and later improved it with infrared sensors on the side, something that Amazon and B&N are using today. Sony had it probably a year in advance.
I love my Sony eReader, but I honestly can't see it being used for text books.
The Kindle DX is currently the only full page reader (there are others that are 8"), but it itself isn't too cheap. Flipping between pages is just too arduous and slow, and the lack of color lends itself against textbooks, which often are full of images, and graphics, and tables that use colors to differentiate data.
But shouldn't news reporters have a broader understanding and not use one manufacturer's product to describe a whole market? I was watching some video of "disabled people voting with the iPad" where someone was holding an iPad up for a person and they pressed buttons. Could have been done with any tablet or touch screen from 10 years ago. Someone is shilling for Apple in many, many articles.
Slashdot Mirror
So you'd need a team of what, a dozen, alright one hundred, people to do the classification? Wouldn't that mean that all libraries in the US would no longer have a reason to exist? Data would be classified, and you could download 300kb self published books from anywhere.
So with the publisher getting cut out, and people self publishing, why are people still concerned with that publishers are trying to do where you're bypassing them altogether. Does it matter, when you go straight to the shop?
So what's the problem then? This is the panacea that everyone's been waiting for: the ease of self publishing, zero barriers to entry. Creating an eBook is dead simple. There are even open source programs to do it.
A publisher trying to reevaluate their business dealings with a library vis a vis the new format of their product has nothing to do with self publishing.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but libraries still purchase books. Possibly at a discount, but they still purchase them. This is the point of contention here. Everlasting electronic versions of books where they'd be replaced every so often in the pbook form.
> so find a different model for paying writers
This sounds like a debate about budget cuts.
- "Don't cut my program"
- "But we are in the red, we have to cut something"
- "Well, find money somewhere else"
- "Alright, where?"
- "I don't know, but not by cutting programs I'm interested in"
You also shouldn't count costs for a specific book as separate from a company's overall business. A publisher releases many books. Most of them aren't hits and they lose money. Some are hits, and they help to absorb those losses, thereby allowing a publishers to try more writers in search of a hit, thereby supporting the industry. So who are you to tell them what profit on a certain book they should be making?
I don't know that they want to kill libraries, as I'm sure libraries are big purchasers of books. They might simply be trying to find a balance where all parties can be rewarded for their efforts.
The one difference in DRM here is that most people have their purchases tied to one device and they're fine with it. They get an eReader to read books on the go, not on their computer. And as far as their mobile options, there are only a few, and for the most part, they are very similar, so users are fine with that.
This compares to music, where people don't want to be tied to only 3 devices that can play a track, or to have to be online and to authenticate play something, or not being able to copy a track onto a USB stick and play it on their car stereo. There are many more playback devices that remind people how limiting DRM in music is.
I don't think I'd have a problem with that, as long as they analyze the average time for a paperback and a hardcover to require replacement, and that analysis is done independently, and not by a publisher. They do have a point that electronic versions can be around for ever, decreasing their livelihood.
Well, I still don't get the 'whoosh,' and I did see the ginger part before I posted. The GP is drawing some sort of a slippery slope argument, using race as one of the criteria, where, to me, this is strictly a business move, nothing about denying people access. Would Jell-O really care that a kid tries their pudding? Probably not, with a few instances. But they don't want a large number of kids eating it simply because the vending machine says 'pudding,' so they put in a weak control to weed out 95% of undesired customers.
I think that banks pay into various insurance funds, so if the above banks did this just like American banks, then it would make little difference if they're "foreign". After all, any of these create lots of jobs in the US.
A possible outrage would be a bank that got taxpayer money to survive, refusing to refinance or restructure said taxpayers' mortgages. That would be the least they could do, considering that by refusing, all they're doing is adding to foreclosed property inventory and keeping housing and the economy down, prolonging everyone's suffering.
Where do you get "white people" from? Jeez. Maybe the taste of the pudding is not liked by kids (like coffee or beer) and they don't want to forever alienate their potential customers at an early age. Inculcating future customers at a very early age is a well known way that companies build brand loyalty. Do you want to do that by teaching kids right off the bat to dislike Jell-O products?
The fact that this had to be negotiated with the union, and the distinction is being made that this does not necessarily apply to all situation, indicates that the same employer practices are happening on either side of the Atlantic.
But even by the actor's description, it wasn't finished. So if anything, it was just a behind the scenes of how a current movie is made, for those curious enough. Why all the hoopla?
But not even Slashdot refers to him by the new name, but by the old name. So there isn't a "Facebook sues Zuckerberg" headline here, and likely other outlets will do the same.
Maybe, I personally haven't looked into it too much. The usability of Opera wins me over. I just visit known sites, and close any obnoxious sites. They don't deserve any traffic. For anything questionable, I suffer with Firefox.
Firefox and Thunderbird both autoupdate default, unless you configure them not to ahead of time. You don't get asked. The next time you start either up, you get a nice "please wait" screen and you're upgraded.
Their live shows may be more infamous than their music, but that isn't to say GWAR didn't have a few good songs. Don't be shy now, it won't bite. You can have a listen and decide for yourself.
I didn't watch it, no, but I doubt anyone at Amazon thinks this is a direct competitor to the iPad. There is a lot of crossover in customer base for both devices, as there is a lot of crossover from the eInk customer base as well. Maybe that's what they meant. They probably *would* take some potential iPad users that realized that they might not need a full blown 10" tablet, but something cheap for quick browsing while on the couch.
The eInk readers would be motorcycles in the analogy :P
I'm not sure Amazon ever claimed the Fire to be an iPad killer. It was likely only the media. And many supposedly sophisticated tech users took the bait for this imaginary conflict.
I'm a realist. I just don't think eInk lends itself to textbooks. With PDF on an LCD, you can scan across multiple pages quickly, which is a frequent occurrence, as you jump between text and a relevant diagram or illustration 3 pages prior. Things are much slower on eInk. The devices are somewhat underpowered, too, when going between menus can have a delay (separate from the display).
Plus, 8"+ size eInk displays aren't really being made in large quantity, showing that there isn't really a demand (Amazon didn't make a DX Touch, for example). So you have the chicken and egg problem, where eInk devices aren't really in high demand, so then why would publishers designate resources to format ePubs for it where most people use Laptops or tablets and existing PDFs work well enough.
Plus, ePub and eInk have been around for a while, and nothing has happened in terms of using it for school. If anything, tests done by Amazon showed that people disliked using eInk for school. And now, the proliferation of LCD tablets (and their ever lowering cost) might be the final nail in that coffin.
Fair enough. I've been out of school for a while, and only point of reference are ebook novels and such, which don't engender much love for pricing of electronic versions.
Bullshit. When the Kindle had a crap dark gray screen, the 505 was head and shoulders above it in contrast. And it wasn't a placticky toy with a keyboard. Sony also was the first to put touch on their readers, and later improved it with infrared sensors on the side, something that Amazon and B&N are using today. Sony had it probably a year in advance.
I love my Sony eReader, but I honestly can't see it being used for text books.
The Kindle DX is currently the only full page reader (there are others that are 8"), but it itself isn't too cheap. Flipping between pages is just too arduous and slow, and the lack of color lends itself against textbooks, which often are full of images, and graphics, and tables that use colors to differentiate data.
But shouldn't news reporters have a broader understanding and not use one manufacturer's product to describe a whole market? I was watching some video of "disabled people voting with the iPad" where someone was holding an iPad up for a person and they pressed buttons. Could have been done with any tablet or touch screen from 10 years ago. Someone is shilling for Apple in many, many articles.