If the point of people paying for books is for the author "to make a living of that," then shouldn't books which sell well enough just be free after a certain point?
Only if you don't consider making a living to be an ongoing process but one that stops at what someone other than the author considers a suitable limit per item.
You seem to be part of the problem which drives book prices lower.
but for ebooks each book has its own monopoly controlled by a large publisher so there is little to no competition
Utterly incorrect. I have eighteen titles available in both formats (paper and ebook) and in each format I and I alone determine the price. Ebooks (self-publishing) are the antithesis of a "monopoly controlled by a large publisher".
The price doesn't go down because eBooks represent a production/distribution innovation by book publishers and distributors.
Traditional book publishers did not do the eBook innovation. In fact, they fought it tooth and nail because eBooks allow single, stand alone authors to publish and sell at the prices they deemed fit, cutting out book publishers and distributors (a throttle more than an avenue) entirely.
A much more accurate statement would be:
The price doesn't go down for eBooks produced by traditional publishers because they wanted to use them as they had the print medium.
Overall, eBooks are far cheaper than traditionally published ones.
The demand isn't for the copy of software, but for humans.
Sometimes yes, sometimes no. You made a bland, generic over-simplification. There's plenty of software (programs/apps/whatever) with no CS at all. People buy the program and will do so even w/o CS if they want it.
There are more. It looks like, according to you, the six universites above are in the pocket of the alcohol industry. Your claim, now go about backing it up.
Not really. "Social Justice", at least as it is practiced today, appears to be not concerned with equal opportunity but equal OUTCOMES.
No, that's just the propaganda. SJ as it is practiced today is concerned with allowing any number of minuscule fragments of the population to broadcast specious complaints in a manner so as to outshout and "reform" the bulk of humanity.
The key word there is "strangers", i.e. people who they are ignorant of. After all, once they know and understand them they are not strangers any more.
I notice you picked the second (less commonly used) definition.
Stranger : 1 one who is strange: such as a (1) : foreigner (2) :
a resident alien b : one in the house of another as a guest, visitor, or intruder c : a person or thing that is unknown or with whom one is unacquainted d : one who does not belong to or is kept from the activities of a group e : one not privy or party to an act, contract, or title : one that interferes without right
2 : one ignorant of or unacquainted with someone or something
And the real significance of this article is that what programmers want doesn't matter.
Unless, of course, they are the ones shoveling money into the project. If I hire you, you do what I want and, yes, your desires don't enter into it. Software is not a friggin' "calling".
Language "expiry date" = I want to play with a new toy, I'm bored with this one.
Company systems are not the programmer's play toys regardless of the current collective outlook. They are something to develop and keep running for years. And that means boredom.
If a system is working, it's working. The desire to redo the damn thing in a newer language is simply wanting to play with new toys. You build it and run it until it *actually* cannot handle either volume or speed, not until a newer language comes out.
Oh, the friendship is tarnished, you've just allowed that the amount of tarnish is acceptable. I've done the same for friends. Only once for those that don't repay.
Just make sure they don't start avoiding YOU if they can't pay you back and they feel bad about it.
Slashdot Mirror
Cost to produce one of my paperbacks (526 pages) - $11.77.
Cost to produce same book in hardback - $23.17.
Clearly, you are wrong.
Only if you don't consider making a living to be an ongoing process but one that stops at what someone other than the author considers a suitable limit per item.
No. It's gains by volume. (am serious)
Utterly incorrect. I have eighteen titles available in both formats (paper and ebook) and in each format I and I alone determine the price. Ebooks (self-publishing) are the antithesis of a "monopoly controlled by a large publisher".
Traditional book publishers did not do the eBook innovation. In fact, they fought it tooth and nail because eBooks allow single, stand alone authors to publish and sell at the prices they deemed fit, cutting out book publishers and distributors (a throttle more than an avenue) entirely.
A much more accurate statement would be:
Overall, eBooks are far cheaper than traditionally published ones.
Sometimes yes, sometimes no. You made a bland, generic over-simplification. There's plenty of software (programs/apps/whatever) with no CS at all. People buy the program and will do so even w/o CS if they want it.
Pretty much the definition of a laugh track. The people on older laugh tracks were watching and being recorded for use in dubbing later as well.
Well, what the hell, turn about is fair play.
Just a few of those doing those 'alcohol industry backed' studies:
The School of Public Health at Harvard University
Catholic University of Campobasso
Kew-Kim Chew, epidemiologist, University of West Australia
Department of Psychology, Carnegie Mellon University
Edward J. Neafsey, Ph.D., Loyola University Chicago
University of East Anglia
There are more. It looks like, according to you, the six universites above are in the pocket of the alcohol industry. Your claim, now go about backing it up.
The grasp of cause and effect boggles.
I'm pouring a shot from it now.
Oh, I'd put money on their tweaking the data "the right way".
Nope. That footage of the giraffe with a hangover in the persimmon grove beats all.
Personal assertion stated as if fact.
Oh fuck off with this tripe.
Link to some stats for your spurious claim please.
You expect other from BeauHD why?
No, that's just the propaganda. SJ as it is practiced today is concerned with allowing any number of minuscule fragments of the population to broadcast specious complaints in a manner so as to outshout and "reform" the bulk of humanity.
We're talking biology, not politics. Without shifting the goalposts to include electricity, etc, the shrew has humans beat by leagues.
I notice you picked the second (less commonly used) definition.
Stranger :
1 one who is strange: such as a (1) : foreigner (2) :
a resident alien
b : one in the house of another as a guest, visitor, or intruder
c : a person or thing that is unknown or with whom one is unacquainted
d : one who does not belong to or is kept from the activities of a group
e : one not privy or party to an act, contract, or title : one that interferes without right
2 : one ignorant of or unacquainted with someone or something
It's a more complex word than you promote.
Purposeful conflation.
Don't project.
Unless, of course, they are the ones shoveling money into the project. If I hire you, you do what I want and, yes, your desires don't enter into it. Software is not a friggin' "calling".
Language "expiry date" = I want to play with a new toy, I'm bored with this one.
Company systems are not the programmer's play toys regardless of the current collective outlook. They are something to develop and keep running for years. And that means boredom.
If a system is working, it's working. The desire to redo the damn thing in a newer language is simply wanting to play with new toys. You build it and run it until it *actually* cannot handle either volume or speed, not until a newer language comes out.
So, you admit you don't use or understand JavaScript.
You cannot control someone else's guilt.