5 ms·

> An e-book is going to heavily (and negatively) impact the sales figures for the print book What? Do you have a source on that claim? For me, I only get eboo

> An e-book is going to heavily (and negatively) impact the sales figures for the print book What? Do you have a source on that claim? For me, I only get ebooks for programming books because I can have the IDE side by side with the PDF, no need to continuously look at the physical book and then back into my IDE, and I can copy paste code examples.

jjtheblunt 4y ago
totally agree re user experience with ide...
deltaonefour 4y ago
- cercatrova 4y ago
  You have a few different issues with the assumptions in your comment. First, yes, one can ask for a source without a sincere request for it, known as sealioning. However, that was not what I was doing, because: > While statistical data is much better then common sense reasoning, it's still possible to make claim via deduction and even anecdotal evidence. Oftentimes, intuition is not correct. Think for example to the Monty Hall experiment where many people thought that the odds of two doors holding the winning prize, after a third door were opened, to be 1/2. However, on actual examination and statistical analysis, it is actually 2/3. Similarly, simply because you believe that ebook sales reduce print book sales intuitively does not mean that this be so. In fact, based on other studies, it seems that piracy actually increases sales [0]. > Anecdotally if I see a book I like, the first thing I do is google for that book with a ".epub" or ".pdf" extension so I can download it for free. I figure other do-gooders are going to pay for the book so I might as well freeload a free version. It's logically the most cost effective move. Second, just because you pirate does not mean everyone does. Ebook sales have overtaken print sales, showing that most consumers actually do not pirate. Those that do an action overestimate the percentage of others who also perform that same action, this is a known cognitive effect. All in all, you have no source except intuition that can be shown to be wrong. [0] https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/e-book-piracy-may-have-unexpected-benefits-for-publishers-1.1123710 https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/e-book-piracy-may-have-unexp...?
  - deltaonefour 4y ago
    >Oftentimes, intuition is not correct. However oftentimes statistical data is not AVAILABLE. Thus you must make a claim with available evidence. >Similarly, simply because you believe that ebook sales reduce print book sales intuitively does not mean that this be so. No but given the logic of how humans prefer to get free things then pay for things, and given the fact that I myself prefer this you can make a best possible conclusion. > In fact, based on other studies, it seems that piracy actually increases sales [0]. There are studies that show piracy decreases sales as well rendering even statistics ineffective and contradictory. Additionally the MAJORITY of studies indicate the opposite of your cherry picked source; further indicating that "sources" alone can't even be trusted: https://corsearch.com/does-piracy-impact-sales-a-look-at-the-data/ https://corsearch.com/does-piracy-impact-sales-a-look-at-the... >Second, just because you pirate does not mean everyone does. No but if one person does, it's possible that other people do to. 1 person is 1 data point which is better than zero. Anecdotal data matters. Do I need a scientific study to prove that hitting someone with a car can potentially injure them? No. I don't. Intuition is valid evidence for me to follow so I don't go around running people over with my car. >All in all, you have no source except intuition that can be shown to be wrong. https://corsearch.com/does-piracy-impact-sales-a-look-at-the-data/ https://corsearch.com/does-piracy-impact-sales-a-look-at-the... The site above shows your conclusion and your study to be wrong and contradictory. It says 22 out of 25 studies show that piracy harms sales. Now the above is a scientific study, but before I even found that study I already knew intuitively that piracy harms sales. I made that claim BEFORE I had scientific evidence. I made that claim off of INTUITION. I'm assuming your claim of Increased Sales was based off of you coming to a conclusion based off of that study you linked. Well we both arrived at conclusions. You arrived at your conclusion based off of a scientific study, mine off of intuition and the link I showed you above shows that MY INTUITION beat your SCIENCE. This shows that there's a high amount of unreliable data and bias in science and that you cannot place your full trust into "studies" and "sources" Often times intuition can beat out these studies because there's so many flaws in science in practice that a lot of these studies are just as flawed as intuition.
    - nvrspyx 4y ago
      The real problem here is that you're extrapolating way past a reasonable intuition. Not only are you intuiting that pirating would impact sales, you're extrapolating that: 1. An ebook is the only way a pirated version gets circulated (many physical-only books are scanned and uploaded) 2. The displacement caused by piracy from introducing an ebook version will outweigh the combined revenue of physical and ebook sales, such that physical-only revenue > physical book revenue + ebook revenue - piracy displacement, which depends on assumption 1. 3. Piracy displacement is comparable across media types and topic. For example, does your "intuition" tell you that a programmer is just as likely to pirate a programming book given the amount of free learning material on the internet as a movie watcher is to pirate a movie or a video game player to pirate a game? I think your intuition is more flawed than science. Science at least suggests only what the results show and doesn't build upon unsubstantiated assumption after unsubstantiated assumption. To address some other points: > However oftentimes statistical data is not AVAILABLE. Thus you must make a claim with available evidence. In that case, you should make a hypothesis and not a claim, even if you don't have the means to test it. If you make a claim, you have the burden of proof, but by your own admission, you have none. > 1 person is 1 data point which is better than zero. Anecdotal data matters. It might be better than zero, but not my much. In many cases, it's worse because it's misleading. Anecdotal data only matters in aggregate such that the sample size is reasonable. Using a derivative of your car accident example: just because one pedestrian survives getting hit by a car doesn't mean that getting by a car isn't fatal. Finally, your link is not a counter to the parent's link as all their link says is that ebooks sell more than physical books while also acknowledging that ebook piracy has also grown.
auggierose 4y ago
I prefer ebooks too. If I am really interested in the book, I buy the print version of the book though, if I cannot find an ebook version of high quality (that excludes many epubs, as formulas are typeset horribly in all of them; so a high-quality ebook is usually in PDF format). I am toying with the idea of sending these print books to somebody who (destructively?) scans them for me as PDFs. For reading, I prefer my iPad Pro, although when looking at multiple books at the same time, I also put them up on one of my monitors.

jjtheblunt 4y ago

totally agree re user experience with ide...

deltaonefour 4y ago

cercatrova 4y ago
You have a few different issues with the assumptions in your comment. First, yes, one can ask for a source without a sincere request for it, known as sealioning. However, that was not what I was doing, because: > While statistical data is much better then common sense reasoning, it's still possible to make claim via deduction and even anecdotal evidence. Oftentimes, intuition is not correct. Think for example to the Monty Hall experiment where many people thought that the odds of two doors holding the winning prize, after a third door were opened, to be 1/2. However, on actual examination and statistical analysis, it is actually 2/3. Similarly, simply because you believe that ebook sales reduce print book sales intuitively does not mean that this be so. In fact, based on other studies, it seems that piracy actually increases sales [0]. > Anecdotally if I see a book I like, the first thing I do is google for that book with a ".epub" or ".pdf" extension so I can download it for free. I figure other do-gooders are going to pay for the book so I might as well freeload a free version. It's logically the most cost effective move. Second, just because you pirate does not mean everyone does. Ebook sales have overtaken print sales, showing that most consumers actually do not pirate. Those that do an action overestimate the percentage of others who also perform that same action, this is a known cognitive effect. All in all, you have no source except intuition that can be shown to be wrong. [0] https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/e-book-piracy-may-have-unexpected-benefits-for-publishers-1.1123710 https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/e-book-piracy-may-have-unexp...?
- deltaonefour 4y ago
  >Oftentimes, intuition is not correct. However oftentimes statistical data is not AVAILABLE. Thus you must make a claim with available evidence. >Similarly, simply because you believe that ebook sales reduce print book sales intuitively does not mean that this be so. No but given the logic of how humans prefer to get free things then pay for things, and given the fact that I myself prefer this you can make a best possible conclusion. > In fact, based on other studies, it seems that piracy actually increases sales [0]. There are studies that show piracy decreases sales as well rendering even statistics ineffective and contradictory. Additionally the MAJORITY of studies indicate the opposite of your cherry picked source; further indicating that "sources" alone can't even be trusted: https://corsearch.com/does-piracy-impact-sales-a-look-at-the-data/ https://corsearch.com/does-piracy-impact-sales-a-look-at-the... >Second, just because you pirate does not mean everyone does. No but if one person does, it's possible that other people do to. 1 person is 1 data point which is better than zero. Anecdotal data matters. Do I need a scientific study to prove that hitting someone with a car can potentially injure them? No. I don't. Intuition is valid evidence for me to follow so I don't go around running people over with my car. >All in all, you have no source except intuition that can be shown to be wrong. https://corsearch.com/does-piracy-impact-sales-a-look-at-the-data/ https://corsearch.com/does-piracy-impact-sales-a-look-at-the... The site above shows your conclusion and your study to be wrong and contradictory. It says 22 out of 25 studies show that piracy harms sales. Now the above is a scientific study, but before I even found that study I already knew intuitively that piracy harms sales. I made that claim BEFORE I had scientific evidence. I made that claim off of INTUITION. I'm assuming your claim of Increased Sales was based off of you coming to a conclusion based off of that study you linked. Well we both arrived at conclusions. You arrived at your conclusion based off of a scientific study, mine off of intuition and the link I showed you above shows that MY INTUITION beat your SCIENCE. This shows that there's a high amount of unreliable data and bias in science and that you cannot place your full trust into "studies" and "sources" Often times intuition can beat out these studies because there's so many flaws in science in practice that a lot of these studies are just as flawed as intuition.
  - nvrspyx 4y ago
    The real problem here is that you're extrapolating way past a reasonable intuition. Not only are you intuiting that pirating would impact sales, you're extrapolating that: 1. An ebook is the only way a pirated version gets circulated (many physical-only books are scanned and uploaded) 2. The displacement caused by piracy from introducing an ebook version will outweigh the combined revenue of physical and ebook sales, such that physical-only revenue > physical book revenue + ebook revenue - piracy displacement, which depends on assumption 1. 3. Piracy displacement is comparable across media types and topic. For example, does your "intuition" tell you that a programmer is just as likely to pirate a programming book given the amount of free learning material on the internet as a movie watcher is to pirate a movie or a video game player to pirate a game? I think your intuition is more flawed than science. Science at least suggests only what the results show and doesn't build upon unsubstantiated assumption after unsubstantiated assumption. To address some other points: > However oftentimes statistical data is not AVAILABLE. Thus you must make a claim with available evidence. In that case, you should make a hypothesis and not a claim, even if you don't have the means to test it. If you make a claim, you have the burden of proof, but by your own admission, you have none. > 1 person is 1 data point which is better than zero. Anecdotal data matters. It might be better than zero, but not my much. In many cases, it's worse because it's misleading. Anecdotal data only matters in aggregate such that the sample size is reasonable. Using a derivative of your car accident example: just because one pedestrian survives getting hit by a car doesn't mean that getting by a car isn't fatal. Finally, your link is not a counter to the parent's link as all their link says is that ebooks sell more than physical books while also acknowledging that ebook piracy has also grown.

auggierose 4y ago

I prefer ebooks too. If I am really interested in the book, I buy the print version of the book though, if I cannot find an ebook version of high quality (that excludes many epubs, as formulas are typeset horribly in all of them; so a high-quality ebook is usually in PDF format). I am toying with the idea of sending these print books to somebody who (destructively?) scans them for me as PDFs. For reading, I prefer my iPad Pro, although when looking at multiple books at the same time, I also put them up on one of my monitors.