1. Lightweight, in-browser preview of docs. 2. Embeddable docs: you don't have to leave the context in which a doc is referenced to peruse it. 3. Easy way to

1. Lightweight, in-browser preview of docs. 2. Embeddable docs: you don't have to leave the context in which a doc is referenced to peruse it. 3. Easy way to integrate advertising in docs. 4. Improves browsability of docs by aggregating them and analyzing content for relatedness. 5. Comments/community. Admittedly, the shortcomings this ranter lists (can't save, can't print, can't copy & paste) are major annoyances. The problem here isn't that Scribd doesn't add any value: it most certainly does. The problem is that it currently takes away enough value to make many potential uses of their services annoying, like the very situation on HN mentioned in this guy's blog post. But why is Scribd necessarily to blame, here? The person who submitted the Scribd version of the document could have linked to the freely downloadable version instead. Just because there are dumb uses of a service doesn't mean that service is useless. (On the other hand, it's possible the linker wouldn't have found the document to begin with if it wasn't on Scribd. In which case, the value added from aiding users in discovery of valuable documents clearly outweighs the nuisance of having to find a freely downloadable copy yourself.) Sheesh, folks. Do a little thinking before you decide to jump on the hater bandwagon.