6 ms·

I recognize that I'm posting an article by Cracked here, but anybody who's a regular reader knows that Cracked hits the nail on the head at least 2% of the time

I recognize that I'm posting an article by Cracked here, but anybody who's a regular reader knows that Cracked hits the nail on the head at least 2% of the time. They recently had an article about the future and artificial scarcity (using a colorful acronym), and this is a perfect example. You don't have to "lend" books, you can just make a digital copy and give it to your friend. Anything less than that is software and hardware that is purposely crippled in order to manufacture an artificial scarcity. http://www.cracked.com/article_18817_5-reasons-future-will-be-ruled-by-b.s..html http://www.cracked.com/article_18817_5-reasons-future-will-b... -- #4 To Stay Afloat, Businesses Have to Pretend Unlimited Goods are Limited A. Why can't the library just buy as many digital copies as are needed for the customers, and keep them forever, if they don't naturally degrade? B. Wait a second. It's just a digital file. Why not just buy one copy, and just copy and paste it for every customer who wants to read it? C. Wait a second. Why do you need the library at all? Why can't a customer just buy a copy from the publisher and "lend" copies to all of his friends? D. Wait a second. If no printing and binding needs to be done, why do you need the publisher? Just buy it directly from the author. E. Waaaaait a second. Why buy it? Once the author makes one copy available, why can't everyone just grab it for free?

jules 16y ago
F. Waaaaaaaaait a second. Why would the author write a book of which he can only sell 1 copy? There is no book.
- secretasiandan 16y ago
  G. Waaaaaaaaaaaait a second. People currently write books and software and distribute them free.
  - glhaynes 16y ago
    Out of the books I've read in the last 5 years, I believe the only ones that were free were those whose copyright had expired. Yes, there's lots of good free software, but that's most often because the software, once written, scratched an itch for someone. The same phenomenon doesn't really exist with books: nearly nobody writes books for themselves; we write books to share our knowledge, stories, and opinions with others.
    - michaelchisari 16y ago
      The same phenomenon doesn't really exist with books I would argue that a budding hobby novelist culture already exists, and will only grow, just like the free software movement did. Heck, we're already seeing open source movies. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source_film http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source_film
    - InclinedPlane 16y ago
      It's almost impossible to make a living writing technical books, worse yet if they're actually good (because the best technical books tend to have a smaller audience since they tend to be targeted at the best developers). Technical books aren't written because they are profitable, they are written out of passion or pride. Edit: the same is true for a great many non-technical books. The average writer has a day job, writing is for most a questionably lucrative hobby.
    - jedberg 16y ago
      I'm sure if you ask Jessica why she wrote founders at work, it was more about sharing knowledge than making money.
      - glhaynes 16y ago
        Yes, but that doesn't mean it's not at all about money or that she could have even feasibly done it if she didn't get paid at all. For many people, while writing may not be their only job, they still need that part of their income.
    - _delirium 16y ago
      The vast majority of books from academic presses are basically written for free. Even books that sell fairly well from relatively well-known presses like MIT Press make their authors very little money. They do it because publishing your book through MIT Press is a great way to get your ideas out there (and get paid indirectly in academic cred / CV lines). True to some extent with other nonfiction publishers too, e.g. I believe HN user lsc gets "paid" for his Xen book primarily in publicity driving sales to his VPS business, not because the royalties are something to live on.
  - GHFigs 16y ago
    What do you do for a living?
    - michaelchisari 16y ago
      I write software and give it away for free, how about you? :P Also, there's a whole culture of free fiction on the internet. It's pretty huge, although most of it is crap, there are some real nuggets of goodness out there. Of course, most of the stuff people charge for is crap, too.
      - sliverstorm 16y ago
        > I write software and give it away for free, how about you? For a living, eh? So do we presume you feed yourself with soup kitchens, and live in a cardboard box on the street?
        michaelchisari 16y ago
        Open source economic models have been pretty well established, no? My income is through payment for services, not software. My software may be free, but my labor is not. The same is being applied to music, artists like Unwoman regularly write songs and albums on spec and through crowd-sourcing. A friend of mine is a huge fan, and donated money for her to write a song using a Voltairine DeClayre poem. http://www.unwoman.com http://www.unwoman.com
        danudey 16y ago
        So what you do for a living is provide (consulting? programming?) services related to open-source software, not write free software.
        michaelchisari 16y ago
        I write free software for a living, because the result of my programming services are GPL licensed.
- aw3c2 16y ago
  Ask for money, get money (or pledges), write book, distribute book.
- michaelchisari 16y ago
  Regardless of whether human creativity is intrinsically bound to economic reward (I would strongly argue that it isn't), the fact of the matter is that you can't make the case that what we're dealing with isn't a matter of artificial scarcity.
  - jonhohle 16y ago
    The true scarcity is the clever/creative author, which was previously monetized by selling less scarce physical artifacts of the author's work. This doesn't decrease the value of the author, however they are stuck finding another way to capitalize on their ability. Software did it by putting software behind services, not allowing copies to be distributed to the end users. Perhaps authors can figure out something analogous.
  - robryan 16y ago
    If an author can't afford to put all their time towards writing a book though, because they no longer make any significant amount of money out them, wouldn't it be a net loss for society. I agree that creativity isn't bound, but it will certainly happen less when a person who is exceptional doesn't have the opportunity to full devote themselves to their craft.
  - bad_user 16y ago
    Almost everything sold today is by means of artificial scarcity ... do you think oil companies are happy with alternative fuels and hybrid diesels? Related to book authors: they need a way to make a living writing books, at least part-time. Also in a fair society, brilliant people should be rewarded accordingly.
  - ergo98 16y ago
    >Regardless of whether human creativity is intrinsically bound to economic reward "Reward" is the means to pursue your creativity. The ability for an author or a photographer or a painter or a musician to actually work on their trade instead of working menial jobs to try to support a hobby. There was once a time in human history where creativity wasn't a meritocracy. It was an idle pursuit that the rich engaged in. Is that a better model? >the fact of the matter is that you can't make the case that what we're dealing with isn't a matter of artificial scarcity From a naive perspective, of course you can copy that floppy. From a rational perspective, however, of course it deals with a real scarcity of creation that copyright seeks to prevent (just as patents attempt to prevent a scarcity of innovation, though the results are much more mixed).
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- htsh 16y ago
  1. Speaking tours make money. Conferences make money, etc. 2. Fame, recognition, i.e. non-monetary benefits to being a good writer. 3. At least some people write because they believe what they have to say is important and/or helpful. 4. People will always want to own physical books. This is different than music or a dvd as a book can be passed-on/gifted much easier than a DVD or a CD, which will be obsolete. I can see both arguments, but I'm definitely not worried about the possibility that people will stop writing books.
  - ceejayoz 16y ago
    Speaking tours and the like make money if you're an established author, and it's about as likely as it is for your garage band to make millions on tour. Sure, it happens, but it's hardly a good career for the other 99.999% of folks who yearn to do that.
    - htsh 16y ago
      Agreed, but is it now possible get established relatively easier by simply writing a better book than the other guy? I mean the ease of distribution brings the harm of piracy but aren't there also some gains? As examples, I'd offer both Why's poignant guide to Ruby and 2 pretty good books I've recently checked out, Learn Python the Hard Way & A Byte of Python.
      - ceejayoz 16y ago
        > [Is] it now possible get established relatively easier by simply writing a better book than the other guy? Sure, just like Britney Spears gets all her sales by having good music. Writing a good book means little if you can't find a way to get lots of people to read it.
        htsh 16y ago
        Well Britney is a good example but at the other end I'd offer something like Die Antwoord, who were able to get themselves a big record deal by simply putting their videos on youtube. Or Justin Bieber, who also only exists because of the internet and youtube. I'm not saying Bieber makes good music, but he exists and thrives because of the internet, not despite it.
- hyperbovine 16y ago
  He can sell support contracts, documentation for it.
- lsb 16y ago
  Because the book is an advertisement for whatever products he describes therein ("so they sat at the Au Bon Pain™, sipping Mochafrappalattes™ silently, watching each other"), and the advertisers pay per thousand books sold (CPM!), so the author wants to write well.
jamesbritt 16y ago
"A. Why can't the library just buy as many digital copies as are needed for the customers, and keep them forever, if they don't naturally degrade?" My local library offers assorted e-books. Every so often, when I've tried to request one, I was told I had to wait until someone else "returned" their copy.
ig1 16y ago
It's not anything new. The whole point of copyright (and other intellectual property law) is to artificial limit unlimited goods. Copying has become cheaper with the digital age, but copying's been cheaper than buying monopoly copies for a long time. Why do you think libraries impose limits on how much you can photocopy out of a single book ?
tyng 16y ago
"Planned scarcity" is the term. But I still think "lending" is a step forward to enable booking sharing, while preserving the incentive for writers to keep writing. Needless to say Amazon will take a cut in this feature, perhaps some to the book publisher and author too. Kind of works out for everyone.
- michaelchisari 16y ago
  I think you're getting it confused with "planned obsolescence". The economic term actually is artificial scarcity. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_scarcity http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_scarcity Although the acronym Cracked uses is most definitely not the scientific one.
ergo98 16y ago
You're looking in the wrong place to discover scarcity. Copyright law is there to prevent real scarcity. Without copyright law there would be no big budget or little budget movies, little recorded music, few books, and on and on and on. Sure, there will be a couple of beatniks who'll work night jobs as janitors to ply their trade, but the vast majority would abandon the effort. The scarcity, minus the "artificial" scarcity, would be very real.

jules 16y ago

F. Waaaaaaaaait a second. Why would the author write a book of which he can only sell 1 copy? There is no book.

secretasiandan 16y ago
G. Waaaaaaaaaaaait a second. People currently write books and software and distribute them free.
- glhaynes 16y ago
  Out of the books I've read in the last 5 years, I believe the only ones that were free were those whose copyright had expired. Yes, there's lots of good free software, but that's most often because the software, once written, scratched an itch for someone. The same phenomenon doesn't really exist with books: nearly nobody writes books for themselves; we write books to share our knowledge, stories, and opinions with others.
  - michaelchisari 16y ago
    The same phenomenon doesn't really exist with books I would argue that a budding hobby novelist culture already exists, and will only grow, just like the free software movement did. Heck, we're already seeing open source movies. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source_film http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source_film
  - InclinedPlane 16y ago
    It's almost impossible to make a living writing technical books, worse yet if they're actually good (because the best technical books tend to have a smaller audience since they tend to be targeted at the best developers). Technical books aren't written because they are profitable, they are written out of passion or pride. Edit: the same is true for a great many non-technical books. The average writer has a day job, writing is for most a questionably lucrative hobby.
  - jedberg 16y ago
    I'm sure if you ask Jessica why she wrote founders at work, it was more about sharing knowledge than making money.
    - glhaynes 16y ago
      Yes, but that doesn't mean it's not at all about money or that she could have even feasibly done it if she didn't get paid at all. For many people, while writing may not be their only job, they still need that part of their income.
  - _delirium 16y ago
    The vast majority of books from academic presses are basically written for free. Even books that sell fairly well from relatively well-known presses like MIT Press make their authors very little money. They do it because publishing your book through MIT Press is a great way to get your ideas out there (and get paid indirectly in academic cred / CV lines). True to some extent with other nonfiction publishers too, e.g. I believe HN user lsc gets "paid" for his Xen book primarily in publicity driving sales to his VPS business, not because the royalties are something to live on.
- GHFigs 16y ago
  What do you do for a living?
  - michaelchisari 16y ago
    I write software and give it away for free, how about you? :P Also, there's a whole culture of free fiction on the internet. It's pretty huge, although most of it is crap, there are some real nuggets of goodness out there. Of course, most of the stuff people charge for is crap, too.
    - sliverstorm 16y ago
      > I write software and give it away for free, how about you? For a living, eh? So do we presume you feed yourself with soup kitchens, and live in a cardboard box on the street?
      - michaelchisari 16y ago
        Open source economic models have been pretty well established, no? My income is through payment for services, not software. My software may be free, but my labor is not. The same is being applied to music, artists like Unwoman regularly write songs and albums on spec and through crowd-sourcing. A friend of mine is a huge fan, and donated money for her to write a song using a Voltairine DeClayre poem. http://www.unwoman.com http://www.unwoman.com
        danudey 16y ago
        So what you do for a living is provide (consulting? programming?) services related to open-source software, not write free software.
        michaelchisari 16y ago
        I write free software for a living, because the result of my programming services are GPL licensed.
aw3c2 16y ago
Ask for money, get money (or pledges), write book, distribute book.
michaelchisari 16y ago
Regardless of whether human creativity is intrinsically bound to economic reward (I would strongly argue that it isn't), the fact of the matter is that you can't make the case that what we're dealing with isn't a matter of artificial scarcity.
- jonhohle 16y ago
  The true scarcity is the clever/creative author, which was previously monetized by selling less scarce physical artifacts of the author's work. This doesn't decrease the value of the author, however they are stuck finding another way to capitalize on their ability. Software did it by putting software behind services, not allowing copies to be distributed to the end users. Perhaps authors can figure out something analogous.
- robryan 16y ago
  If an author can't afford to put all their time towards writing a book though, because they no longer make any significant amount of money out them, wouldn't it be a net loss for society. I agree that creativity isn't bound, but it will certainly happen less when a person who is exceptional doesn't have the opportunity to full devote themselves to their craft.
- bad_user 16y ago
  Almost everything sold today is by means of artificial scarcity ... do you think oil companies are happy with alternative fuels and hybrid diesels? Related to book authors: they need a way to make a living writing books, at least part-time. Also in a fair society, brilliant people should be rewarded accordingly.
- ergo98 16y ago
  >Regardless of whether human creativity is intrinsically bound to economic reward "Reward" is the means to pursue your creativity. The ability for an author or a photographer or a painter or a musician to actually work on their trade instead of working menial jobs to try to support a hobby. There was once a time in human history where creativity wasn't a meritocracy. It was an idle pursuit that the rich engaged in. Is that a better model? >the fact of the matter is that you can't make the case that what we're dealing with isn't a matter of artificial scarcity From a naive perspective, of course you can copy that floppy. From a rational perspective, however, of course it deals with a real scarcity of creation that copyright seeks to prevent (just as patents attempt to prevent a scarcity of innovation, though the results are much more mixed).
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
htsh 16y ago
1. Speaking tours make money. Conferences make money, etc. 2. Fame, recognition, i.e. non-monetary benefits to being a good writer. 3. At least some people write because they believe what they have to say is important and/or helpful. 4. People will always want to own physical books. This is different than music or a dvd as a book can be passed-on/gifted much easier than a DVD or a CD, which will be obsolete. I can see both arguments, but I'm definitely not worried about the possibility that people will stop writing books.
- ceejayoz 16y ago
  Speaking tours and the like make money if you're an established author, and it's about as likely as it is for your garage band to make millions on tour. Sure, it happens, but it's hardly a good career for the other 99.999% of folks who yearn to do that.
  - htsh 16y ago
    Agreed, but is it now possible get established relatively easier by simply writing a better book than the other guy? I mean the ease of distribution brings the harm of piracy but aren't there also some gains? As examples, I'd offer both Why's poignant guide to Ruby and 2 pretty good books I've recently checked out, Learn Python the Hard Way & A Byte of Python.
    - ceejayoz 16y ago
      > [Is] it now possible get established relatively easier by simply writing a better book than the other guy? Sure, just like Britney Spears gets all her sales by having good music. Writing a good book means little if you can't find a way to get lots of people to read it.
      - htsh 16y ago
        Well Britney is a good example but at the other end I'd offer something like Die Antwoord, who were able to get themselves a big record deal by simply putting their videos on youtube. Or Justin Bieber, who also only exists because of the internet and youtube. I'm not saying Bieber makes good music, but he exists and thrives because of the internet, not despite it.
hyperbovine 16y ago
He can sell support contracts, documentation for it.
lsb 16y ago
Because the book is an advertisement for whatever products he describes therein ("so they sat at the Au Bon Pain™, sipping Mochafrappalattes™ silently, watching each other"), and the advertisers pay per thousand books sold (CPM!), so the author wants to write well.

jamesbritt 16y ago

"A. Why can't the library just buy as many digital copies as are needed for the customers, and keep them forever, if they don't naturally degrade?" My local library offers assorted e-books. Every so often, when I've tried to request one, I was told I had to wait until someone else "returned" their copy.

ig1 16y ago

It's not anything new. The whole point of copyright (and other intellectual property law) is to artificial limit unlimited goods. Copying has become cheaper with the digital age, but copying's been cheaper than buying monopoly copies for a long time. Why do you think libraries impose limits on how much you can photocopy out of a single book ?

tyng 16y ago

"Planned scarcity" is the term. But I still think "lending" is a step forward to enable booking sharing, while preserving the incentive for writers to keep writing. Needless to say Amazon will take a cut in this feature, perhaps some to the book publisher and author too. Kind of works out for everyone.

michaelchisari 16y ago
I think you're getting it confused with "planned obsolescence". The economic term actually is artificial scarcity. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_scarcity http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_scarcity Although the acronym Cracked uses is most definitely not the scientific one.

ergo98 16y ago

You're looking in the wrong place to discover scarcity. Copyright law is there to prevent real scarcity. Without copyright law there would be no big budget or little budget movies, little recorded music, few books, and on and on and on. Sure, there will be a couple of beatniks who'll work night jobs as janitors to ply their trade, but the vast majority would abandon the effort. The scarcity, minus the "artificial" scarcity, would be very real.