4 ms·
I don't get it, on the frontpage you have books like "Harry Potter", I'm fairly sure that's not open source or even available for free distribution. It also see
by mrweasel 3y ago
I don't get it, on the frontpage you have books like "Harry Potter", I'm fairly sure that's not open source or even available for free distribution. It also seems counter intuitive that you get preferential treatment if you login, why would that be the case, if it's truly open?
- ftxbro 3y ago> "it also seems counter intuitive that you get preferential treatment if you login" what preferential treatment is that
- jer0me 3y ago> Fast downloads from our partners (requires logging in) https://annas-archive.org/md5/224c5b1195fd2fb4650c3b75c2908d65 https://annas-archive.org/md5/224c5b1195fd2fb4650c3b75c2908d...
- vidyesh 3y agoIn this case open-source does not mean only open-source books. Anna's Archive is a shadow library, they also maintain a pirate library mirror. So you can think of them like an anarchist(?) archivist? I think only the high-speed direct downloads require logging-in but other downloads and torrents are freely available.
- mrweasel 3y agoOkay, but isn't Project Gutenberg the true open source library, without the risk of me misunderstanding the licensing and violating copyright?
- ddeck 3y agoThe Internet Archive might be better example, depending on your definition of open. They have over 4 million books archived. I believe Project Gutenberg have around 70k. The Internet Archive include books still in copyright, which can be read by "borrowing" them virtually. https://archive.org/details/internetarchivebooks https://archive.org/details/internetarchivebooks
- mdp2021 3y ago> which can be read by "borrowing" Reminder: based on the idea that "if the library holds a physical copy it can lend an electronic view over it, respecting the same principle of the physical object, i.e. one user per item per period (i.e. one user per use instance)". Such principle is being fought.
- TechBro8615 3y agoViolating copyright is the whole point. The contention of this archive seems to be that Project Gutenberg is in fact not "open," because it's constrained by its adherence to copyright laws.
- jug 3y agoWeird definition of "open source". "It's open because we violated copyright and uploaded it in the open." Call it what it is. Pirated books. People that must use them still will but at least now we'll know what it is.
- jrflowers 3y ago> why would that be the case, if it's truly open? Traffic management would make sense.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- RobotToaster 3y agodo what you want 'cause a pirate is free
- mdp2021 3y ago> free Actually, per the meaning of its own name, is /daring/ ("per-ya", ex PIE for "to try, risk").
- foobarbecue 3y agohttps://youtu.be/i8ju_10NkGY https://youtu.be/i8ju_10NkGY