babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
"Instead of signing out a book from the library, eventually one might be able to sign out an infernal ebook and download the selections from the library's website...with IP protections and such considered."
IP? I think you mean the much narrower category of "copyright".
Did you say "Intellectual Property"? It's a Seductive Mirage
John Sullivan has an interesting article on the so-called "lending" features of current e-book readers
I'll stick to dead tree books until DRM (Digital Restrictions Management) is history.
@ Unionist
If you are comfy with that technology I have no problem with it. I'm not making a luddite argument.
I just think it is an open question as to whether it is a better technology, a more secure technology, and a less-wasteful technology.
I'd advise looking at cases of people who have seen their bought-and-paid-for data disappear because some company folded, before I throw my support behind e-books, e-music or e-anything.
And for that, among other reasons, I don't see anything like a fait accompli here, especially since the publishers and others who can control and profit most from this new technology are the ones who are pushing the hardest for it.
What about pre-1923 books - there's no DRM on those - you still insist on murdered trees?
It's just that we hear so blessed little of these advances down here in potato patch east.
Yes, that is what I meant....pertaining to people and organizations who's job it is to consider such things, libraries for instance. Personally I could care less about it.
This is outrageous.
I can't believe that rabble published a column not only uncritically praising (advertising?) Apple's iBook Author software, but also advocating that schools use textbooks created with this software, which would force school children to use Apple products exclusively in order to read their textbooks.
Which would give Apple a complete monopoly on the devices that CHILDREN use in our public schools. One nasty corporation gets a monopoly in our schools.
Seriously?
Thank you for the courage in saying it like that. Personally I've said little about Rabble's NDP leanings and wall to wall coverage, because I still like hanging out here. You're such an inspiration! :)
SJ, have you found a corporate link between Apple and the NDP - and rabble too? Please share!!
@Michelle: Do you foresee a name change to "rapple"?
Well, I don't know if these sort of alignments have been tweaked during the last little while, and if so our lack of visibility in that respect is likely the result of it having become lost within the general omerta of oppositional politics in recent years. But we're getting well beyond fancy book learnin now.
NDP Platform Highlights Fiscal Responsibility
SJ, I think this is a working link to the article you cited.
I haven't actually given nihilism much thought as a viable alternative. It is likely more understandable as an on the spot means, but I don't know from my understanding if it is capable of being sustained within long term social relationships.
I fixed it...thanks Unionist.
"Viable" "sustain" and "nihilism" are contradictions in terms, actually.
Though on a nihilist note, there is also the fact that much of what is currently on paper from the past century or so is going to quickly disintegrate because of the acid paper it has been printed on.
In any case, I think a good exercise for those arguing about the wastefulness of books would be to go to any paper recycling depot and look at what is actually in those giant pressed cubes. Most of it is packaging and newsprint.
Again, not to say that ebooks might not be a better option, or a valid one if a person prefers it, I just think that when it comes to the killing trees argument books are far behind magazines, and even further behind flyers, cardboard packaging, and other paper products.
And we have to look at the other side of the equation - the power, and the plastic, metal and other materials that go into making computers.
And also, who can afford to buy them.
Perhaps, but if we just leave it at sustained nihilism there wouldn't necessarily be any contradictory elements to it per se. And as far as viability, there's always re-destruction for those who go might go in on that sort of work, perhaps inspired by the US Military's battle damage assessment teams who determine if something needs to be hit again. There'd be no end to the possibilities once you get rolling.
I have a GNU/Linux powered netbook computer. I'll read my non-DRM'ed ebooks on a computing device where I have complete control over the software that runs on it. There's no chance of some e-publishing conglomerate accidently deleting my files.
There are times these days where I'm beginning to wonder myself. I've begun referring to those on the left who give the Apple Corporation a free pass as the "iLeft".
Write a rebuttal, rr!
Before in fact there were the Trudeaumaniacs. They liked to sport their leftish creds in a way. The whole concept just adopts different names from time to time...like the liberal 'youth' wing, or the NSNDP, or even so far as red conservatism.
Yeah good one.
I think he needs to delete all the f-bombs out of his first draft.
I don't think there needs to be a rebuttal. I don't see that there has been a solid case made against the printed book in the first place.
And I just dropped off another load of paper recycling half an hour ago. 10 huge bins in a row. I didn't see one book in any of them.
And if we are to even broach that subject, it should properly be with books as a reusable item, not recyclable, and therefore not necessarily a waste of anything.
Hell, do away with telephone books - make it available as a downloadable database if people want their own version - then maybe we can talk about how damaging literature is.
Though of course, no one is going to get rid of flyers or phone books because they are market-driven, and are a source of profit. SO of course the easy target is literature, which has no value at all.
Smith, I think CF was referring to radiorahim writing a rebuttal to the abominable article that Michelle linked to at post #36.
Ah, gotcha.
FOr some reason I thought it was in reference to the 1923 DRM comment.
Though the date is moot, since the U.S. Supreme Court just ruled that artistic works can be brought back out of the public domain. And they have extended copyright before, and can certainly do so again, if they wish.
My response here
Ok. That's a partial relief. Thanks.
Hey rr, in case this "rapple" handle actually catches on, let's not forget who owns the rights (ahem ahem). Don't worry, you've got "iLeft".
.I'm releasing the term "iLeft" under the GNU Free Documentation License.
oops duplicate post
iBet iLeft long before uDid.