4 ms·
The decision to buy it is done after going through the book and see if I like how the author writes, how the example code is, and especially how it covers my sp
by fbuilesv 15y ago
The decision to buy it is done after going through the book and see if I like how the author writes, how the example code is, and especially how it covers my specific topic, before buying it
You're basically saying you'd walk in to a restaurant, have a bite of every dish and then maybe decide to pay for it.
I do this for about 3-5 books, and decide on which one to buy.
Now you walk into three restaurants, eat a bit at every one of them and then decide to pay for the one you liked the most.
I agree with the original article and I think there are times where piracy is valid, but let's not think that a valid solution is to pay for what we think we should pay and nothing else.
- tikhonj 15y agoNo. What he's saying is that he'd want to listen to a band on the radio or from a friend before maybe buying their album. Which is completely reasonable. Drawing parallels between physical property or services and information can be misleading--the real issue with the restaurant example is the restaurant's loss in both time and opportunity cost. Since copies of information are not naturally scarce, this is not an issue. It's really more like he looked at the food and cooked the same meal at home before coming to the restaurant and paying.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- psquid 15y agoThe important difference here is that your examples involve something physical; in both, he has eaten some food that can thus no longer be given to anyone else. Whereas, if he downloads a copy of an eBook, the publisher can still sell copies to just as many people; he has not removed any finite resource from the system. I'm still not sure it's justifiable (though I'm leaning slightly towards it being so), but it certainly isn't comparable to what you're saying it is.