5 ms·

I don’t read much. I bought an e-reader in 2014 and it has sat in a bin basically the whole time. But recently I discovered library genesis, which is full of pi

I don’t read much. I bought an e-reader in 2014 and it has sat in a bin basically the whole time. But recently I discovered library genesis, which is full of pirated books in the vein of sci-hub. I dug up the old e-reader and I’m starting to read again. It’s amazing being able to just download and read a high quality epub of whatever book I have wanted to read. A lot of the books I actually own physical copies because I bought them thinking I would read them, and then never got around to them and I now have many boxes of books in the garage. Normal libraries aren’t quite right for me because I don’t read promptly and feel bad holding something I am not reading when others might want to check it out. But finally with library genesis I can download whatever and it doesn’t cost me money or take up any space. It works really well for me. And at night, after work, I’m making a little time for reading again. Of course, in our current society we can’t offer this to everyone or artists would starve. But I think the solution is not to stop offering giant free libraries to everyone. I actually think the solution is to build a society where food and shelter and clothing and internet are free. So the daily costs of life go away. And artists can create their art and offer it for free to everyone. And every person on earth can grow up with access to a library of every book ever digitized. EDIT: I should add, that if we did not patent and copyright everything, then costs would go down because generics would rule the market. This would also allow MUCH FASTER growth in poorer nations, since they would not have to import expensive goods from wealthy nations but could make their own clones. Google the TRIPS agreement for more. But if we also make society free to live (which is now cheaper without patents and copyright keeping prices high), then creators and engineers do not have to fear for their livelihood. So it is a self reinforcing change to society, and one where I believe the rate of innovation would be much higher. For every business person who only innovates because of the monopoly profits our current society offers, there are 100 engineers and business owners who just want to offer the next greatest thing, and who see the potential profit in being first to market. The hardcore libertarians who give talks at the Mises Institute know that intellectual property is a state enforced distortion of the free market, and all the communists and anarchists know that if you can offer knowledge to help others, you should not lock it down. One of the rare places both these groups agree!

Wistar 5y ago
> "A lot of the books I actually own physical copies because I bought them thinking I would read them, and then never got around to them and I now have many boxes of books in the garage." Me, too. A couple years ago, right here on HN, I learned that there is a word for that: Tsundoku. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsundoku https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsundoku
WalterBright 5y ago
Who is going to do the jobs that need doing but are not so pleasant - like washing dishes? I also expect that making money is a prime motivator for artists, and also drives the quality of their work.
- SequoiaHope 5y ago
  > Who is going to do the jobs that need doing but are not so pleasant - like washing dishes? Generally this work can either be done by machines, it can be done by the people who are eating the food, it can be done in rotation by all people who participate in the system, or it can be done by people who feel like washing dishes is their way to contribute back to society. I am definitely a big fan of the idea that to make this work, we need to intentionally automate more stuff. Right now minimum wage is so low that capitalist organizations are happy to just throw bodies at the problem, but you could easily use durable dishes that feed in to a little mechanized washer. Such a system would also benefit from centralization, so there are lower numbers of larger facilities. Or you could have a spoke and hub model where the main processing equipment is in the center and different restaurants share that infrastructure. Finally I will say that there is already an existence proof of a culture that does this every day. The Sikhs in India operate facilities all over India that offer free food on a large scale (the largest facilities offer 50k-100k free meals a day). They have zero robots and it all works out for them. I'm sure if we work in robots and also change our attitudes, we can do it here. Take a look at this video, it is beautiful and deeply thought provoking: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdoJroKUwu0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdoJroKUwu0 > I also expect that making money is a prime motivator for artists, and also drives the quality of their work. I think you would find few people in the art community who agree with this. I am not an artist but that is my speculation. Also if you look at historical art, I don't think money was a prime motivator. You could also look at basketball. Probably most basketball players play because they enjoy it. I suspect very few only do it because they plan to get rich. Oh, and I did not say we should eliminate money. Artists could make money if they want to. It would just not be required for survival.

Wistar 5y ago

> "A lot of the books I actually own physical copies because I bought them thinking I would read them, and then never got around to them and I now have many boxes of books in the garage." Me, too. A couple years ago, right here on HN, I learned that there is a word for that: Tsundoku. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsundoku https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsundoku

WalterBright 5y ago

Who is going to do the jobs that need doing but are not so pleasant - like washing dishes? I also expect that making money is a prime motivator for artists, and also drives the quality of their work.

SequoiaHope 5y ago
> Who is going to do the jobs that need doing but are not so pleasant - like washing dishes? Generally this work can either be done by machines, it can be done by the people who are eating the food, it can be done in rotation by all people who participate in the system, or it can be done by people who feel like washing dishes is their way to contribute back to society. I am definitely a big fan of the idea that to make this work, we need to intentionally automate more stuff. Right now minimum wage is so low that capitalist organizations are happy to just throw bodies at the problem, but you could easily use durable dishes that feed in to a little mechanized washer. Such a system would also benefit from centralization, so there are lower numbers of larger facilities. Or you could have a spoke and hub model where the main processing equipment is in the center and different restaurants share that infrastructure. Finally I will say that there is already an existence proof of a culture that does this every day. The Sikhs in India operate facilities all over India that offer free food on a large scale (the largest facilities offer 50k-100k free meals a day). They have zero robots and it all works out for them. I'm sure if we work in robots and also change our attitudes, we can do it here. Take a look at this video, it is beautiful and deeply thought provoking: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdoJroKUwu0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdoJroKUwu0 > I also expect that making money is a prime motivator for artists, and also drives the quality of their work. I think you would find few people in the art community who agree with this. I am not an artist but that is my speculation. Also if you look at historical art, I don't think money was a prime motivator. You could also look at basketball. Probably most basketball players play because they enjoy it. I suspect very few only do it because they plan to get rich. Oh, and I did not say we should eliminate money. Artists could make money if they want to. It would just not be required for survival.