Neither of those links actually prove your hypothesis or provide any data. They're news articles and are only reporting that two authors\publishers are trying something new to promote and sell their work.
I suspect you have motivation to not want to see any real world figures? I gave you good references that do lead to real world sales figures in a number of locations. Here is one below, posted by the Author, who should know. Also see research article in my post above, there is more solid evidence out there - despite being shouted down by the majority of corporate media - hell bent against the idea.
NEW YORK (Fortune) â" In 1999, best-selling author Paulo Coelho, who wrote "The Alchemist," was failing in Russia. That year he sold only about 1,000 books, and his Russian publisher dropped him. But after he found another, Coelho took a radical step. On his own Web site, launched in 1996, he posted a digital Russian copy of "The Alchemist". With no additional promotion, print sales picked up immediately. Within a year he sold 10,000 copies; the next year around 100,000. By 2002 he was selling a total of a million copies of multiple titles. Today, Coelho's sales in Russian are over 10 million and growing....
By last year Coelho's total print sales worldwide surpassed 100 million books. "Once we did the Pirate Coelho there was a significant boost," he says.
For all this, he kept quiet with his many publishers in countries around the world. "Sharing" is typically not the word they use to describe such activities. Coelho says the publishers have periodically taken action to remove books from the Pirate Coelho. "They think it is against me. They don't know it is in my favor. They will know it after your article," he says.
"Publishing is in a kind of Jurassic age," Coelho continues. "Publishers see free downloads as threatening the sales of the book. But this should make them rethink their entire business model." http://paulocoelhoblog.com/2008/02/03/pirate-coelho/
Your best defense at this point is to claim books are completely different to games. Any data to prove the hypothesis? You would have to have some pretty convincing data, cause at least some professional game developers disagree, with real world data to back their point up (you have been given a reference follow the lead - there are sales figures posted).
Your turn: Where is the data to even slightly support the idea that one pirated good == one lost sale?**
** Quoting *IAA propaganda talking points does not count.
> Now Bruce is not making the later editions for free anymore. > Why? I can only surmise that it did not work out. I once asked him and he said, "oh yeah that it was an interesting experiment."
There is another, IMO more valid explanation: Mr Eckel built up considerable fame for his books, despite being just one more reference in a forest of better presented and marketed than his own, because they were freely "pirateble". Now once Mr Eckel had established his niche in the market and built the following to "sustainable numbers" - he could take his next versions all closed pay per read/traditional model and reap financial benefits - at least over the short term until the momentum of their original free-status popularity declines. Good on him, a viable strategy that may work in some cases, but it is defiantly in no way an indication against the benefits open-free model - which launched his books into the limelight in the first place.
This is not a new concept. One Reference of a few out there:
Competition Over Piratable Goods July 2004 Abstract: The effects of (private, small-scale) copying on the pricing behavior of producers of information goods are studied within a unified model of vertical diÂerentiation. Although information goods are assumed to be perfectly horizontally differentiated, demands are interdependent because the copying technology exhibits increasing returns to scale. We characterize the symmetric Nash equilibria of the pricing game played by n producers of information goods. We show thereby how the producersÂ' attitudes towards piracy are interdependent and evolve with the relative attractiveness of copies.
Keywords: Information goods, piracy, copyright, pricing
JEL Classifications: L13, L82, L86, K11, O34 Working Paper Series
Its because of the Marketing blitz. Everywhere I look its Spore this, Spore that. You'd have mushrooms in your ears to miss hearing about it. OF COURSE people are going to think: "Whats all the hype about - not like MARKETING has LIED to me before so I'll take a free no-obligation look-see for myself." Some %, possibly significant, of those downloaders are going to perhaps like it and/or will want to play online, so they will sign up for valid copies. These people are new clients - they would not of bought the game otherwise. Now the hardliners-stuck in the 80's software model will cry "these numbers will destroy the game industry". Bollocks. They are getting 1.X million potential clients who would never have bother buying the game to see if it was worth the hype in the first place.
News flash: Bittorent downloads will reflect real world marketing promotion.
"They" said the same thing about once popular File Service Protocol (http://fsp.sourceforge.net/) way back when the net was young, pre-Napster, and before any massive internet infrastructure investment was made...
My Bank (HSBC) gives me a little keychain keygenerator that spits out a 6 digit number when I press the button. All logins must also have the key number... I wonder if this simple measure would stop dead any keylogger attacks like this, OR with enough reasonable time monitoring they could reverse engineer the generator's seeds?
Having a big stick is very profitable. Smaller sticks actually help keep the big stick propped up on its shaky ground, for longer than it would be on its own. I agree with you but unfortunately there is no short term buck to be made in education and basic services for US's biggest export industry, the industrial military complex. On top of that, if you educate then the population will probably be smart enough to say No and negotiate a better contract when you try to take all their oil and other natural resources...
P.S. Qantas never claimed it was passenger electronics. The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) http://www.atsb.gov.au/newsroom/2008/release/2008_43.aspx said that laptops could have interfered with the plane's on-board computer system... but the bureau also said in the same breath that it's too early to make that judgment. From that bland boring statement you arrive at Slashdots and dozens of other sensationlist news headlines: "Qantas Blames Wireless For Aircraft Incidents" http://mobile.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/10/09/1427232&tid=270 WTF? Even five at the source http://www.atsb.gov.au/newsroom/media.aspx would have determined that. I come here for NEWS not fucking Fox-News...
Does Qantas' aircraft maintenance suck or does Airbus' quality control suck? Do both suck?
Australia is big, really big. I leave Sydney heading north, watch one full length movie, have a snooze, watch another full length movie then flick over to the map and get depressed... I have watched the only two decent films on offer, am already sick of the flight to Europe but I still have not even left Aussie borders. So with that in mind, my money is on Airbus's unit testing that sucks. Qantas is more than likely just the beta tester who runs the most miles.
You are entirely right. A hybrid car makes absolutely NO sense whatsoever. Todays hybrids basically use a big gas motor and an electric motor to help go easier on the gas. The problem with this method is that its carrying TWO BIG ENGINES so more weight means you have to be that much more efficient.
To the contrary, Toyota Prius MPG-Real World Numbers make a whole lot of economic sense. Throw in the much reduced need to bring it in for servicing and you have a good real-world counter example to the "two big moters==worse than one" logic you are using. Look them up for yourself: http://www.google.com/search?q=toyota+prius+mpg
Keep in mind, that hydrids still have a combustion engine, that's why they call it a hybrid and not an electric car. Adding extra parts (generator, batteries, electric motor) only makes the car more complex, harder to service and more expensive.
This assumes your not running on electric for most of the day and are actually using the combustion. There are a few sources around that claim to demonstrate that most drivers are not traveling far from home - i.e. electric will do the job even if the car is hybrid. Which leads to the original point I was make in my post above: "as the masses step from hybrids to full electric". Its a short leap from a hybrid to full electric, especially when the consumer see's that they are not using the combustion for around-town, so why pay more to lug such a heavy inefficient piece of metal on those around-town trips? Just make the second household car a full electric == lost part sales, so big Auto does not want Hybrid stepping stones.
From a previous article: "Plug-in Hybrids May Not Go Mainstream, Toyota Says" http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/10/02/210250 translated (directly from the accounting department): "We have run the numbers, and the industry is set to lose X billions of dollars through lost part sales over the coming decades as the masses step from hybrids to full electric for that around-town runner. No, we never want to help or see hybrids go mainstream, ever. Keep it all business as usual: hard to maintain combustion engines are expensive for the consumer and good for our bottom line. Furthermore, it essentially costs us nothing to FREELOAD the longer term consequences of combustion engines onto the environment and society as a whole, so it is a sound short term strategy to satisfy our immediate obligations to investors."
I did not see it reported in the US as well, but no surprise there. How can you demonize Russia if it votes to give the North AND South back to the Ossetians - rightful owners for thousands of years? Of course have to take the Russian Parliament vote with a large grain of salt - only the future will tell, BUT they did start pulling troops out almost the second after kicking out the Georgian invaders. All that crap about France brokering a deal and forcing Russia to withdraw was a load of laughable hogwash... Sarkozy's plane had hardly touched the ground, plus he had no leverage, where does French natural gas come from? but Moscow was already scaling out anyway. Talk about trying to save face for NATO.
doing their serial killing far away, bombing countries half the world away. While just imposing embargoes on those next door, to reduce the risk to the hive. You don't need Bee theory, forensics or the CSI team to figure out who is doing the killing though.
Two words: Network Effect. All the alternatives I have reviewed are harder than skype. Harder to download, setup, use, the list goes on. Result: Skype is popular - they nailed delivery to the "masses". No screwing around with the microphone, NAT/firewalls, SIP providers, names etc etc. The average joe can just download and install it in just two url clicks, type in a name and begin to use it. Done deal. All the open source VOIP (most of them SIP) I have seen completely miss this most important point, and so all their development effort is ultimately wasted - walled themselves off to the technically proficient crowd and not benefiting from the network effect.
It will "protect 'jobs'". Put that last little word through your Noam Chomsky filter, and it translates:
"protect profits".
but that does not envoke the same emotion in the masses as "Jobs" do. Which your congress spokesperson might have a hard time trying to disagree with this bill.
Thats the older generation for you... once you young-uns who grew up with email get promoted to PHB status, you too can adopt your favourite technology of your day to deliver signatures...
Slashdot Mirror
Neither of those links actually prove your hypothesis or provide any data. They're news articles and are only reporting that two authors\publishers are trying something new to promote and sell their work.
I suspect you have motivation to not want to see any real world figures? I gave you good references that do lead to real world sales figures in a number of locations. Here is one below, posted by the Author, who should know. Also see research article in my post above, there is more solid evidence out there - despite being shouted down by the majority of corporate media - hell bent against the idea.
NEW YORK (Fortune) â" In 1999, best-selling author Paulo Coelho, who wrote "The Alchemist," was failing in Russia. That year he sold only about 1,000 books, and his Russian publisher dropped him. But after he found another, Coelho took a radical step. On his own Web site, launched in 1996, he posted a digital Russian copy of "The Alchemist". ...
With no additional promotion, print sales picked up immediately. Within a year he sold 10,000 copies; the next year around 100,000. By 2002 he was selling a total of a million copies of multiple titles. Today, Coelho's sales in Russian are over 10 million and growing.
By last year Coelho's total print sales worldwide surpassed 100 million books. "Once we did the Pirate Coelho there was a significant boost," he says.
For all this, he kept quiet with his many publishers in countries around the world. "Sharing" is typically not the word they use to describe such activities. Coelho says the publishers have periodically taken action to remove books from the Pirate Coelho. "They think it is against me. They don't know it is in my favor. They will know it after your article," he says.
"Publishing is in a kind of Jurassic age," Coelho continues. "Publishers see free downloads as threatening the sales of the book. But this should make them rethink their entire business model."
http://paulocoelhoblog.com/2008/02/03/pirate-coelho/
Your best defense at this point is to claim books are completely different to games. Any data to prove the hypothesis? You would have to have some pretty convincing data, cause at least some professional game developers disagree, with real world data to back their point up (you have been given a reference follow the lead - there are sales figures posted).
Your turn: Where is the data to even slightly support the idea that one pirated good == one lost sale?**
** Quoting *IAA propaganda talking points does not count.
I finally found a resource to help make intelligent decisions when voting in European elections, an excellent one at that:
http://www.laquadrature.net/en
Check out the Political memory resource:
http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/Political_Memory
especially the "List of recorded votes" section to see who voted for what - before you reward them with your vote for them.
Slashdotters will probably be interested in the Telecoms Package section as well: http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/Telecoms_Package
> Now Bruce is not making the later editions for free anymore.
> Why? I can only surmise that it did not work out. I once asked him and he said, "oh yeah that it was an interesting experiment."
There is another, IMO more valid explanation: Mr Eckel built up considerable fame for his books, despite being just one more reference in a forest of better presented and marketed than his own, because they were freely "pirateble".
Now once Mr Eckel had established his niche in the market and built the following to "sustainable numbers" - he could take his next versions all closed pay per read/traditional model and reap financial benefits - at least over the short term until the momentum of their original free-status popularity declines. Good on him, a viable strategy that may work in some cases, but it is defiantly in no way an indication against the benefits open-free model - which launched his books into the limelight in the first place.
This is not a new concept. One Reference of a few out there:
Competition Over Piratable Goods
July 2004
Abstract:
The effects of (private, small-scale) copying on the pricing behavior of producers of information goods are studied within a unified model of vertical diÂerentiation. Although information goods are assumed to be perfectly horizontally differentiated, demands are interdependent because the copying technology exhibits increasing returns to scale. We characterize the symmetric Nash equilibria of the pricing game played by n producers of information goods. We show thereby how the producersÂ' attitudes towards piracy are interdependent and evolve with the relative attractiveness of copies.
Keywords: Information goods, piracy, copyright, pricing
JEL Classifications: L13, L82, L86, K11, O34
Working Paper Series
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=882804
P.S. Fast forward one year. News Title: "Spore the Most Successful Game of 2009". If its worthy of the hype. Mark my words.
Can go one better: The weight of evidence is in the real world sales: http://torrentfreak.com/alchemist-author-pirates-own-books-080124/
http://toc.oreilly.com/2008/08/pirates-convince-game-develope.html
The weight of real-world evidence is in favor of the hypothesis posted above. The only anti-hypothesis you've got is 1 Pirate == 1 lost sale. *cough* Your data prove your hypothesis?*cough**cough*
Its because of the Marketing blitz.
Everywhere I look its Spore this, Spore that. You'd have mushrooms in your ears to miss hearing about it.
OF COURSE people are going to think: "Whats all the hype about - not like MARKETING has LIED to me before so I'll take a free no-obligation look-see for myself."
Some %, possibly significant, of those downloaders are going to perhaps like it and/or will want to play online, so they will sign up for valid copies. These people are new clients - they would not of bought the game otherwise.
Now the hardliners-stuck in the 80's software model will cry "these numbers will destroy the game industry". Bollocks. They are getting 1.X million potential clients who would never have bother buying the game to see if it was worth the hype in the first place.
News flash: Bittorent downloads will reflect real world marketing promotion.
"They" said the same thing about once popular File Service Protocol (http://fsp.sourceforge.net/) way back when the net was young, pre-Napster, and before any massive internet infrastructure investment was made...
European Parliament elections are coming up soon, have yet to find a resource to help pick decent candidates to elect, reward these kinds of decisions...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament_election,_2009
Also Lamarckian style, or at least very flexible in the short term inheritance
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v14/n2/full/5201567a.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetics
No, HSBC Hong Kong...
My Bank (HSBC) gives me a little keychain keygenerator that spits out a 6 digit number when I press the button. All logins must also have the key number... I wonder if this simple measure would stop dead any keylogger attacks like this, OR with enough reasonable time monitoring they could reverse engineer the generator's seeds?
Having a big stick is very profitable. Smaller sticks actually help keep the big stick propped up on its shaky ground, for longer than it would be on its own.
I agree with you but unfortunately there is no short term buck to be made in education and basic services for US's biggest export industry, the industrial military complex. On top of that, if you educate then the population will probably be smart enough to say No and negotiate a better contract when you try to take all their oil and other natural resources...
P.S. Qantas never claimed it was passenger electronics. The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) http://www.atsb.gov.au/newsroom/2008/release/2008_43.aspx said that laptops could have interfered with the plane's on-board computer system... but the bureau also said in the same breath that it's too early to make that judgment. From that bland boring statement you arrive at Slashdots and dozens of other sensationlist news headlines: "Qantas Blames Wireless For Aircraft Incidents" http://mobile.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/10/09/1427232&tid=270
WTF? Even five at the source http://www.atsb.gov.au/newsroom/media.aspx would have determined that.
I come here for NEWS not fucking Fox-News...
Does Qantas' aircraft maintenance suck or does Airbus' quality control suck? Do both suck?
Australia is big, really big. I leave Sydney heading north, watch one full length movie, have a snooze, watch another full length movie then flick over to the map and get depressed... I have watched the only two decent films on offer, am already sick of the flight to Europe but I still have not even left Aussie borders. So with that in mind, my money is on Airbus's unit testing that sucks. Qantas is more than likely just the beta tester who runs the most miles.
You are entirely right. A hybrid car makes absolutely NO sense whatsoever. Todays hybrids basically use a big gas motor and an electric motor to help go easier on the gas. The problem with this method is that its carrying TWO BIG ENGINES so more weight means you have to be that much more efficient.
To the contrary, Toyota Prius MPG-Real World Numbers make a whole lot of economic sense. Throw in the much reduced need to bring it in for servicing and you have a good real-world counter example to the "two big moters==worse than one" logic you are using. Look them up for yourself: http://www.google.com/search?q=toyota+prius+mpg
Keep in mind, that hydrids still have a combustion engine, that's why they call it a hybrid and not an electric car.
Adding extra parts (generator, batteries, electric motor) only makes the car more complex, harder to service and more expensive.
This assumes your not running on electric for most of the day and are actually using the combustion. There are a few sources around that claim to demonstrate that most drivers are not traveling far from home - i.e. electric will do the job even if the car is hybrid. Which leads to the original point I was make in my post above: "as the masses step from hybrids to full electric". Its a short leap from a hybrid to full electric, especially when the consumer see's that they are not using the combustion for around-town, so why pay more to lug such a heavy inefficient piece of metal on those around-town trips? Just make the second household car a full electric == lost part sales, so big Auto does not want Hybrid stepping stones.
From a previous article:
"Plug-in Hybrids May Not Go Mainstream, Toyota Says"
http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/10/02/210250
translated (directly from the accounting department): "We have run the numbers, and the industry is set to lose X billions of dollars through lost part sales over the coming decades as the masses step from hybrids to full electric for that around-town runner.
No, we never want to help or see hybrids go mainstream, ever. Keep it all business as usual: hard to maintain combustion engines are expensive for the consumer and good for our bottom line. Furthermore, it essentially costs us nothing to FREELOAD the longer term consequences of combustion engines onto the environment and society as a whole, so it is a sound short term strategy to satisfy our immediate obligations to investors."
Oh, I'm sure Russia would have just let the North Ossetians have their land back.
Parent poster has a point. You must of missed this old news: "Russian parliament votes to recognise independent Ossetia"
"The Russian parliament has voted unanimously to recognise Georgiaâ(TM)s breakaway regions as independent, in a move that will increase tensions with the US and other Western nations."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/2618728/Georgia-conflict-Russian-parliament-votes-to-recognise-independent-Ossetia.html
I did not see it reported in the US as well, but no surprise there. How can you demonize Russia if it votes to give the North AND South back to the Ossetians - rightful owners for thousands of years? Of course have to take the Russian Parliament vote with a large grain of salt - only the future will tell, BUT they did start pulling troops out almost the second after kicking out the Georgian invaders. All that crap about France brokering a deal and forcing Russia to withdraw was a load of laughable hogwash... Sarkozy's plane had hardly touched the ground, plus he had no leverage, where does French natural gas come from? but Moscow was already scaling out anyway. Talk about trying to save face for NATO.
> "questioning the judgment and relevance of the ISO/IEC and the standards they approve... said they are 'no longer confident' in the ability of..."
Judgment: Bought
Relevance: Irrelevant
Your Confidence in ISO: Of no concern to us now that we have nice fat OOXML consulting paychecks flowing in.
doing their serial killing far away, bombing countries half the world away. While just imposing embargoes on those next door, to reduce the risk to the hive. You don't need Bee theory, forensics or the CSI team to figure out who is doing the killing though.
Two words: Network Effect. All the alternatives I have reviewed are harder than skype. Harder to download, setup, use, the list goes on.
Result: Skype is popular - they nailed delivery to the "masses". No screwing around with the microphone, NAT/firewalls, SIP providers, names etc etc. The average joe can just download and install it in just two url clicks, type in a name and begin to use it. Done deal.
All the open source VOIP (most of them SIP) I have seen completely miss this most important point, and so all their development effort is ultimately wasted - walled themselves off to the technically proficient crowd and not benefiting from the network effect.
It will "protect 'jobs'". Put that last little word through your Noam Chomsky filter, and it translates:
"protect profits".
but that does not envoke the same emotion in the masses as "Jobs" do.
Which your congress spokesperson might have a hard time trying to disagree with this bill.
NSA warrantless surveillance controversy
Combating Corruption for Development: The Rule of Law, Transparency and Accountability PDF || Google Cache
Thats the older generation for you... once you young-uns who grew up with email get promoted to PHB status, you too can adopt your favourite technology of your day to deliver signatures...