3 ms·

I'm not saying this to be rude, so I apologize in advance if you personally take offence: In my mind, you're a complete idiot if you are an e-book consumer at

I'm not saying this to be rude, so I apologize in advance if you personally take offence: In my mind, you're a complete idiot if you are an e-book consumer at this point in time. You essentially rent the book for a price often higher than owning a physical copy of the exact same material. All this for the slight mobility advantage, and instant purchase ability. You can't share your ebooks with friends. You run the risk that the publisher might decide you're no longer worthy of that purchase. I question the sanity of any person that has done a pro/con comparison and actually judged e-books to be superior. My guess is that most people don't bother to actually think about these purchases. e-books can and should be revolutionary, but what is on offer now is essentially nothing more than window dressing - and people are eating it up.

Lukeas14 14y ago
Your reasons are very subjective and calling someone an idiot is always offensive whether you apologize in advance or not. Anyways, I like e-books because, for me, the mobility advantage is huge and I'm less concerned about lending them to friends. The only reason I buy them from Amazon, as opposed to torrenting, is to support the author. I wish I could do that without Amazon but they do provide a useful service allowing me to buy and sync books from any device. And once I remove the DRM I would certainly say that ebooks are superior to physical books for me.
- run4yourlives 14y ago
  First, you don't buy e-books, you rent them. The book doesn't really belong to you at all, as this article points out. Second, you not only pay more to support your behaviour, you break the law for it as well. (Note: I'm not a supporter of this law, but it is nonetheless true.) I'm sorry but I cannot see how the average person sees this as a net positive. You are by definition acting in an idiotic manner. Idiot: - a mentally deficient person, or someone who acts in a self-defeating or significantly counterproductive way. I'm using the second meaning, of course.
  - lukifer 14y ago
    There are several stores that sell content legally in DRM-free ePub, such as ebooks.com, not to mention all of the public domain content from Project Gutenberg. Moreover, I think consumers who have purchased a legal copy of a physical or DRM'd book have the moral authority to torrent a matching non-DRM copy, legal technicalities be damned. Please don't try to paint everyone with the same brush, or resort to name-calling. Techies usually understand the trade-offs and risks, and non-techies simply need to be educated.
    - run4yourlives 14y ago
      >legal technicalities be damned. I think the moment anyone says this, I'm well within the realm of normality to question that person's judgement making abilities. I happen to agree with you, but to simply ignore the fact that you need to break the law to make the value equation work in your favour is pretty much, well, idiotic.
      - lukifer 14y ago
        I'm of the opinion that the burden of proof is upon the law to justify its existence, and that I as a free sentient being have a right and/or responsibility to ignore any law that does not meet that burden of proof, and accept the consequences of doing so. The fear of death is the beginning of slavery.
  - awfabian2 14y ago
    You actually can't make that assertion in confidence. To do so, you have to measure the utility of the benefits to a given individual, and the utility of the money they spend on it, and quantify the risk of Amazon revoking/pulling the content. As hard as it might be for you to believe, your subjective worldview is not absolute reality, and not everyone shares your world-view and definition of utility, so you can't actually judge whether their actions are self-defeating for them.
  - Lukeas14 14y ago
    Once again, just because the benefits don't outweigh the costs for you does not mean it can't be a net positive for other people. eBooks have resulted in me reading twice the number of books I would've read otherwise and I've never bought an ebook that costs more than the physical copy. Explain to me how that is counterproductive or self-defeating. Laws are simply the consequences you face if you get caught performing behavior deemed illegal. The chances of someone being punished for removing the DRM from an eBook are essentially nil (provided you're not sharing it).
samdk 14y ago
You're understating the benefits and missing a few key ones. First, the instant purchase ability is extremely important. It means that books gain some measure of equality with other forms of media (the internet, movies/tv, music). With a Kindle I can read whatever book I want whenever I want, which means that I read many more books than I used to. Second, the mobility advantage isn't slight at all, especially for people who read a lot. If you're never carrying more than a single book around that's one thing, but I read 1-2 books a week, and a lot more (often 5+ a week) if I'm traveling. Even just during my daily commute, it's far easier to read while standing on the subway with a Kindle instead of a book. Beyond that, I find reading on a Kindle to be far more comfortable than reading a book. The actual reading experience is much nicer than trade paperbacks, which are printed very cheaply. It's much lighter and only requires one hand to hold/turn pages, so I can more easily read while lying down, and the newest version has a very nice backlight, so that I can read in bad lighting. There are obvious disadvantages, and I absolutely hate that DRM is still a thing, but the benefits absolutely outweigh any possible disadvantages for me. Anecdotally, it's the difference between me reading 5-10 books a year and me reading 50-100 books a year, and I'm a much happier person in the latter state. -- Also, if you're not saying something to be rude, you should actually write like that, not add a disclaimer at the top of what you're writing. There were a lot of ways to get the same message across without calling people idiots.
- run4yourlives 14y ago
  I'm understating the benefits because I highly doubt the average person is reading anywhere close to what you are reading. Personally, I'm not exactly sure where you are finding the time to read this much, but I digress. A vast majority of people read one book at a time. Two max. Given this, the idea that there is a massive benefit in portability is completely overstated - few people (outside of students) were carrying ten pounds of books around with them to support their reading habits. This same line of thinking holds true with purchasing. There is most certainly a convenience in not having to visit a store (or even order online), but most people read at a pace that is fully supportive of being able to find their next read in the traditional manner. That being said, I recognize these are both advantages. What I'm saying though is that there are very few people where this "advantage" makes any form of economic sense. Assuming your usage, this advantage is costing you $200-$500 a year. And your purchase isn't one of ownership. The argument for e-books right now is like leasing a car for $50 more a month than you can buy it for. Sure there are advantages to leasing, but logically, they don't come close to outweighing the costs.
fbuilesv 14y ago
You're confusing e-books with Kindle books. You can still buy a ton of DRM free books online. You can even buy DRM free .mobi (Kindle) books. PS: Calling someone "idiot" is never a good way to start a discussion. Especially when you're wrong.

Lukeas14 14y ago

Your reasons are very subjective and calling someone an idiot is always offensive whether you apologize in advance or not. Anyways, I like e-books because, for me, the mobility advantage is huge and I'm less concerned about lending them to friends. The only reason I buy them from Amazon, as opposed to torrenting, is to support the author. I wish I could do that without Amazon but they do provide a useful service allowing me to buy and sync books from any device. And once I remove the DRM I would certainly say that ebooks are superior to physical books for me.

run4yourlives 14y ago
First, you don't buy e-books, you rent them. The book doesn't really belong to you at all, as this article points out. Second, you not only pay more to support your behaviour, you break the law for it as well. (Note: I'm not a supporter of this law, but it is nonetheless true.) I'm sorry but I cannot see how the average person sees this as a net positive. You are by definition acting in an idiotic manner. Idiot: - a mentally deficient person, or someone who acts in a self-defeating or significantly counterproductive way. I'm using the second meaning, of course.
- lukifer 14y ago
  There are several stores that sell content legally in DRM-free ePub, such as ebooks.com, not to mention all of the public domain content from Project Gutenberg. Moreover, I think consumers who have purchased a legal copy of a physical or DRM'd book have the moral authority to torrent a matching non-DRM copy, legal technicalities be damned. Please don't try to paint everyone with the same brush, or resort to name-calling. Techies usually understand the trade-offs and risks, and non-techies simply need to be educated.
  - run4yourlives 14y ago
    >legal technicalities be damned. I think the moment anyone says this, I'm well within the realm of normality to question that person's judgement making abilities. I happen to agree with you, but to simply ignore the fact that you need to break the law to make the value equation work in your favour is pretty much, well, idiotic.
    - lukifer 14y ago
      I'm of the opinion that the burden of proof is upon the law to justify its existence, and that I as a free sentient being have a right and/or responsibility to ignore any law that does not meet that burden of proof, and accept the consequences of doing so. The fear of death is the beginning of slavery.
- awfabian2 14y ago
  You actually can't make that assertion in confidence. To do so, you have to measure the utility of the benefits to a given individual, and the utility of the money they spend on it, and quantify the risk of Amazon revoking/pulling the content. As hard as it might be for you to believe, your subjective worldview is not absolute reality, and not everyone shares your world-view and definition of utility, so you can't actually judge whether their actions are self-defeating for them.
- Lukeas14 14y ago
  Once again, just because the benefits don't outweigh the costs for you does not mean it can't be a net positive for other people. eBooks have resulted in me reading twice the number of books I would've read otherwise and I've never bought an ebook that costs more than the physical copy. Explain to me how that is counterproductive or self-defeating. Laws are simply the consequences you face if you get caught performing behavior deemed illegal. The chances of someone being punished for removing the DRM from an eBook are essentially nil (provided you're not sharing it).

samdk 14y ago

You're understating the benefits and missing a few key ones. First, the instant purchase ability is extremely important. It means that books gain some measure of equality with other forms of media (the internet, movies/tv, music). With a Kindle I can read whatever book I want whenever I want, which means that I read many more books than I used to. Second, the mobility advantage isn't slight at all, especially for people who read a lot. If you're never carrying more than a single book around that's one thing, but I read 1-2 books a week, and a lot more (often 5+ a week) if I'm traveling. Even just during my daily commute, it's far easier to read while standing on the subway with a Kindle instead of a book. Beyond that, I find reading on a Kindle to be far more comfortable than reading a book. The actual reading experience is much nicer than trade paperbacks, which are printed very cheaply. It's much lighter and only requires one hand to hold/turn pages, so I can more easily read while lying down, and the newest version has a very nice backlight, so that I can read in bad lighting. There are obvious disadvantages, and I absolutely hate that DRM is still a thing, but the benefits absolutely outweigh any possible disadvantages for me. Anecdotally, it's the difference between me reading 5-10 books a year and me reading 50-100 books a year, and I'm a much happier person in the latter state. -- Also, if you're not saying something to be rude, you should actually write like that, not add a disclaimer at the top of what you're writing. There were a lot of ways to get the same message across without calling people idiots.

run4yourlives 14y ago
I'm understating the benefits because I highly doubt the average person is reading anywhere close to what you are reading. Personally, I'm not exactly sure where you are finding the time to read this much, but I digress. A vast majority of people read one book at a time. Two max. Given this, the idea that there is a massive benefit in portability is completely overstated - few people (outside of students) were carrying ten pounds of books around with them to support their reading habits. This same line of thinking holds true with purchasing. There is most certainly a convenience in not having to visit a store (or even order online), but most people read at a pace that is fully supportive of being able to find their next read in the traditional manner. That being said, I recognize these are both advantages. What I'm saying though is that there are very few people where this "advantage" makes any form of economic sense. Assuming your usage, this advantage is costing you $200-$500 a year. And your purchase isn't one of ownership. The argument for e-books right now is like leasing a car for $50 more a month than you can buy it for. Sure there are advantages to leasing, but logically, they don't come close to outweighing the costs.

fbuilesv 14y ago

You're confusing e-books with Kindle books. You can still buy a ton of DRM free books online. You can even buy DRM free .mobi (Kindle) books. PS: Calling someone "idiot" is never a good way to start a discussion. Especially when you're wrong.