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

Groups > sci.physics > #513534 > unrolled thread

Accessing books and articles

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

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 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 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 Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-08-14 13:48 -0700
                Re: Accessing books and articles Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-08-14 21:34 +0000
                  Re: Accessing books and articles Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-14 16:42 -0500
                    Re: Accessing books and articles Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-08-14 22:03 +0000
                      Re: Accessing books and articles Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-14 17:25 -0500
                        Re: Accessing books and articles Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-14 17:37 -0500
                      Re: Accessing books and articles HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 08:50 -0400
              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 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 Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-08-14 15:53 -0700
              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 Timo <timo@physics.uq.edu.au> - 2015-08-14 16:04 -0700
              Re: Accessing books and articles Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-14 20:05 -0500
                Re: Accessing books and articles Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-08-15 03:23 +0000
                  Re: Accessing books and articles Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 10:10 +0200
                  Re: Accessing books and articles Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 07:44 -0500
                Re: Accessing books and articles Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-08-17 01:09 +0200
            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 Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 12:41 +0200
        Re: Accessing books and articles "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2015-08-16 13:10 -0700
          Re: Accessing books and articles Fabian Russell <root@localhost.localdomain> - 2015-08-16 21:12 +0000
            Re: Accessing books and articles "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2015-08-16 18:06 -0700
        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 ? ! §ñûhwØ£f <snuhwolf@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-18 19:11 -0500
                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 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 →

#513710

On 8/14/2015 5:38 PM, kefischer wrote:
>          Why are you holding back on the underlying
> agenda you are touting, is it total socialism, or the
> utopian ignorance of communism?
>
>          Information that already exists has very little
> value, the observant already know it.
>
>          So what you want, is elimination of copyright,
> patent, trademark, design, intellectual property
> and trade secret laws.

That sure sounds like what he wants.

It sounds like he wants the lowering of value to that which everyone can 
do in their spare time. It sounds like that he holds that copyright, 
patents, trademark, design, intellectual property, and trade secrets are 
the currencies of evil corporations. So the cure is that no development 
or design or method should be supported beyond what the moderately and 
broadly exposed individual can do on his own. So if the the individual 
is capable of building a family home, then there shall be no 
skyscrapers. If the individual is capable of building his own 
electronics, then there shall be no cellular networks or 10-nm chip 
manufacturers. If the individual is capable of building his own 
horse-drawn carriage, then this is favored over massive car 
manufacturing operations that stifle creativity.

Or maybe he thinks that it's only computers that everyone should know 
about, because computers are what he cares about. And it's only the 
software and internet companies that he's pissed about. Because after 
all, they're the ones he can't find work with.

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

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

#513665

On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 15:43:44 -0400, kefischer wrote:

> 
>           You are dreaming the impossible dream,
>

You are expressing a defeatist attitude.  With cowards like you,
it's no wonder that the world still wallows in primitivism.

There are on-line journals.  They do it.  Therefore, all of them
can do it.


> 
>           Until the drive gets erased or fails.
>

Why aren't the "cloud" companies in a state of alarm?

Digital information requires new management techniques.  If managed
properly, digital info can last forever.

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

#513669

On 8/14/2015 3:05 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 15:43:44 -0400, kefischer wrote:
>
>>
>>            You are dreaming the impossible dream,
>>
>
> You are expressing a defeatist attitude.  With cowards like you,
> it's no wonder that the world still wallows in primitivism.
>
> There are on-line journals.  They do it.  Therefore, all of them
> can do it.

Yep, they can do it. They require a subscription. No free information 
there, bub.

>
>
>>
>>            Until the drive gets erased or fails.
>>
>
> Why aren't the "cloud" companies in a state of alarm?
>
> Digital information requires new management techniques.  If managed
> properly, digital info can last forever.
>

I agree, and that's where libraries are going.
The value of libraries, as the sponsored place where you can go to 
access that information without having to pay for it yourself with a 
subscription or an online purchase, remains.

My earlier comment about libraries stands.


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

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

#513662

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]

#513666

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]

#513672

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]

#513677

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]

#513707

On Saturday, August 15, 2015 at 6:37:17 AM UTC+10, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 8/14/2015 3:19 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> >
> > 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.

Here, a book is worth 5 peer-reviewed journal papers. Books are high-ranked publications in academia, if published by a "proper" publisher (put online for free, or published through a vanity press, aren't counted). One is even allowed to make money from the book.

A book chapter = 1 paper.

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

#513732

On 8/14/2015 6:04 PM, Timo wrote:
> On Saturday, August 15, 2015 at 6:37:17 AM UTC+10, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> On 8/14/2015 3:19 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
>>>
>>> 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.
>
> Here, a book is worth 5 peer-reviewed journal papers. Books are high-ranked publications
> in academia, if published by a "proper" publisher (put online for free, or published through
> a vanity press, aren't counted). One is even allowed to make money from the book.
>
> A book chapter = 1 paper.
>

John E. McMurry is on the chemistry faculty at Cornell.
His research is listed as "writing textbooks".
The last time I looked, he had several ongoing book projects, nicely 
interleaved in a 3-year revision cycle:
- A general chemistry book with Fay (now in 6th edition)
- An organic chemistry book (now in 8th edition)
- A nursing book in "GOB" (general, organic, and bio chem) with several 
others (now in 6th edition)

His web page says he's sold some 13 million copies of these books, and 
so he's probably earned in the vicinity of $20 million over the course 
of the last 20 years or so.

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

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

#513771

On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 20:05:34 -0500, Odd Bodkin wrote:

> 
> His web page says he's sold some 13 million copies of these books, and 
> so he's probably earned in the vicinity of $20 million over the course 
> of the last 20 years or so.
>

He didn't sell those books, he, or his robber publishers, literally
foisted them onto unwilling students.  That $20 million is as dirty
as drug money.

Students are beginning to fight against this reprehensible practice
through widespread FILE SHARING, which is erroneously labeled as
"piracy."

And it has the publishers getting scared.  They, like the drug cartels,
feel threatened by the "home grown" movement.

Boo hoo.  Boo hoo.  Poor little robber publishers.

But they can share their stuff with whomever they choose.

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

#513810

Dne 15/08/2015 v 05:23 Fabian Russell napsal(a):
> On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 20:05:34 -0500, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> 
>>
>> His web page says he's sold some 13 million copies of these books, and 
>> so he's probably earned in the vicinity of $20 million over the course 
>> of the last 20 years or so.
>>
> 
> He didn't sell those books, he, or his robber publishers, literally
> foisted them onto unwilling students.  That $20 million is as dirty
> as drug money.
> 
Hmm, earning about 1.5 dollar per a print
is really a robbing of the students...

Writing and selling bestsellers is much better business.

They need not to study.

But if they want to,
studying was free in communist countries only,
and western countries honour intellectual property.

Even if studying in communist Czechoslovakia was free of charge
( if you were granted to study - different story )
I remember we paid for manuscripts more than 1.5 dollar in late 80s,
and for books much more, if not borrowed in library.

-- 
Poutnik ( the Czech word for a wanderer )

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

#513852

On 8/14/2015 10:23 PM, Fabian Russell wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Aug 2015 20:05:34 -0500, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>
>>
>> His web page says he's sold some 13 million copies of these books, and
>> so he's probably earned in the vicinity of $20 million over the course
>> of the last 20 years or so.
>>
>
> He didn't sell those books, he, or his robber publishers, literally
> foisted them onto unwilling students.  That $20 million is as dirty
> as drug money.

Well, to be clear, the students paid $130 million for them, roughly, and 
$20M is only his royalty for the work done. But on the other hand, the 
13M books were used by roughly 60M students, thanks to college 
bookstores and their middleman/robber tactics of reselling the used books.

>
> Students are beginning to fight against this reprehensible practice
> through widespread FILE SHARING, which is erroneously labeled as
> "piracy."

File sharing of what, though? Not of McMurry's books. Maybe of some 
other, inferior things.

>
> And it has the publishers getting scared.  They, like the drug cartels,
> feel threatened by the "home grown" movement.
>
> Boo hoo.  Boo hoo.  Poor little robber publishers.
>
> But they can share their stuff with whomever they choose.
>

Well, no, not really. That's what the copyright is about.



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

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

#514492

Odd Bodkin wrote:

> John E. McMurry is on the chemistry faculty at Cornell.
> His research is listed as "writing textbooks".
> The last time I looked, he had several ongoing book projects, nicely
> interleaved in a 3-year revision cycle:
> - A general chemistry book with Fay (now in 6th edition)
> - An organic chemistry book (now in 8th edition)
> - A nursing book in "GOB" (general, organic, and bio chem) with several
> others (now in 6th edition)
> 
> His web page says he's sold some 13 million copies of these books, and
> so he's probably earned in the vicinity of $20 million over the course
> of the last 20 years or so.

Can you be so naïve to think that a publisher just gives an author all the 
money they make from a book?


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]

#513824

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]

#514491

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]

#513719

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]

#513729

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]

#513827

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]

#514458

On Friday, August 14, 2015 at 4:56:13 PM UTC-7, Lofty Goat wrote:
> 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]

  I wonder how much he PAYS for his internet connection? Does he think that should be "free" too?

> Someone has to pay for its cataloguing and publication.

  In more detail, work has to be done to get that done, and nobody works for free.

>  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*.

  I've often pointed out that the real basis of economics is thermodynamics.

> 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!

  It still isn't free- it's just averaging the entropy over the group. Some pay more than their "fair share" so that others can "freeload".


  Mark L. Fergerson

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

#514473

On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 13:10:16 -0700, nuny@bid.nes wrote:

> 
>   I wonder how much he PAYS for his internet connection? Does he
>  think that should be "free" too?
> 

This is completely non sequitur.  It only demonstrates your pathetic
failure in basic logic.


> 
>   I've often pointed out that the real basis of economics is thermodynamics.
> 

A stupid assessment.  Economics is based more in human psychology.

But although any schoolgirl is quite familiar with psychic principles,
they are well beyond your expertise. 



> 
>   It still isn't free- it's just averaging the entropy over the group. 
>  Some pay more than their "fair share" so that others can "freeload".
> 

Read carefully the following article, then go and seek help for your
pitiful ineptitude:

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/aug/14/australian-academics-seek-to-challenge-web-of-avarice-in-scientific-publishing

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

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

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web