> which is so obviously a quantum leap in terms of what it could do for human productivity that's a very strong claim. and it's very likely, unfortunately, fal

> which is so obviously a quantum leap in terms of what it could do for human productivity that's a very strong claim. and it's very likely, unfortunately, false. we have the great classics all available for free in a multitude of formats. a lot of works slowly but surely mature into the public domain each year, yet there's no discernible productivity growth based on the availability of books. also, this sadly goes for research papers too. sure, fuck Elsevier and the whole paper mill industry, but the limiting factor is expertise, tenured spots, academic integrity. (see the replicability crisis in psychology, in particular how the many times the whole scientific enterprise is backwards: https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2011/01/11/one_more_time_o/ https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2011/01/11/one_more_t... and https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2016/09/21/what-has-happened-down-here-is-the-winds-have-changed/ https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2016/09/21/what-has-h... )