Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #360712 > unrolled thread

Accessing books and articles

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

Contents

  Accessing books and articles Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-14 09:06 -0500
    Re: Accessing books and articles Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-14 09:16 -0500
    Re: Accessing books and articles Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-14 07:23 -0700
      Re: Accessing books and articles "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2015-08-17 20:10 +0200
    Re: Accessing books and articles Poutnik <Poutnik4NNTP@gmail.com> - 2015-08-14 16:33 +0200
      Re: Accessing books and articles Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-14 10:06 -0500
        Re: Accessing books and articles Poutnik <Poutnik4NNTP@gmail.com> - 2015-08-14 17:14 +0200
        Re: Accessing books and articles HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-08-14 11:26 -0400
    Re: Accessing books and articles gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-14 13:41 -0500
    Re: Accessing books and articles benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-08-14 15:01 -0400
      Re: Accessing books and articles John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-14 17:25 -0700
      Re: Accessing books and articles HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 08:06 -0400
    Re: Accessing books and articles Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-08-14 19:13 +0000
      Re: Accessing books and articles kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-08-14 15:43 -0400
        Re: Accessing books and articles Eteocles Panagakos <eteoclespd@prospernetwork.org> - 2015-08-14 19:51 +0000
          Re: Accessing books and articles Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-14 15:22 -0500
            Re: Accessing books and articles Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-08-14 20:39 +0000
              Re: Accessing books and articles Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-14 16:09 -0500
                Re: Accessing books and articles Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-08-14 21:14 +0000
                  Re: Accessing books and articles Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-14 16:33 -0500
          Re: Accessing books and articles Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 10:43 +0200
        Re: Accessing books and articles Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-14 15:00 -0500
          Re: Accessing books and articles Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-08-14 20:30 +0000
            Re: Accessing books and articles Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-14 15:46 -0500
              Re: Accessing books and articles Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-08-15 02:04 +0000
                Re: Accessing books and articles Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-14 21:37 -0500
                Re: Accessing books and articles kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-08-14 22:40 -0400
                  Re: Accessing books and articles Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-08-15 03:15 +0000
                    Re: Accessing books and articles kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-08-14 23:57 -0400
                      Re: Accessing books and articles Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 12:13 +0200
                        Re: Accessing books and articles kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-08-15 10:38 -0400
                          Re: Accessing books and articles Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 16:59 +0200
                    Re: Accessing books and articles Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 12:05 +0200
                    Re: Accessing books and articles John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-15 17:49 -0700
                Re: Accessing books and articles John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-14 20:05 -0700
                Re: Accessing books and articles Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 11:51 +0200
            Re: Accessing books and articles kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-08-14 18:38 -0400
              Re: Accessing books and articles Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-14 18:11 -0500
        Re: Accessing books and articles Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-08-14 20:05 +0000
          Re: Accessing books and articles Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-14 15:10 -0500
      Re: Accessing books and articles Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-14 14:51 -0500
        Re: Accessing books and articles Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-14 15:07 -0500
        Re: Accessing books and articles Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-08-14 20:19 +0000
          Re: Accessing books and articles Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-14 15:37 -0500
            Re: Accessing books and articles Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 12:34 +0200
        Re: Accessing books and articles Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-08-17 01:05 +0200
      Re: Accessing books and articles Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2015-08-14 18:56 -0500
        Re: Accessing books and articles Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-08-15 00:53 +0000
          Re: Accessing books and articles John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-14 18:43 -0700
        Re: Accessing books and articles Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 12:41 +0200
        Re: Should we jail librarians ? ! benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-08-17 03:08 -0400
          Re: Should we jail librarians ? ! noel <deletethis@invalin.lan> - 2015-08-18 08:40 +1000
            Re: Should we jail librarians ? ! benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-08-17 19:25 -0400
            Re: Should we jail librarians ? ! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-08-18 08:48 -0400
              Re: Should we jail librarians ? ! noel <deletethis@invalin.lan> - 2015-08-19 10:04 +1000
                Re: Should we jail librarians ? ! "A.M" <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-08-19 12:54 -0400
      Re: Accessing books and articles Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 10:39 +0200
    Re: Accessing books and articles Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 08:20 -0700
      Re: Accessing books and articles Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 18:19 +0200
        Re: Accessing books and articles kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-08-15 12:37 -0400
          Re: Accessing books and articles Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 18:45 +0200
    Re: Accessing books and articles Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-08-16 12:04 +0200
      Re: Accessing books and articles Eteocles Panagakos <eteoclespd@prospernetwork.org> - 2015-08-16 11:44 +0000
        Re: Accessing books and articles Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-08-16 15:30 +0200
    Re: Accessing books and articles "T.M. Sommers" <tmsommers2@gmail.com> - 2015-08-16 11:07 -0400
      Re: Accessing books and articles Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-08-16 17:53 +0200
      Re: Accessing books and articles Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-08-17 00:44 +0200
    Re: Accessing books and articles Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-08-16 18:27 +0000

Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4  Next page →

#360769

On 8/14/2015 2:13 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 09:06:25 -0500, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>
>>
>> Access to a university library is almost always free and does not
>> require a campus ID. Once inside, you have free access to any of the
>> shelved materials.
>>
>
> You are advocating a giant step backward into the idiocy of the past.
>
> All information, bar none, should be accessible from the comfort
> of my desktop.  That's the whole fscking point of the so-called
> INTERNET (the information superhighway, remember?).  The fact that
> universal and free access is taking so fscking long to implement,
> even though it's perfectly possible to do so right now, is a testament
> to the inexcusable intransigence exhibited by contemporary men.

LOL. Love your pseudo-ideologue manifesto.

>
> We have scientific publishing houses stubbornly clinging to their
> easy source of income.  The world, however, is changing drastically.
> It's time for these folks to seek their profit elsewhere (maybe
> selling ice cream from a truck?).

Well, this rather implies that the publisher does nothing to add value, 
and only takes someone's hard work and makes money off it. And it also 
implies that the author of the information has contributed nothing of 
value and should not be compensated for the work in any way. After all, 
all the author has done is supply information -- high quality 
information -- and information is free.

So instead authors should invest years of their lives to write high 
quality information and disseminate it for free for the betterment of 
mankind. And if any author worries how he will feed his family while 
he's investing that effort, then he shouldn't be writing. Only 
independently wealthy people should take on the task of writing high 
quality information, so that they can disseminate it for free.

And, by the way, the same authors won't have a publisher that is 
providing illustrators or photo researchers, so they'll have to do their 
own illustrations and take their own photos. Oh, but photos are 
information and are free too, so professional photographers can hang it 
up -- no point in that job.

And while we're at it, medical diagnosis and treatment plans are 
information and should be free. Doctors should freely tell their 
patients what's wrong with them and what they need to do to correct it, 
all for free, because that's nothing more than information. Where are 
the websites where I can buy a diagnostic probe to plug into my 
computer and have some software do all that FOR FREE?

>
> If I see a link, I should be able to simply click and have the article
> IMMEDIATELY.  There's no need for libraries that house THOUSANDS OF
> TONS of obsolete paper.  But currently all I get is a goddamned
> pay wall.  This practice has got to die.
>
> Information is free.  There is no justification whatsoever
> for sci publishers. (But Odd Ball will certainly attempt to
> find one.)
>
> The Google Books Library Project should be lauded, but all recent
> information should be, and should have been been, all DIGITAL.
> Use trees for fscking toothpicks and toilet paper, not books and
> journals.
>
> Note: using Djvu compression ( http://djvu.org ) I can compress
> 150 dpi 8"x5" scanned documents to 12 kilobytes and I have been
> doing this for a long, long time.  Years and years of paperwork
> can be kept on a thumb drive.  C'mon world.  Get your asses moving.
>

You go first. Your services for free, right?


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#360777

On 8/14/2015 2:51 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>
> You go first. Your services for free, right?

Oh, wait, a man's man like you has to provide for his family, because 
there's no way you're going to let a *woman* do that in your world, are 
you?

So how do you feed your family, there, Fabian?

Oh wait, I know. There's no family to provide for, so you only have to 
provide for yourself. Because a woman and useless children would only be 
a ball and chain to a man's man like you. Right?

-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#360780

On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 14:51:53 -0500, Odd Bodkin wrote:

> 
> Well, this rather implies that the publisher does nothing to add value,
>

They don't.  Unless you consider a snappy, colorful cover sheet "added value."
 
> 
> and only takes someone's hard work and makes money off it.
>

That's their basic business model.

>
> And it also 
> implies that the author of the information has contributed nothing of 
> value and should not be compensated for the work in any way.
>

The authors receive compensation from their supporting institution, be
it academic, industrial, or governmental.

> 
> So instead authors should invest years of their lives to write high 
> quality information and disseminate it for free for the betterment of 
> mankind
>

That's the whole raison detre of academic research, and it has been that
way for hundreds of years.








>
> And if any author worries how he will feed his family while 
> he's investing that effort, then he shouldn't be writing. Only 
> independently wealthy people
>

Academic or governmental institutions provide independence to scientific
researchers.

But, yes, if an author cannot be satisfied with such institutional sponsorship
then he should not be writing.


> 
> And, by the way, the same authors won't have a publisher that is 
> providing illustrators or photo researchers, so they'll have to do their 
> own illustrations and take their own photos. Oh, but photos are 
> information and are free too, so professional photographers can hang it 
> up -- no point in that job.
> 

Ever hear of software?  A schoolboy can now produce better graphics than
those homosexuals artists employs by publishing houses


>
> And while we're at it, medical diagnosis and treatment plans are 
> information and should be free. Doctors should freely tell their 
> patients what's wrong with them and what they need to do to correct it, 
> all for free,
>

This is a whimsical derivation and has no substance.


> 
> You go first. Your services for free, right?
>

When I was formerly supported by an institution I had made information
available for free.  As stated above, this has been the practice since
Plato's Academy.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#360786

On 8/14/2015 3:19 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 14:51:53 -0500, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>
>>
>> Well, this rather implies that the publisher does nothing to add value,
>
> They don't.  Unless you consider a snappy, colorful cover sheet "added value."

I'm pretty sure you don't have the foggiest idea what a publisher does.

>
>> and only takes someone's hard work and makes money off it.
>
> That's their basic business model.
>
>>
>> And it also
>> implies that the author of the information has contributed nothing of
>> value and should not be compensated for the work in any way.
>>
>
> The authors receive compensation from their supporting institution, be
> it academic, industrial, or governmental.

I completely disagree. Academic institutions do not pay any of their 
staff for the time writing a book. In fact, professors who want to write 
a book have to "buy their commitment" back from the university. Or they 
have to do it in their spare time, so that it does not affect their 
research, teaching, and administrative work.

Academic papers ARE part of the job description for many positions, 
especially in academia (not so much in government and industry), but it 
is not a for-free model. When a researcher earns a grant to do research, 
a good chunk of that (perhaps a 1/3rd) goes to "overhead", which is 
precisely to pay for the costs of publishing work and having available 
the published work of others.

>
>>
>> So instead authors should invest years of their lives to write high
>> quality information and disseminate it for free for the betterment of
>> mankind
>>
>
> That's the whole raison detre of academic research, and it has been that
> way for hundreds of years.
>

I think you may be under the illusion that universities don't pay for 
the access to those journals.

>>
>> And if any author worries how he will feed his family while
>> he's investing that effort, then he shouldn't be writing. Only
>> independently wealthy people
>>
>
> Academic or governmental institutions provide independence to scientific
> researchers.
>
> But, yes, if an author cannot be satisfied with such institutional sponsorship
> then he should not be writing.

And perhaps you are aware that if an author cannot attract enough 
funding for his research to pay for the overhead that funds the access 
to publications, then they are not awarded tenure and they are let go?

>
>
>>
>> And, by the way, the same authors won't have a publisher that is
>> providing illustrators or photo researchers, so they'll have to do their
>> own illustrations and take their own photos. Oh, but photos are
>> information and are free too, so professional photographers can hang it
>> up -- no point in that job.
>>
>
> Ever hear of software?  A schoolboy can now produce better graphics than
> those homosexuals artists employs by publishing houses

I think those "homosexual artists" (or maybe they are -- shudder -- 
women) use that software. And they use it better than a schoolboy can.

>
>
>>
>> And while we're at it, medical diagnosis and treatment plans are
>> information and should be free. Doctors should freely tell their
>> patients what's wrong with them and what they need to do to correct it,
>> all for free,
>>
>
> This is a whimsical derivation and has no substance.
>
>
>>
>> You go first. Your services for free, right?
>>
>
> When I was formerly supported by an institution I had made information
> available for free.  As stated above, this has been the practice since
> Plato's Academy.

No, you did not make information for free. You had to pay for it with 
grant money and other institutional services for which the clients paid 
more than you were compensated. If that was not true for you, then I 
understand how your separation from the institution happened.


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#360858

Dne 14/08/2015 v 22:37 Odd Bodkin napsal(a):
> 
> I completely disagree. Academic institutions do not pay any of their 
> staff for the time writing a book. In fact, professors who want to write 
> a book have to "buy their commitment" back from the university. Or they 
> have to do it in their spare time, so that it does not affect their 
> research, teaching, and administrative work.
> 

Feynman wrote in his book "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!",
that he got a free paid sabbatical year to do anything he wants.
Some "carte blanche".

Note that unpaid sabbatical are more common.

-- 
Poutnik ( the Czech word for a wanderer )

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#361039

Odd Bodkin wrote:

> On 8/14/2015 2:13 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
>> We have scientific publishing houses stubbornly clinging to their
>> easy source of income.  The world, however, is changing drastically.
>> It's time for these folks to seek their profit elsewhere (maybe
>> selling ice cream from a truck?).
> 
> Well, this rather implies that the publisher does nothing to add value,
> and only takes someone's hard work and makes money off it. And it also
> implies that the author of the information has contributed nothing of
> value and should not be compensated for the work in any way. After all,
> all the author has done is supply information -- high quality
> information -- and information is free.
> 
> So instead authors should invest years of their lives to write high
> quality information and disseminate it for free for the betterment of
> mankind. And if any author worries how he will feed his family while
> he's investing that effort, then he shouldn't be writing. Only
> independently wealthy people should take on the task of writing high
> quality information, so that they can disseminate it for free.

There is hope that some day people will be compensated for their 
contributions to society with something other than money, so that the notion 
of “wealthy people” becomes one of the past.  We can already see the 
beginnings of that as so-called “fringe benefits” are growing, and growing 
in importance for employees.  A big salary is no longer always the major 
argument for taking a job; a comfortable working environment and proper 
work-life balance are valued more. 

Publishing houses will have to change in order to keep up, and I know from 
personal experience that some are trying to change, some really desperately 
as they feel the grip of digital media on their neck.

But those are topics for other newsgroups.


PointedEars
-- 
“Science is empirical: knowing the answer means nothing;
 testing your knowledge means everything.”
   —Dr. Lawrence M. Krauss, theoretical physicist,
    in “A Universe from Nothing” (2009)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#360808

On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 19:13:40 +0000, Fabian Russell wrote:

> All information, bar none, should be accessible from the comfort of my
> desktop.  [yada, yada, yada]

Someone has to pay for its cataloguing and publication.  If the library 
pays, you go to the library.  If you pay, you get it at home.

Information is not free.  Nothing which requires effort is free.  You may 
not have to pay for it, but it is not *free*.

The closest you can come to "free" information is if you decide, as a 
group, to pay for it as a group.  That's called:

[ding, ding, ding, ding]  You guessed it!  A library!

-- 
Goat

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#360810

On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 18:56:10 -0500, Lofty Goat wrote:

> 
> The closest you can come to "free" information is if you decide, as a 
> group, to pay for it as a group.  That's called:
> 
> [ding, ding, ding, ding]  You guessed it!  A library!
>

The library will soon suffer the same fate as the consultant.

Many people still seek solutions to technical problems from
a paid consultant or expert in a particular field.  But other people
will just post their problem or question to one of the hundreds of
Internet forums because they know that an expert, and usually more
than one, will respond for free with highly competent information.

I am sorry, Mr. High-Paid Consultant, but you are now redundant.

We are facing a tremendous social crisis.  Information, in itself
an intangible and nebulous entity, could be commoditized by virtue
of a need for tangible channels of distribution.  Such material requirements
for an otherwise immaterial product formed the basis for all large publishing
houses, newspapers broadcasting networks, etc.  But today those material channels
are no longer necessary.  Information has become truly free and universally
accessible.

But rather than rejoicing and implementing appropriate networks for information
dissemination, there are those among us who will insist on preserving the old
ways. These folks are responsible for inventing "make believe" channels such as
pay walls, digital rights management, and subscription services.  These folks
are dinosaurs and should be made to suffer a total extinction.

Limiting information to material channels is like having had limited the early
automobiles to ply the existing horse trails instead of building a highway system.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#360813

On Friday, August 14, 2015 at 7:54:26 PM UTC-5, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 18:56:10 -0500, Lofty Goat wrote:
> 
> > 
> > The closest you can come to "free" information is if you decide, as a 
> > group, to pay for it as a group.  That's called:
> > 
> > [ding, ding, ding, ding]  You guessed it!  A library!
> >
> 
> The library will soon suffer the same fate as the consultant.
> 
> Many people still seek solutions to technical problems from
> a paid consultant or expert in a particular field.  But other people
> will just post their problem or question to one of the hundreds of
> Internet forums because they know that an expert, and usually more
> than one, will respond for free with highly competent information.
> 
> I am sorry, Mr. High-Paid Consultant, but you are now redundant.
> 
> We are facing a tremendous social crisis.  Information, in itself
> an intangible and nebulous entity, could be commoditized by virtue
> of a need for tangible channels of distribution.  Such material requirements
> for an otherwise immaterial product formed the basis for all large publishing
> houses, newspapers broadcasting networks, etc.  But today those material channels
> are no longer necessary.  Information has become truly free and universally
> accessible.
> 
> But rather than rejoicing and implementing appropriate networks for information
> dissemination, there are those among us who will insist on preserving the old
> ways. These folks are responsible for inventing "make believe" channels such as
> pay walls, digital rights management, and subscription services.  These folks
> are dinosaurs and should be made to suffer a total extinction.
> 
> Limiting information to material channels is like having had limited the early
> automobiles to ply the existing horse trails instead of building a highway system.

The opposite might happen.  An "outsider" may penetrate the consciousness of the scientific convention.  The outsider will ask questions and have answers that are free of charge- to be used by convention as it sees fit.  There is no room here for pretense.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#360860

Dne 15/08/2015 v 01:56 Lofty Goat napsal(a):
> Someone has to pay for its cataloguing and publication.  If the library 
> pays, you go to the library.  If you pay, you get it at home.
> 
> Information is not free.  Nothing which requires effort is free.  You may 
> not have to pay for it, but it is not *free*.

Everything worthy comes with price.

But one is not always the one who pay it,
and the price is not always in money.

-- 
Poutnik ( the Czech word for a wanderer )

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#361063 — Re: Should we jail librarians ? !

On 08/16/2015 06:09 AM, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote:
>
> Bob_Watkins wrote:
>> The closest you can come to "free" information is
>> if you decide, as a group, to pay for it as a group.
>> That's called:
>>
>> [ding, ding, ding, ding]  You guessed it!  A library!
>
> Here's a good library or two:
>
>    rarbg.to/s/MVGroup/
>    rarbg.to/torrents.php?category=41
>    kickass.unblocked.pw/usearch/_A_Search_Term_/?field=time_add&sorder=desc
>
> Copying a file might be "illegal", but it's not "theft";
> it's better than checking out a CD from the library ! ! ?
>
> Should we jail librarians
> and make them return their "ill_gotten gains" ? !
>
> Through luck, or whatever, some can _waste_ money on houses,
> cars, and vacations... So why begrudge those who'd copy files ?

Rolf, you are still an idiot. Copying a file IS theft if the file is 
copyrighted. "RIGHT TO COPY"!  Get the picture? To copy without the 
right to do so is theft pure and simple. Libraries PAY for their copies 
of things. It's the library patrons who get to read, listen to, view, 
whatever, the file without paying for it. Basically the library buys the 
book and you get to READ it, but you never own the book nor have the 
right to even copy it.

The problem that has developed with digital technology is that it has 
become easy to illegally copy things making a perfect copy which then is 
every bit as good as the original. (Note in the past actions like 
recording of records never produced an exact copy, but an inferior one)

This is why to me it is important to monitor copyright laws to insure 
they are used as an enhancement of civilization that ENCOURAGES people 
to produce such materials rather than a tool of greed extending long 
beyond the author's life and making no exceptions for research and 
education. We all die and that means we ALL have a duty to pass on what 
we know to the next generations. That's why there are "fair use" 
exceptions for copyrights etc. There is a fine line here but a line that 
CAN be figured out. In fact many in the "open source" community have 
already figured much of it out!

-- 
         ___           ___           ___            ___
        /\  \         /\  \         /\__\          /\  \
       /::\  \       /::\  \       /::|  |         \:\  \
      /:/\:\  \     /:/\:\  \     /:|:|  |     ___ /::\__\
     /::\~\:\__\   /::\~\:\  \   /:/|:|  |__  /\  /:/\/__/
    /:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/  /
    \:\~\:\/:/  / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/  /  \::/  /
     \:\ \::/  /   \:\ \:\__\       |:/:/  /    \/__/
      \:\/:/  /     \:\ \/__/       |::/  /
       \_:/__/       \:\__\         /:/  /
                      \/__/         \/__/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#361138 — Re: Should we jail librarians ? !

On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 03:08:44 -0400, benj wrote:

> 
> Rolf, you are still an idiot. Copying a file IS theft if the file is
> copyrighted. "RIGHT TO COPY"!  Get the picture? To copy without the
> right to do so is theft pure and simple. 

Actually, no, not so pure and not so simple, don't assume your countries 
laws apply equally everywhere, you see in my country:

1/ Theft implies a criminal offence, a violation of an Act under the 
criminal code, making theft, the stealing of a thing, trade or state 
secret, a "crime" under our criminal code.

2/ Copyright infringement is not under our criminal code, it is covered 
by other legislation, the Telecommunications Act, meaning it is a CIVIL 
wrong, making it a matter for the copyright owner to chase down and sue 
all violators for damages - any "fair use provisions" not withstanding.

Although copyright infringment is wrong and deprives the author (well 
actually nearly everyone BUT the author, since they get sweet fuck all of 
the royalties anyway - the majority goes to managers, production comps 
and so on) of a small part of their income capability, so please do not 
confuse the two, you can not here and since most of this countries laws 
originate out of the westminster legal system, I dare say much of UK and 
maybe even much of europe, call C.I.  "theft".

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#361142 — Re: Should we jail librarians ? !

On 08/17/2015 06:40 PM, noel wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 03:08:44 -0400, benj wrote:
>
>>
>> Rolf, you are still an idiot. Copying a file IS theft if the file is
>> copyrighted. "RIGHT TO COPY"!  Get the picture? To copy without the
>> right to do so is theft pure and simple.
>
> Actually, no, not so pure and not so simple, don't assume your countries
> laws apply equally everywhere, you see in my country:
>
> 1/ Theft implies a criminal offence, a violation of an Act under the
> criminal code, making theft, the stealing of a thing, trade or state
> secret, a "crime" under our criminal code.
>
> 2/ Copyright infringement is not under our criminal code, it is covered
> by other legislation, the Telecommunications Act, meaning it is a CIVIL
> wrong, making it a matter for the copyright owner to chase down and sue
> all violators for damages - any "fair use provisions" not withstanding.
>
> Although copyright infringment is wrong and deprives the author (well
> actually nearly everyone BUT the author, since they get sweet fuck all of
> the royalties anyway - the majority goes to managers, production comps
> and so on) of a small part of their income capability, so please do not
> confuse the two, you can not here and since most of this countries laws
> originate out of the westminster legal system, I dare say much of UK and
> maybe even much of europe, call C.I.  "theft".

Well, you can argue fine points of law but that isn't the point, is it?

Theft as a general word means taking something that does not belong to 
you from someone else if they have not given you permission (sold it or 
gave it to you). Whether it's criminal law or civil law there are acts 
causing damages to the owners and owners have right to seek justice.

How exactly all this is done just depends on the system and doesn't 
change the meaning of what is going on. The points under discussion are 
the big picture and the big picture is how can copyrights encourage the 
kinds of works that move civilization forward? A bunch of people 
"stealing" a file instead of paying for the work clearly discourages 
authors from engaging in the creation of such works. But as you note 
ALSO a bunch of managers, producers, production companies etc. grabbing 
an unfair share also represent a problem.

Again I point out the general principle of copyright laws is NOT to 
guarantee profits for authors and their descendants forever, but rather 
to ENCOURAGE such authors to produce such works. Stopping the "theft" or 
whatever word you want to use by easy digital technology helps do that 
by giving return for the effort. On the other hand my point was that 
when the guarantees of profit become so excessive and finely tuned that 
educational and research "fair use" is denied without fees, then clearly 
the original purpose of copyright laws (namely to encourage research and 
education for the betterment of society) has been subverted.


-- 
         ___           ___           ___            ___
        /\  \         /\  \         /\__\          /\  \
       /::\  \       /::\  \       /::|  |         \:\  \
      /:/\:\  \     /:/\:\  \     /:|:|  |     ___ /::\__\
     /::\~\:\__\   /::\~\:\  \   /:/|:|  |__  /\  /:/\/__/
    /:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/  /
    \:\~\:\/:/  / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/  /  \::/  /
     \:\ \::/  /   \:\ \:\__\       |:/:/  /    \/__/
      \:\/:/  /     \:\ \/__/       |::/  /
       \_:/__/       \:\__\         /:/  /
                      \/__/         \/__/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#361185 — Re: Should we jail librarians ? !

On 2015-08-17 6:40 PM, noel wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 03:08:44 -0400, benj wrote:
> 
>>
>> Rolf, you are still an idiot. Copying a file IS theft if the file is
>> copyrighted. "RIGHT TO COPY"!  Get the picture? To copy without the
>> right to do so is theft pure and simple. 
> 
> Actually, no, not so pure and not so simple, don't assume your countries 
> laws apply equally everywhere, you see in my country:
> 
> 1/ Theft implies a criminal offence, a violation of an Act under the 
> criminal code, making theft, the stealing of a thing, trade or state 
> secret, a "crime" under our criminal code.
> 
> 2/ Copyright infringement is not under our criminal code, it is covered 
> by other legislation, the Telecommunications Act, meaning it is a CIVIL 
> wrong, making it a matter for the copyright owner to chase down and sue 
> all violators for damages - any "fair use provisions" not withstanding.
> 
> Although copyright infringment is wrong and deprives the author (well 
> actually nearly everyone BUT the author, since they get sweet fuck all of 
> the royalties anyway - the majority goes to managers, production comps 
> and so on) of a small part of their income capability, so please do not 
> confuse the two, you can not here and since most of this countries laws 
> originate out of the westminster legal system, I dare say much of UK and 
> maybe even much of europe, call C.I.  "theft".

It really is repulsive how little authors actually make from their
craft. If you're a well-known artist of any kind, it really is to your
advantage to self-publish. Of course, if no one knows who you are, it
might be better to make a name for yourself first with the marketing of
a publisher. Most of your profits will go to paying their salaries, but
once you become famous, you can change your way of operating entirely.

-- 
A.M

Hillary for Prison 2016!!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#361241 — Re: Should we jail librarians ? !

On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 08:48:29 -0400, A.M wrote:

> 
> It really is repulsive how little authors actually make from their
> craft. If you're a well-known artist of any kind, it really is to your
> advantage to self-publish. Of course, if no one knows who you are, it
> might be better to make a name for yourself first with the marketing of
> a publisher. Most of your profits will go to paying their salaries, but
> once you become famous, you can change your way of operating entirely.

Exactly!  but how many do, how many are blinded by their managers self 
interest bullshit that make it seems the world will fall apart if tehy go 
it alone, and so just end up going with the flow maintaining status quo.
sadly.. most...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#361301 — Re: Should we jail librarians ? !

On 2015-08-18 8:04 PM, noel wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 08:48:29 -0400, A.M wrote:
> 
>>
>> It really is repulsive how little authors actually make from their
>> craft. If you're a well-known artist of any kind, it really is to your
>> advantage to self-publish. Of course, if no one knows who you are, it
>> might be better to make a name for yourself first with the marketing of
>> a publisher. Most of your profits will go to paying their salaries, but
>> once you become famous, you can change your way of operating entirely.
> 
> Exactly!  but how many do, how many are blinded by their managers self 
> interest bullshit that make it seems the world will fall apart if tehy go 
> it alone, and so just end up going with the flow maintaining status quo.
> sadly.. most...

As an author, I am unknown and probably will remain that way for my
entire life. Knowing that there was no way that I was ever going to make
any kind of real money from the craft, I was ready and willing to just
write stories and give them away. After all, I was more interested in
fame (no matter how little of it) than fortune anyway. My wife pushed me
into seeking compensation which is why I published it, however I
insisted on self-publishing for two reasons: 1) I retain all rights, 2)
if there are profits of any kind, I get the largest amount of them. I
know that self-publishing is not seen as favourably as being published.
After all, self-publishing tends to suggest that the book itself is not
that great because it wasn't good enough to be picked up by a company.
Meanwhile, I never sought the interest of a publisher. Whether I end up
being the greatest author who ever lived or some hack, it feels good to
know that I am not subservient to anyone else. I would absolutely love
for most talented musicians to take this route as well, especially since
there are many excellent web sites which will market their music just as
effectively as any publisher would, people buy digital copies of music
instead of physical ones and they get to keep all of their royalties.
Thom Yorke's been convinced, I can only hope others see how awful the
current system is and move away from it.


-- 
A.M

Hillary for Prison 2016!!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#360847

Dne 14/08/2015 v 21:13 Fabian Russell napsal(a):
> On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 09:06:25 -0500, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> 
>>
>> Access to a university library is almost always free and does not 
>> require a campus ID. Once inside, you have free access to any of the 
>> shelved materials.
>>
> 
> You are advocating a giant step backward into the idiocy of the past.
> 
> All information, bar none, should be accessible from the comfort
> of my desktop.  That's the whole fscking point of the so-called
> INTERNET (the information superhighway, remember?). 

However I like everything free, I do not agree.

What does make you think
you have right for free access to all information ?

It is the right of information holder,
if it is provided at all, and if free or not.
( unless access is granted by law )

It does not depend on existence of internet.

If there are roads to gates of all buildings,
should it grant access to all things inside ?

Some building holders grant such access, if public,
some restricted one, some none at all.

It is on them, not on visitors.

-- 
Poutnik ( the Czech word for a wanderer )

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#360881

The libraries here in USA have automatic false alarms at the exit. When I borrowed a book, I tried to leave by the door, but a false alarm went off and a government security goon said I would be considered a thief if I did not obey the false alarm, obey a dunce government thug, and STOP THIEF! I try to minimize my contact with government scum, so I prefer internet papers to read. Hawaii Public Libraries are corrupt accusers and liars.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#360890

Dne 15/08/2015 v 17:20 Alan Folmsbee napsal(a):
> The libraries here in USA have automatic false alarms at the exit. When I borrowed a book, I tried to leave by the door, but a false alarm went off and a government security goon said I would be considered a thief if I did not obey the false alarm, obey a dunce government thug, and STOP THIEF! I try to minimize my contact with government scum, so I prefer internet papers to read. Hawaii Public Libraries are corrupt accusers and liars.
> 

It is not library specific.

Alarms with false positives are not false alarms.

Sometime operators fail to remove or deactivate the chip,
or the chip fails to be deactivated.

-- 
Poutnik ( the Czech word for a wanderer )

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#360891

On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 18:19:05 +0200, Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Dne 15/08/2015 v 17:20 Alan Folmsbee napsal(a):
>> The libraries here in USA have automatic false alarms at the exit. When I borrowed a book, I tried to leave by the door, but a false alarm went off and a government security goon said I would be considered a thief if I did not obey the false alarm, obey a dunce government thug, and STOP THIEF! I try to minimize my contact with government scum, so I prefer internet papers to read. Hawaii Public Libraries are corrupt accusers and liars.
>> 
>
>It is not library specific.
>
>Alarms with false positives are not false alarms.
>
>Sometime operators fail to remove or deactivate the chip,
>or the chip fails to be deactivated.

        He probably didn't have a library card,
and didn't "checkout" the book.   :-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web