November 2011 - gutvol-d - lists.pglaf.org

looking at the most meaningful indicator
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 14 Nov '11

14 Nov '11

i have been studying e-books for 3 decades now, which is long enough to know that my instincts were always correct. the reason that's important is because i am confident that i know which variables constitute the major tipping-points. and the fulcrum which might be the most crucial one of all revolves around when the large print-run grows untenable. the logic here is that a good part of the "economy of scale" which large publishers enjoy is due to that large print run. when each copy of a book that you printed costs you a dime -- a quarter at most -- you can afford to spread 'em around. and if it doesn't sell, you can just have the retailer strip off the cover and "throw the book away". why spend any money transporting a 15-cent product back to stack in a warehouse? in that vein, this is interesting: > http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20111113/SUB/311139977 i'll quote quite a bit, so you get the full impact: > Net sales of those artfully designed, easy-to-hold, > pleasant-smelling trade paperbacks slid 18%, to $773 million, > in the year through August, compared with the year-earlier > period, according to the Association of American Publishers. > Meanwhile, sales of e-books, the second-place format, > soared 144%, to $649 million. ok, so let me give you the deep background on this... according to the figures of the corporate publishers themselves -- their own figures, mind you! -- e-books have nearly gained parity with trade paperbooks, on a _monetary_ basis (which is the only one that really counts to a profit-minded corporation). that is for january-to-august. with trade paperbacks "sliding", and e-books "soaring", it's probably the case that e-books now -- on this november day -- sell _better_ than trade paperbacks. again, this is according to figures from the dinosaurs themselves. this is even more remarkable when you consider that these guys have been dragging their feet for a decade on electronic-books. imagine what woulda happened if they had been really _trying_! the article continues: > Just as telling are reports from inside publishing houses, > where more and more often, executives are thinking twice > about which hardcover books to reprint in a trade paperback. > “It used to be standard operating procedure to do > a trade paperback,” said literary agent and former editor > Paul Bresnick. “No longer.” this isn't surprising. if a corporation can't make money at it, they won't keep doing it. making money is their raison d'etre. what _is_ surprising -- or maybe not -- is that if a corporation cannot make money at _something_, it will go out of business. and that is the bigger issue lurking here... it goes on: > Demand is quickly evaporating. According to one executive, > the e-book surge has driven No. 1 bookstore chain > Barnes & Noble to alter its rule-of-thumb formula > for preordering trade paperbacks from publishers. > It used to ask for half as many copies as its stores > sold in hardcover. Today, the number is down to 30%. ouch. that's gotta hurt. and it _will_ leave a bruise. a bad one. > At a certain point, the preorders become > too small for publication to make sense. and here we have the coup de grace. can the publishers continue to live on 30% from barnes&noble, instead of the old 50%? maybe yes, maybe no, i don't really know... but the 30% will turn into 25%, then 20%, and at _some_ point soon, it will collapse. 1 year? 3? 5? what difference will it make? when you can no longer make enough sales to justify a large print-run, all of a sudden your 20-cent cost-of-goods measure turns into a $2 cost-of-goods figure, which means the $1 profit you were sticking in your pocket turns into an 80-cent loss. and you go kaput. i've been saying it for over 15 years already, and now the timing of the event is upon us... once the large print-run becomes untenable, the corporate dinosaur publishers go extinct... -bowerbird

2 1

Re: [gutvol-d] too clever, by half
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 13 Nov '11

13 Nov '11

when you tell people things they don't want to hear, for their own good, you need to _expect_ that they will react badly. it simply comes with the territory. and if you persist, their reaction will likely persist. the best you can hope for, in some situations, is that everyone comes to learn something from the process. it is with some sadness, then, that i must now admit something i have actually known for quite some time. i rarely learn much of anything at all from jim adcock, and he seemingly never learns a thing from me either. for a while it was ok, because i turned it pedagogical, but nobody else is learning anything any more either, because jim never brings anything new to the table... so although i always take such action with reluctance, it's time for me to concede that the proper course now is for me to put jim in my kill-filter. sorry about that. such action is a last resort. but at times it's necessary. what it means for everyone else is that i will no longer respond to any points that jim makes, because i simply won't see them. so if jim makes some point that _you_ would like to see me respond to, you'll have to rephrase the point in your own words and point it at me directly. it won't work to simply copy-and-paste jim's message, because his "points" are usually so dull that they must be sharpened first, and they are usually so fuzzy that they could be sharpened in any one of a dozen ways, and my already-too-long posts become unbearable... besides, it's tedious to take one vague sentence and polish it into a dozen possible interpretations only to see _each_ of those interpretations defeated by logic. most of us are too busy for such a pointless exercise. so boil it down to a good question, and i assure you i _will_ have an answer. jim's never stumped me yet. except on the question of "what is this guy thinking?" i can never figure that out. so it's time to stop trying. -bowerbird

1 0

too clever by half
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 13 Nov '11

13 Nov '11

jim said: > You might do better by putting > a colored transparent text overlay > over a colored text base, such that > one can spot the color change where > the (additive please not subtractive) > colors "don't mix." > > For example a green base text layer > with an additive red transparent text > OCR overlay layer give you a yellow letter > where the colors mix -- "hit", > but green or red where there is a "miss". big kudos to jim for his improvement upon the well-known standard suggestion of this tactic... it's very clever. the problem is that it's _too_ clever, by half... you guys are treating this task as if it is some visual-discrimination type of chore, which is the mistake someone would make if they had rarely -- or perhaps _never_ -- done the job... but for anyone who has actually _tracked_ the type of errors that are common in o.c.r. today, a visual approach to this task is the last resort. once again, the _most_ common type of error is spacey punctuation. you don't need some fancy "color overlay" to find spacey punctuation, folks! indeed, you don't even need to _look_ for it at all! you can merely instruct your text-editor to find it. when d.p. started, a decade ago, maybe then you needed to verify every line, word-for-word -- but today that's a ridiculous waste of time and energy. unless/until y'all get that through your thick skulls, you are chasing your tails around the wrong bush... and your efforts will never begin to scale as needed. -bowerbird p.s. the smartest digitizers, like nicholas hodson, have known for _years_ that text-to-speech is the _best_ strategy for finding well-disguised errors... your computers and ipads can _speak_! use that!

2 1

al haines makes a positive contribution
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 12 Nov '11

12 Nov '11

al said: > Keep track of "awards" for the year, then > donate any resulting money to PG. hmm... any impulse toward charity is a good one... and i won't chalk that up to self-interest, even though you're a principle in p.g., al, because i'm pretty sure you're a volunteer, and you've donated a big slice of your life to the cause, and i give full credit for that... but the money i'm awarding already _will_ benefit p.g., by making its listserve better. and besides, i have also liked the fact that michael hart built p.g. not to need money. (it's so hard to speak of him in past-tense.) so there's a reluctance to give p.g. money... the other thing is that p.g. isn't really my favorite charity. i very much like 826-l.a., an organization nurturing young writers. still, i like the general idea. the overwhelming objection, however, is that i already put the cash in the pockets of the people who will post the messages. the money has been promised to _them_. so i can't now take it out of their pockets and give it to project gutenberg "instead". that would be like the "white man" who broke all his promises to the "indians"... i just can't do that. but like i said, i still like the idea. so here's what i'll do... i'll give people a _choice_ between: 1. receiving their money as promised, or 2. opting instead to donate it to charity... if they decide to donate their prize-money, i'll _increase_ it by 50% (so $2 becomes $3) and then split it between p.g. and 826-l.a, so p.g. will get $1.50, and likewise 826-l.a. transparent accounting will be done here: > http://z-m-l.com/misc/gutvold_positivity.html and yes, i'll give al his $2 prize for that post. -bowerbird

1 0

Re: [gutvol-d] don suggests wordpress again
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 12 Nov '11

12 Nov '11

don said: > Time for a refresher on WP, bird. oh, c'mon, don, you're never gonna get your $2 being obfuscatory and avoiding the real points... 1. wordpress content is stored in a mysql database. are you trying to make us believe that is not true? because if anyone doubts it, here is a u.r.l. for you: > http://codex.wordpress.org/Database_Description so on top of the obfuscation of the text by the .html, it's now buried inside of a mysql database, meaning that anyone who wants to understand the system well needs to acquire an additional hairy set of experience. 2. the mysql database used is not a simple one, either. i mean, seriously, people, take a look at that page, and ask yourself if you wanna have to deal with all that crap. and it ain't easy, either. read the cautions on this page: > http://lorelle.wordpress.com/2005/12/01/search-and-replace-in-wordpress-mys… those are the warnings for doing a search-and-replace! should we have to worry about anything so elementary? a wordpress database has about a dozen tables in it: > http://bloggersmarket.com/wordpress-mysql-database-tables/ ask yourself if you need that kind of hassle... seriously. what about doing mysql "queries"? know how to do them? > http://www.onextrapixel.com/2010/01/30/13-useful-wordpress-sql-queries-you-… something as "simple" as doing a back-up gets complex. please don't let yourself fall for a slick interface, folks... because if you don't grok how to do the things yourself, you'll have to depend on someone else to do it "for you". this is simple text, folks. storable in simple text-files. unless you let other guys gunk up your systems instead. do _not_ let them seize that control over your workflow! 3. the .html and .css used by wordpress is convoluted. do you deny this, don? please tell us if you deny this... because if you do, i'll post some here, for "evaluation", and i'll invite you to explain it to the nice people here... i'm glad you're doing experimentation; that is valuable. but the mere idea of using wordpress is a non-starter... i like you, don. you're one of the good guys. seriously. the way you are treated over at d.p. is truly a disgrace... but you'll need to step up your game to snare your $2... ;+) -bowerbird

2 1

double your money and quadruple your fun
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 12 Nov '11

12 Nov '11

for everyone who makes a positive contribution to the listserve in the next year, i will send $2... _any_ positive contribution counts, _especially_ if it is not made in reaction to one of my posts. (i'll include a $.22 bonus if you clear that bar.) the first award goes to jim, for "color overlay"... -bowerbird

2 1

don suggests wordpress again
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 12 Nov '11

12 Nov '11

don said: > You could try what is arguably > the most widely used html editor/platform for non-techies > - the WordPress.blog engine. > Besides it's default mediocre sorta-wysiwyg UI, > you can get adapters to input markdown, RST, textile, etc. you've been experimenting with that for a while now, don. something tells me that if it really worked, you would have some things that you would be willing to show us by now... > Pure, unadulterated HTML. oh, it's .html, to be sure, but i wouldn't call it "unadulterated" in any way, and describing it with "pure" is simply laughable... evidently you haven't really looked at it, or its .css stylesheets. oh, and just for the record, wordpress doesn't actually _save_ content as .html files, but rather saves it in a mysql database. because saving content as .html files would be _very_messy_... *** but hey, let's say someone wants to give wordpress a whirl... i would suggest that that person check out pressbooks.com. i believe the site, which i have suggested before (but when do my first few suggestions ever get traction on this list?), is now out of beta... if not, it will be, soon, so check back... my guess is that you will find it unsatisfactory, but if not, please come back here and tell us. i like to be surprised. -bowerbird

2 1

Anti-troll prize
by Sparr 12 Nov '11

12 Nov '11

If you've posted to this list within the last year, if you post to this list within the next year, and if you do not respond, directly or indirectly, by email, forum post, website updates, or otherwise, to any Bowerbird's[1] emails during the next year, One year from today I will send you a prize of one dollar, in any reasonable form and fashion of your choosing. [1] Bowerbird(a)aol.com or any easily recognized or identified sockpuppets

1 0

back to my former, wiser, decision
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 11 Nov '11

11 Nov '11

since lee passey is continuing to communicate in a dishonest way, i've made the decision to reinstate my refusal to engage him in debate. if you believe he "addressed" my points, or added much value to this conversation, i now choose to allow you to remain stupid. so, back to the kill-file, lee. buh-bye passey. -bowerbird

1 0

Re: [gutvol-d] epubeditor.sourceforge.net
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 11 Nov '11

11 Nov '11

the good alex said: > Here's something someone at the archive is working on > (after hours, since it's not an official project yet). > He'd love to hear your thoughts. > http://edwardbetts.com/correct i'm not sure of the exact point being made, but a line-by-line proofing interface like betts made is simple enough to create with the page-scans and a correctly-created o.c.r. output text-file... ya don't need to plow through ten tons of x.m.l. i even demonstrated it years ago here on this list, with an interface quite similar to the one shown (except without that too-funky font and spacing.) but i couldn't find the code or graphic right away, so i just went and rewrote it and regenerated it... here's a graphic showing baseline-determination: > http://z-m-l.com/misc/flatland.jpg i've appended the code which gets those baselines. after that, it is simple to _slice_the_pagescan_ into _lines_ and then interleave each of the lines of text. (you can also probe the slices for paragraph indents, for the shortened last-line-of-paragraph lines, for run-heads with pagenumbers on the outside border, chapter-heads which start relatively low on the page and end-of-chapter pages which end relatively high, footnotes with their small text and thus long lines, title-lines indented on both sides, and blockquotes also indented on both sides, plus image insets which result in abbreviated blocks of paragraph lines, etc. and of course many of those findings can be used to sync up the text-file lines with their pagescan slices. and none of it is difficult at all, not in the slightest.) as far as the interface of the betts' methodology, i'd suggest a less-unpleasant correction modality... ..._except_... ...for the fact that this whole correction strategy is one that is severely misguided and wrong-headed. line-by-line proofing is an unwise investment when the vast majority of lines in the o.c.r. (upwards from 90% in most cases) can _easily_ be made error-free... ...and of course i've been saying that for many years, having presented a veritable raft of supporting data... instead, fix the lines which are _clearly_ incorrect -- i.e., which show up on spellcheck and easy probes -- and then move the near-perfect text into a pleasant smooth-reading environment used by actual readers. there's absolutely no need for a betts-style interface. i mean, really, do what you like, people... but if you think you can find volunteers who will let you waste their time, i think you're likely wasting _your_ time... because d.p. has a lock on that kind of idiot. -bowerbird p.s. and yes, i realize that the interface shown is actually a word-based one, not a line-based one, which actually adds another layer of smudge, but we can safely ignore that for the bigger picture... p.p.s. here's that code... dim x as integer dim y as integer dim solid as color dim question as color dim consec as integer canvas1.graphics.textsize=18 consec=0-99 solid=(canvas1.graphics.pixel(10,10)) for y=10 to canvas1.height-10 for x=25 to canvas1.width-25 question=(canvas1.graphics.pixel(x,y)) if abs(question.red-solid.red)<30 then if abs(question.green-solid.green)<30 then if abs(question.blue-solid.blue)<30 then if x=canvas1.width-25 then consec=consec+1 ' was a solid slice end if else y=y+1 ' was not a solid slice if y<=canvas1.height-10 then x=25 consec=0 end if end if end if next x if consec=4 then canvas1.graphics.forecolor=rgb(0,0,255) canvas1.graphics.drawstring str(y),canvas1.width-15-canvas1.graphics.stringwidth(str(y)),y-3 canvas1.graphics.forecolor=rgb(255,0,0) canvas1.graphics.drawline 0,y,canvas1.width,y end if next y

1 0