3 ms·

That's one way of looking at it. Another way is that building the loaded weapon was a prerequisite for their capacity to offer the world's largest library of c

That's one way of looking at it. Another way is that building the loaded weapon was a prerequisite for their capacity to offer the world's largest library of commercially-viable ebook content, and without that "bizarre fact," the content simply wouldn't be available to anyone electronically because of the legal wrangling necessary to get it into publicly-accessible electronic format.

jordigh 11y ago
These manacles are always sold to the public as "for your own" or "for your own protection" as if they were an inevitable fait accompli of how things should proceed. Very Machiavellian, very gangsterish. We have evidence of these libraries growing without these restrictions, so we know it's simply a lie that we need these restrictions. The ends do not justify these means.
- fixermark 11y ago
  They grow faster with the restrictions. Digital music was doable, but wasn't easy until Apple did the business work necessary to make the iTunes Music Store possible. eBook access to the latest publications on day-of publication across fiction and nonfiction was functionally a non-starter until Amazon did the business work necessary to make the Kindle Store possible. Their competition who didn't want to play by the rules of the restrictions the content owners wanted were plowed under by the volume and convenience generated by successful business partnerships. It's inconvenient for those who prefer a world without business-driven constraints that the processes that create those constraints also create massive convenience. But they do, and the world is full of potential customers who want that convenience. Because the alternative of a marketplace where they can pay someone (and play by that someone's terms of service) to do the work for them is to learn to do that work themselves, and that's not what people want to specialize in.

jordigh 11y ago

These manacles are always sold to the public as "for your own" or "for your own protection" as if they were an inevitable fait accompli of how things should proceed. Very Machiavellian, very gangsterish. We have evidence of these libraries growing without these restrictions, so we know it's simply a lie that we need these restrictions. The ends do not justify these means.

fixermark 11y ago
They grow faster with the restrictions. Digital music was doable, but wasn't easy until Apple did the business work necessary to make the iTunes Music Store possible. eBook access to the latest publications on day-of publication across fiction and nonfiction was functionally a non-starter until Amazon did the business work necessary to make the Kindle Store possible. Their competition who didn't want to play by the rules of the restrictions the content owners wanted were plowed under by the volume and convenience generated by successful business partnerships. It's inconvenient for those who prefer a world without business-driven constraints that the processes that create those constraints also create massive convenience. But they do, and the world is full of potential customers who want that convenience. Because the alternative of a marketplace where they can pay someone (and play by that someone's terms of service) to do the work for them is to learn to do that work themselves, and that's not what people want to specialize in.