rothman said:
Same old troll, BB ;-).
right. i deal in facts, and you call me names, and somehow it's _me_ who is the "troll" here. ;+)
My big point here
oh please. your "big point" is *censored*. <- fact! and i've told people precisely _why_ it's *censored*, and you have no rejoinder. you don't even _try_ to mount a counter, because you don't have one.
My big point here is that schools and libraries and the rest of us should be preparing--
your message -- whether you know it or not -- is that people should _wait_, because the tech is "right around the corner", but not _here_ yet. so everyone is sitting around waiting, while google raids the library. thanks for the catatonia, david...
the capabilities will be coming sooner or later.
your message is that they will be coming _later_. let's contrast that with the message of michael hart, which is that "we can make e-books happen right now."
Glad BB himself has been so 100 percent infallible, especially about ePub (Sony signed up for ZML lately?).
i already have my response written concerning all that... i'm waiting to send it until people get back from holiday. suffice it to say for now that you're a tool of the industry, david, the corporate dinosaur publishing industry, and there is no future for the dinosaurs, zero future at all... sony will never sign up for z.m.l., because they can't slap d.r.m. on it, so they chose the publishers' .epub instead... that's quite some victory, david. just like the "victory" you had a decade ago, when microsoft slapped d.r.m. on the earlier version of .epub. now this time it's adobe, but the story will turn out the very same way, just watch. but oh well, the executives bought themselves some more quarters, even if profitability wasn't as good as they hoped.
As for E Ink, it's just one of several possibilities out there. My pointer in fact was to Pixel Qi.
yeah, see how quickly you disown your own past, david. you promoted e-ink unceasingly, for years and years, in hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of your blog entries. and now pixel qi is about to prove that you were _wrong_ about e-ink being "the future" that was "around the corner". so you ditch e-ink as if you never knew it. you chase every technology that sends you a press release, instead of having the real-world discipline that requires working models, or at least something more than vapor... -bowerbird
let's contrast that with the message of michael hart, which is that "we can make e-books happen right now."
We've done our share of posts at TeleRead.org about PG and other valuable "now" resources--and the availability of inexpensive used hardware. Not to mention TeleRead's advocacy of the e-book standards you've resisted. BOTH Michael and I have helped e-bookdom in different ways. Just the other day I complained that a Harvard professor had NOT mentioned Michael and PG in a book. I've even called for federal funding of grassroots digitization projects like PG/DP's.
suffice it to say for now that you're a tool of the industry, david, the corporate dinosaur publishing industry..
Wow. TeleRead again and again has said publishers should stop selling encrypted books to consumers--contradicting the standard dino line--and this unimaginative smear is the best Bowerbird can do. See URL below. I will confess to wanting publishers of all sizes to thrive; big crime. OK, I've spent too much time feeding the troll. Happy post-Thanksgiving, everyone! David http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9128139/DRM_a_drag_on_e_book_growth_s... On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 4:03 PM, <Bowerbird@aol.com> wrote:
rothman said:
Same old troll, BB ;-).
right. i deal in facts, and you call me names, and somehow it's _me_ who is the "troll" here. ;+)
My big point here
oh please. your "big point" is *censored*. <- fact!
and i've told people precisely _why_ it's *censored*, and you have no rejoinder. you don't even _try_ to mount a counter, because you don't have one.
My big point here is that schools and libraries and the rest of us should be preparing--
your message -- whether you know it or not -- is that people should _wait_, because the tech is "right around the corner", but not _here_ yet.
so everyone is sitting around waiting, while google raids the library. thanks for the catatonia, david...
the capabilities will be coming sooner or later.
your message is that they will be coming _later_.
let's contrast that with the message of michael hart, which is that "we can make e-books happen right now."
Glad BB himself has been so 100 percent infallible, especially about ePub (Sony signed up for ZML lately?).
i already have my response written concerning all that... i'm waiting to send it until people get back from holiday.
suffice it to say for now that you're a tool of the industry, david, the corporate dinosaur publishing industry, and there is no future for the dinosaurs, zero future at all...
sony will never sign up for z.m.l., because they can't slap d.r.m. on it, so they chose the publishers' .epub instead...
that's quite some victory, david. just like the "victory" you had a decade ago, when microsoft slapped d.r.m. on the earlier version of .epub. now this time it's adobe, but the story will turn out the very same way, just watch.
but oh well, the executives bought themselves some more quarters, even if profitability wasn't as good as they hoped.
As for E Ink, it's just one of several possibilities out there. My pointer in fact was to Pixel Qi.
yeah, see how quickly you disown your own past, david.
you promoted e-ink unceasingly, for years and years, in hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of your blog entries.
and now pixel qi is about to prove that you were _wrong_ about e-ink being "the future" that was "around the corner".
so you ditch e-ink as if you never knew it.
you chase every technology that sends you a press release, instead of having the real-world discipline that requires working models, or at least something more than vapor...
-bowerbird
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d
On Sat, 28 Nov 2009, David H. Rothman wrote:
let's contrast that with the message of michael hart, which is that "we can make e-books happen right now."
We've done our share of posts at TeleRead.org about PG and other valuable "now" resources--and the availability of inexpensive used hardware. Not to mention TeleRead's advocacy of the e-book standards you've resisted. BOTH Michael and I have helped e-bookdom in different
Just because these last two sentences are so consequtive, I must add that I have NOT done any "advocacy of the eBook standards." Any. I don't believe any of these standards will last terribly long, and I don't want to give any standards MORE gravitas that would allow them to keep new ones from developing. I like certain things about many of the standards, even MS Word, as it would allow one document to contain all the varied editions of Shakespeare in a manner that would switching back and forth to compare any edition[s] to any other[s].
ways. Just the other day I complained that a Harvard professor had NOT mentioned Michael and PG in a book. I've even called for federal funding of grassroots digitization projects like PG/DP's.
I fear that any time any "grassroots. . .projects" that get taste of federal funding might get so weakened by it that they were not more likely, but less likely, to survive after such funding. Of course, if the copyright trend, and there is only one, as far as length of copyright terms goes, will continue just a few more decades, then there really won't be much more of such to do, not another copyright will ever expire. . . .
suffice it to say for now that you're a tool of the industry, david, the corporate dinosaur publishing industry..
Wow. TeleRead again and again has said publishers should stop selling encrypted books to consumers--contradicting the standard dino line--and this unimaginative smear is the best Bowerbird can do. See URL below. I will confess to wanting publishers of all sizes to thrive; big crime.
If there WERE publishers of all size, just as with other company types, then the normal distribution will still put vast majority stakes in the hands of just the top handful of such companies as it is via paper publishers, music publishers, radio & television publishers, newspaper publishers, etc., etc., etc., all with the same business model subject to the same downfalls, just as with, are you ready. . . Just as with the dinosaurs. Any time the gene pool gets going too much in one direction, the odds of epidemics, pandemics, and other ELE's ["Extinction Level Events] goes up and up and up. Just as it did with the financial markets in 1929 and again now. No matter how much genetics and other sciences prove diversity's power over the centuries, there are still plenty of people quite literally and vocally against it. "DIVERSITY ISN'T WORTH IT" Is a bumper sticker I have seen right here in my home town. http://www.cafepress.com/+diversity_isnt_worth_it_bumper,31591635 I prefer to see a wide variety of eBook formats for wide variety usage on everything from mainframes to netbooks to cellphones to PDAs and MP3 players, and everything in between. eBooks should be ubiquitous and so should the hardware/software! mh
OK, I've spent too much time feeding the troll.
Happy post-Thanksgiving, everyone!
David
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9128139/DRM_a_drag_on_e_book_growth_s...
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 4:03 PM, <Bowerbird@aol.com> wrote:
rothman said:
Same old troll, BB ;-).
right. i deal in facts, and you call me names, and somehow it's _me_ who is the "troll" here. ;+)
My big point here
oh please. your "big point" is *censored*. <- fact!
and i've told people precisely _why_ it's *censored*, and you have no rejoinder. you don't even _try_ to mount a counter, because you don't have one.
My big point here is that schools and libraries and the rest of us should be preparing--
your message -- whether you know it or not -- is that people should _wait_, because the tech is "right around the corner", but not _here_ yet.
so everyone is sitting around waiting, while google raids the library. thanks for the catatonia, david...
the capabilities will be coming sooner or later.
your message is that they will be coming _later_.
let's contrast that with the message of michael hart, which is that "we can make e-books happen right now."
Glad BB himself has been so 100 percent infallible, especially about ePub (Sony signed up for ZML lately?).
i already have my response written concerning all that... i'm waiting to send it until people get back from holiday.
suffice it to say for now that you're a tool of the industry, david, the corporate dinosaur publishing industry, and there is no future for the dinosaurs, zero future at all...
sony will never sign up for z.m.l., because they can't slap d.r.m. on it, so they chose the publishers' .epub instead...
that's quite some victory, david. just like the "victory" you had a decade ago, when microsoft slapped d.r.m. on the earlier version of .epub. now this time it's adobe, but the story will turn out the very same way, just watch.
but oh well, the executives bought themselves some more quarters, even if profitability wasn't as good as they hoped.
As for E Ink, it's just one of several possibilities out there. My pointer in fact was to Pixel Qi.
yeah, see how quickly you disown your own past, david.
you promoted e-ink unceasingly, for years and years, in hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of your blog entries.
and now pixel qi is about to prove that you were _wrong_ about e-ink being "the future" that was "around the corner".
so you ditch e-ink as if you never knew it.
you chase every technology that sends you a press release, instead of having the real-world discipline that requires working models, or at least something more than vapor...
-bowerbird
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d
LOL, same ole Michael re formats, etc. But so what? I'll be happy to see you get credit for your pioneering efforts in other areas. Cheers, David On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 6:06 PM, Michael S. Hart <hart@pglaf.org> wrote:
On Sat, 28 Nov 2009, David H. Rothman wrote:
let's contrast that with the message of michael hart, which is that "we can make e-books happen right now."
We've done our share of posts at TeleRead.org about PG and other valuable "now" resources--and the availability of inexpensive used hardware. Not to mention TeleRead's advocacy of the e-book standards you've resisted. BOTH Michael and I have helped e-bookdom in different
Just because these last two sentences are so consequtive, I must add that I have NOT done any "advocacy of the eBook standards." Any.
I don't believe any of these standards will last terribly long, and I don't want to give any standards MORE gravitas that would allow them to keep new ones from developing.
I like certain things about many of the standards, even MS Word, as it would allow one document to contain all the varied editions of Shakespeare in a manner that would switching back and forth to compare any edition[s] to any other[s].
ways. Just the other day I complained that a Harvard professor had NOT mentioned Michael and PG in a book. I've even called for federal funding of grassroots digitization projects like PG/DP's.
I fear that any time any "grassroots. . .projects" that get taste of federal funding might get so weakened by it that they were not more likely, but less likely, to survive after such funding.
Of course, if the copyright trend, and there is only one, as far as length of copyright terms goes, will continue just a few more decades, then there really won't be much more of such to do, not another copyright will ever expire. . . .
suffice it to say for now that you're a tool of the industry, david, the corporate dinosaur publishing industry..
Wow. TeleRead again and again has said publishers should stop selling encrypted books to consumers--contradicting the standard dino line--and this unimaginative smear is the best Bowerbird can do. See URL below. I will confess to wanting publishers of all sizes to thrive; big crime.
If there WERE publishers of all size, just as with other company types, then the normal distribution will still put vast majority stakes in the hands of just the top handful of such companies as it is via paper publishers, music publishers, radio & television publishers, newspaper publishers, etc., etc., etc., all with the same business model subject to the same downfalls, just as with, are you ready. . .
Just as with the dinosaurs.
Any time the gene pool gets going too much in one direction, the odds of epidemics, pandemics, and other ELE's ["Extinction Level Events] goes up and up and up.
Just as it did with the financial markets in 1929 and again now.
No matter how much genetics and other sciences prove diversity's power over the centuries, there are still plenty of people quite literally and vocally against it.
"DIVERSITY ISN'T WORTH IT"
Is a bumper sticker I have seen right here in my home town.
http://www.cafepress.com/+diversity_isnt_worth_it_bumper,31591635
I prefer to see a wide variety of eBook formats for wide variety usage on everything from mainframes to netbooks to cellphones to PDAs and MP3 players, and everything in between.
eBooks should be ubiquitous and so should the hardware/software!
mh
OK, I've spent too much time feeding the troll.
Happy post-Thanksgiving, everyone!
David
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9128139/DRM_a_drag_on_e_book_growth_s...
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 4:03 PM, <Bowerbird@aol.com> wrote:
rothman said:
Same old troll, BB ;-).
right. i deal in facts, and you call me names, and somehow it's _me_ who is the "troll" here. ;+)
My big point here
oh please. your "big point" is *censored*. <- fact!
and i've told people precisely _why_ it's *censored*, and you have no rejoinder. you don't even _try_ to mount a counter, because you don't have one.
My big point here is that schools and libraries and the rest of us should be preparing--
your message -- whether you know it or not -- is that people should _wait_, because the tech is "right around the corner", but not _here_ yet.
so everyone is sitting around waiting, while google raids the library. thanks for the catatonia, david...
the capabilities will be coming sooner or later.
your message is that they will be coming _later_.
let's contrast that with the message of michael hart, which is that "we can make e-books happen right now."
Glad BB himself has been so 100 percent infallible, especially about ePub (Sony signed up for ZML lately?).
i already have my response written concerning all that... i'm waiting to send it until people get back from holiday.
suffice it to say for now that you're a tool of the industry, david, the corporate dinosaur publishing industry, and there is no future for the dinosaurs, zero future at all...
sony will never sign up for z.m.l., because they can't slap d.r.m. on it, so they chose the publishers' .epub instead...
that's quite some victory, david. just like the "victory" you had a decade ago, when microsoft slapped d.r.m. on the earlier version of .epub. now this time it's adobe, but the story will turn out the very same way, just watch.
but oh well, the executives bought themselves some more quarters, even if profitability wasn't as good as they hoped.
As for E Ink, it's just one of several possibilities out there. My pointer in fact was to Pixel Qi.
yeah, see how quickly you disown your own past, david.
you promoted e-ink unceasingly, for years and years, in hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of your blog entries.
and now pixel qi is about to prove that you were _wrong_ about e-ink being "the future" that was "around the corner".
so you ditch e-ink as if you never knew it.
you chase every technology that sends you a press release, instead of having the real-world discipline that requires working models, or at least something more than vapor...
-bowerbird
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d
On Sat, 28 Nov 2009, David H. Rothman wrote:
LOL, same ole Michael re formats, etc.
But so what? I'll be happy to see you get credit for your pioneering efforts in other areas.
Cheers, David
Same old Rothman. . .given all I said below, just ridicule rather than an rational response to any or all of the points outlined below. However, as I am sure BB would say, "Just look at how many new formats there are than five years ago when Rothman and Hart discussed this B4. The result obviously supports the position Hart has taken all along, I wonder if Rothman would or could resist the temptation to charges Hart was being a namby-pamby vacillator if someone did finally come up with a format that did those things mentioned below, & Hart acknowledged it as being a worthwhile step forward?" Michael Hart with apologies to BB By the way, I got some email saying Rothman had been tossed out of the discussion group for being routinely disruptive. I don't recall that.
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 6:06 PM, Michael S. Hart <hart@pglaf.org> wrote:
On Sat, 28 Nov 2009, David H. Rothman wrote:
> > let's contrast that with the message of michael hart, which is that "we can make e-books happen right now." > > We've done our share of posts at TeleRead.org about PG and other > valuable "now" resources--and the availability of inexpensive used > hardware. Not to mention TeleRead's advocacy of the e-book standards > you've resisted. BOTH Michael and I have helped e-bookdom in different
Just because these last two sentences are so consequtive, I must add that I have NOT done any "advocacy of the eBook standards." Any.
I don't believe any of these standards will last terribly long, and I don't want to give any standards MORE gravitas that would allow them to keep new ones from developing.
I like certain things about many of the standards, even MS Word, as it would allow one document to contain all the varied editions of Shakespeare in a manner that would switching back and forth to compare any edition[s] to any other[s].
ways. Just the other day I complained that a Harvard professor had NOT mentioned Michael and PG in a book. I've even called for federal funding of grassroots digitization projects like PG/DP's.
I fear that any time any "grassroots. . .projects" that get taste of federal funding might get so weakened by it that they were not more likely, but less likely, to survive after such funding.
Of course, if the copyright trend, and there is only one, as far as length of copyright terms goes, will continue just a few more decades, then there really won't be much more of such to do, not another copyright will ever expire. . . .
suffice it to say for now that you're a tool of the industry, david, the corporate dinosaur publishing industry..
Wow. TeleRead again and again has said publishers should stop selling encrypted books to consumers--contradicting the standard dino line--and this unimaginative smear is the best Bowerbird can do. See URL below. I will confess to wanting publishers of all sizes to thrive; big crime.
If there WERE publishers of all size, just as with other company types, then the normal distribution will still put vast majority stakes in the hands of just the top handful of such companies as it is via paper publishers, music publishers, radio & television publishers, newspaper publishers, etc., etc., etc., all with the same business model subject to the same downfalls, just as with, are you ready. . .
Just as with the dinosaurs.
Any time the gene pool gets going too much in one direction, the odds of epidemics, pandemics, and other ELE's ["Extinction Level Events] goes up and up and up.
Just as it did with the financial markets in 1929 and again now.
No matter how much genetics and other sciences prove diversity's power over the centuries, there are still plenty of people quite literally and vocally against it.
"DIVERSITY ISN'T WORTH IT"
Is a bumper sticker I have seen right here in my home town.
http://www.cafepress.com/+diversity_isnt_worth_it_bumper,31591635
I prefer to see a wide variety of eBook formats for wide variety usage on everything from mainframes to netbooks to cellphones to PDAs and MP3 players, and everything in between.
eBooks should be ubiquitous and so should the hardware/software!
mh
OK, I've spent too much time feeding the troll.
Happy post-Thanksgiving, everyone!
David
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9128139/DRM_a_drag_on_e_book_growth_s...
ritics_
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 4:03 PM, <Bowerbird@aol.com> wrote:
rothman said:
Same old troll, BB ;-).
right. i deal in facts, and you call me names, and somehow it's _me_ who is the "troll" here. ;+)
My big point here
oh please. your "big point" is *censored*. <- fact!
and i've told people precisely _why_ it's *censored*, and you have no rejoinder. you don't even _try_ to mount a counter, because you don't have one.
My big point here is that schools and libraries and the rest of us should be preparing--
your message -- whether you know it or not -- is that people should _wait_, because the tech is "right around the corner", but not _here_ yet.
so everyone is sitting around waiting, while google raids the library. thanks for the catatonia, david...
the capabilities will be coming sooner or later.
your message is that they will be coming _later_.
let's contrast that with the message of michael hart, which is that "we can make e-books happen right now."
Glad BB himself has been so 100 percent infallible, especially about ePub (Sony signed up for ZML lately?).
i already have my response written concerning all that... i'm waiting to send it until people get back from holiday.
suffice it to say for now that you're a tool of the industry, david, the corporate dinosaur publishing industry, and there is no future for the dinosaurs, zero future at all...
sony will never sign up for z.m.l., because they can't slap d.r.m. on it, so they chose the publishers' .epub instead...
that's quite some victory, david. just like the "victory" you had a decade ago, when microsoft slapped d.r.m. on the earlier version of .epub. now this time it's adobe, but the story will turn out the very same way, just watch.
but oh well, the executives bought themselves some more quarters, even if profitability wasn't as good as they hoped.
As for E Ink, it's just one of several possibilities out there. My pointer in fact was to Pixel Qi.
yeah, see how quickly you disown your own past, david.
you promoted e-ink unceasingly, for years and years, in hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of your blog entries.
and now pixel qi is about to prove that you were _wrong_ about e-ink being "the future" that was "around the corner".
so you ditch e-ink as if you never knew it.
you chase every technology that sends you a press release, instead of having the real-world discipline that requires working models, or at least something more than vapor...
-bowerbird
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d
I don't believe any of these standards will last terribly long, and I don't want to give any standards MORE gravitas that would allow them to keep new ones from developing.
So by that logic, Michael, I guess PG shouldn't have been so .TXTcentric for so long. You can't and shouldn't freeze standards absolutely, but can at least work toward graceful evolution.That's what ePub is about. It isn't perfect, but we're better with it than without it. My own idea of nirvana remain a world where most everything is available in nonDRMed ePub. If the larger publishers won't listen about encrypted books, then smaller rivals may well come along with easier-to-enjoy alternatives. Anyway, I have a choice between doing my work and wasting time replying to some rather surrealistic misstatements here. I choose the former. But meanwhile I'm pleased that PG is offering ePub, which can, yes, slug it out which the other formats in the best Darwinian tradition. David TeleRead: Bring the E-Books Home http://www.teleread.org
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009, David H. Rothman wrote:
I don't believe any of these standards will last terribly long, and I don't want to give any standards MORE gravitas that would allow them to keep new ones from developing.
So by that logic, Michael, I guess PG shouldn't have been so .TXTcentric for so long.
Still pretending that plain text as we are writing it here is a standard!? It just makes anyone wonder if you will ever make any ridicule progress... Why don't you try something new instead of accusing everyone else of not doing anything new???
You can't and shouldn't freeze standards absolutely, but can at least work toward graceful evolution.That's what ePub is about. It isn't perfect, but we're better with it than without it. My own idea of nirvana remain a world where most everything is available in nonDRMed ePub. If the larger publishers won't listen about encrypted books, then smaller rivals may well come along with easier-to-enjoy alternatives.
Hey, where have you been??? We've been supporting ePub. Don't you ever look before you leap?
Anyway, I have a choice between doing my work and wasting time replying to
Well, I certainly agree that you are wasting your time with such comments. If you can't come up with something better, it's time to call it a waste.
some rather surrealistic misstatements here. I choose the former. But meanwhile I'm pleased that PG is offering ePub, which can, yes, slug it out which the other formats in the best Darwinian tradition.
Ah, so. . .on the one hand you deny ePub, on the other it is there. Ever consider trying consistency? Your normally disruptive behaviors haven't changed over the years. Too bad maturity doesn't always come with age. . . . I hope you are serious about stopping wasting time, yours and ours.
We've been supporting ePub. Don't you ever look before you leap?
Heck, Michael, I wrote in the very message you were commenting on: "I'm pleased that PG is offering ePub, which can, yes, slug it out [with] the other formats in the best Darwinian tradition." You acknowledge that later in your response. But there's a difference between PG simply offering ePub and your being a genuine advocate of it, which you have failed to be so far (care to decide to be?). ePub isn't perfect, but it is progress and is still evolving. Speaking of controversy, rather than trying to marginalize my e-book standards advocacy, perhaps you'll find it more rewarding to move on to a different topic if it hasn't been discussed here earlier. To quote Paul Biba's item in TeleRead: "As you may have heard, the US, in a fit of Governmental insanity, is negotiating a new copyright treaty that allows for criminal action to be taken against copyright infringers and gives governments broad powers to require ISPs to spy on their users. The insane thing is that the text of the treaty and its basic terms and conditions are not being released due to 'national security.'" See: http://www.teleread.org/2009/11/25/two-us-senators-demand-that-secret-copyri... We're hardy the first to warn people of the possibilities for mischief here, but we're glad to help spread word. Your comment on this secrecy, Michael? As I see it, THAT is genuine fodder for your ire. Imagine the potential for future damage to the public domain if copyright law is even more crook-ridden than it is today, due to still less transparency. As you can see, national security is the excuse here. Talk about D.C.-style patriotism! As is so often the case, the PG archives contain relevant thoughts. From Boswell: "Patriotism having become one of our topicks, Johnson suddenly uttered, in a strong determined tone, an apophthegm, at which many will start: 'Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.' But let it be considered, that he did not mean a real and generous love of our country, but that pretended patriotism which so many, in all ages and countries, have made a cloak for self-interest." (http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1564/1564-h/1564-h.htm). David TeleRead: Bring the E-Books Home http://www.teleread.org Michael S. Hart wrote:
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009, David H. Rothman wrote:
I don't believe any of these standards will last terribly long, and I don't
want to give any standards MORE gravitas that would allow them to keep new ones from developing.
So by that logic, Michael, I guess PG shouldn't have been so .TXTcentric for so long.
Still pretending that plain text as we are writing it here is a standard!?
It just makes anyone wonder if you will ever make any ridicule progress...
Why don't you try something new instead of accusing everyone else of not doing anything new???
You can't and shouldn't freeze standards absolutely, but can at least work toward graceful evolution.That's what ePub is about. It isn't perfect, but we're better with it than without it. My own idea of nirvana remain a world where most everything is available in nonDRMed ePub. If the larger publishers won't listen about encrypted books, then smaller rivals may well come along with easier-to-enjoy alternatives.
Hey, where have you been???
We've been supporting ePub.
Don't you ever look before you leap?
Anyway, I have a choice between doing my work and wasting time replying to
Well, I certainly agree that you are wasting your time with such comments.
If you can't come up with something better, it's time to call it a waste.
some rather surrealistic misstatements here. I choose the former. But meanwhile I'm pleased that PG is offering ePub, which can, yes, slug it out which the other formats in the best Darwinian tradition.
Ah, so. . .on the one hand you deny ePub, on the other it is there.
Ever consider trying consistency?
Your normally disruptive behaviors haven't changed over the years.
Too bad maturity doesn't always come with age. . . .
I hope you are serious about stopping wasting time, yours and ours. _______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009, David H. Rothman wrote:
We've been supporting ePub. Don't you ever look before you leap?
Heck, Michael, I wrote in the very message you were commenting on: "I'm pleased that PG is offering ePub, which can, yes, slug it out [with] the other formats in the best Darwinian tradition." You acknowledge that later in your response. But there's a difference between PG simply offering ePub and your being a genuine advocate of it, which you have failed to be so far (care to decide to be?). ePub isn't perfect, but it is progress and is still evolving.
I haven't FAILED to be an advocate, I have REFUSED. . . . Quite a difference. A difference YOU have refused to acknowlege all these years. Don't you listen when I say I am not going to do such things? We have added ePub to PG, that is all the support any formats are ever going to get in the foreseeable future. Get used to it! We're not a bandwagon. We're not likely to be any time soon. Do you realize how silly you sound harping away at this when you should have picked it up years and years ago? Stop wasting our time. . .and yours.0
Speaking of controversy, rather than trying to marginalize my e-book standards advocacy, perhaps you'll find it more rewarding to move on to a different topic if it hasn't been discussed here earlier.
You are more than welcome to advocate any eBook standards you like, but at least have the respect to pay attention.
To quote Paul Biba's item in TeleRead: "As you may have heard, the US, in a fit of Governmental insanity, is negotiating a new copyright treaty that allows for criminal action to be taken against copyright infringers and gives governments broad powers to require ISPs to spy on their users. The insane thing is that the text of the treaty and its basic terms and conditions are not being released due to 'national security.'" See:
http://www.teleread.org/2009/11/25/two-us-senators-demand-that-secret-copyri...
We're hardy the first to warn people of the possibilities for mischief here, but we're glad to help spread word.
Your comment on this secrecy, Michael? As I see it, THAT is genuine fodder for your ire. Imagine the potential for future damage to the public domain if copyright law is even more crook-ridden than it is today, due to still less transparency. As you can see, national security is the excuse here. Talk about D.C.-style patriotism!
You missed the REAL threat, when Gonzales asked for life imprisonment!!! You are SOOO far behind the times, all of this is old, not news.
As is so often the case, the PG archives contain relevant thoughts. From Boswell: "Patriotism having become one of our topicks, Johnson suddenly uttered, in a strong determined tone, an apophthegm, at which many will start: 'Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.' But let it be considered, that he did not mean a real and generous love of our country, but that pretended patriotism which so many, in all ages and countries, have made a cloak for self-interest."
If you really want to quote the best, at least quote Milton.
David
TeleRead: Bring the E-Books Home http://www.teleread.org
Michael S. Hart wrote:
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009, David H. Rothman wrote:
I don't believe any of these standards will last terribly long, and I don't
want to give any standards MORE gravitas that would allow them to keep new ones from developing.
So by that logic, Michael, I guess PG shouldn't have been so .TXTcentric for so long.
Still pretending that plain text as we are writing it here is a standard!?
It just makes anyone wonder if you will ever make any ridicule progress...
Why don't you try something new instead of accusing everyone else of not doing anything new???
You can't and shouldn't freeze standards absolutely, but can at least work toward graceful evolution.That's what ePub is about. It isn't perfect, but we're better with it than without it. My own idea of nirvana remain a world where most everything is available in nonDRMed ePub. If the larger publishers won't listen about encrypted books, then smaller rivals may well come along with easier-to-enjoy alternatives.
Hey, where have you been???
We've been supporting ePub.
Don't you ever look before you leap?
Anyway, I have a choice between doing my work and wasting time replying to
Well, I certainly agree that you are wasting your time with such comments.
If you can't come up with something better, it's time to call it a waste.
some rather surrealistic misstatements here. I choose the former. But meanwhile I'm pleased that PG is offering ePub, which can, yes, slug it out which the other formats in the best Darwinian tradition.
Ah, so. . .on the one hand you deny ePub, on the other it is there.
Ever consider trying consistency?
Your normally disruptive behaviors haven't changed over the years.
Too bad maturity doesn't always come with age. . . .
I hope you are serious about stopping wasting time, yours and ours. _______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d
You are SOOO far behind the times, all of this is old, not news.
Uh, Michael, it's the SECRECY that's a big angle here, beyond the usual mischief. Why should proposed copyright treaties be treated like national security secrets? Just Google around a bit: http://news.google.com/news/search?aq=f&pz=1&cf=all&ned=us&hl=en&q=secret+copyright+treaty No small number of news organizations see...news. As for disrupting this list, keep in mind that out of the blue, without my attacking anyone, Bowerbird launched a strike on me and wants to do this every Thanksgiving. Great for holiday cheer, huh? I defended myself. You sided with PG's resident troll, the clown who has been kicked off his share of lists. A little Orwellian. Or is this list instead the Planet of the Trolls? The Apes--no, I mean the Trolls--set the tone? Bizarre. Meanwhile apologies to the Apes. They strike me as far, far more civil than Bowerbird. I'm happy to write up PG's better side, but I gotta say, Michael, you're doing a pretty efficient job of alienating people without my tolerance of your, er, eccentricities. Some potential friends of PG may put themselves in my place and not reach out to you. Horror of horrors, a few of those you alienate might even have money. The tone of the PG volunteer list just might be one reason why PG is unfortunately so bleepin' cash-strapped. All this craziness might also scare away potential participants with first-rate ideas for PG. Which counts most--Bowerbird's rants or your mission to digitize books in the public domain? As for ePub, I've already said that it's fine great for PG to offer many formats and let 'em slug at out. You can do that until the end of time, and in fact I'd prefer this. But ePub is the one that Sony and B&N are gearing up for, and the one that even Amazon might in time offer as a Kindle-format alternative. This took years to achieve. It's unfortunate that rather than helping the standards movement, you've just been sitting on the sidelines. You could still have worked toward standards while offering many formats. OK, enough. Now get back to the stuff I like--PG's mission. David TeleRead: Bring the E-Books Home http://www.teleread.org
On Sun, 29 Nov 2009, David H. Rothman wrote:
You are SOOO far behind the times, all of this is old, not news.
Uh, Michael, it's the SECRECY that's a big angle here, beyond the usual mischief. Why should proposed copyright treaties be treated like national security secrets? Just Google around a bit:
Duh!!! Don't you remember how SECRET the 1998 US Copyright Act was when it passed? I'll bet you didn't even KNOW it was passed for weeks or month afterwards! Biggest political smokescreen. . . . You really don't remember anything about it, do you??? As for this new treaty, I've been on it for quite a while, it's not news.
http://news.google.com/news/search?aq=f&pz=1&cf=all&ned=us&hl=en&q=secret+copyright+treaty
No small number of news organizations see...news.
As for disrupting this list, keep in mind that out of the blue, without my attacking anyone, Bowerbird launched a strike on me and wants to do this every
Talk about "out of the blue" you said you weren't going to waste more time.
Thanksgiving. Great for holiday cheer, huh? I defended myself. You sided with PG's resident troll, the clown who has been kicked off his share of lists. A
I don't side with anyone, particularly either of you two.
little Orwellian. Or is this list instead the Planet of the Trolls? The Apes--no, I mean the Trolls--set the tone? Bizarre. Meanwhile apologies to the Apes. They strike me as far, far more civil than Bowerbird.
Sounds more Orsonwellian to me. . . .
I'm happy to write up PG's better side, but I gotta say, Michael, you're doing a pretty efficient job of alienating people without my tolerance of your, er,
I'm not worried about alienating you or your cadre of friends, I just call them as I see them and you don't like my consistency. Stop wasting time with old news.
eccentricities. Some potential friends of PG may put themselves in my place and not reach out to you. Horror of horrors, a few of those you alienate might even have money. The tone of the PG volunteer list just might be one reason why PG is unfortunately so bleepin' cash-strapped. All this craziness might also scare away potential participants with first-rate ideas for PG. Which counts most--Bowerbird's rants or your mission to digitize books in the public domain?
Money, money, money, money. YOU go for the money, OK? First rate ideas for PG will carry their own weight, without having to carry the weight of all your gold.
As for ePub, I've already said that it's fine great for PG to offer many formats and let 'em slug at out. You can do that until the end of time, and in fact I'd prefer this.
Then please do, and stop contradicting yourself, and everyone else.
But ePub is the one that Sony and B&N are gearing up for, and the one that even Amazon might in time offer as a Kindle-format alternative. This took years to achieve. It's unfortunate that rather than helping the standards movement, you've just been sitting on the sidelines. You could still have worked toward standards while offering many formats.
"Took years to achieve?" Sony, Amazon and Google combined maybe add up to 10 years. Duh! They could all drop their current eBook programs like hot potatoes if things don't go their way, without even a business plan blip. However, I think, as I always have, that eBooks are going to be so extraordinarily HUGE that it will carry them all along. . . .
OK, enough. Now get back to the stuff I like--PG's mission.
Give the most possible books to the most possible people. Let me know when Sony and Amazon and all the rest of them have combined for their first million seller. Then I'll tell that we gave away that many copies of just one book in a single month. . .several times. . . . They are only making a dent in the commercial world, not in the world of eBooks in toto.
David
TeleRead: Bring the E-Books Home http://www.teleread.org
Michael S. Hart wrote:
We have added ePub to PG, that is all the support any formats are ever going to get in the foreseeable future.
I added ePub to PG, single-handedly and with no help or encouragement from PG. I will add more formats whenever my time allows it. Free formats that have some acceptance get the highest priority. -- Marcello Perathoner webmaster@gutenberg.org
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 10:46:58PM +0100, Marcello Perathoner wrote:
Michael S. Hart wrote:
We have added ePub to PG, that is all the support any formats are ever going to get in the foreseeable future.
I added ePub to PG, single-handedly and with no help or encouragement from PG.
It has greatly appreciated. -- Greg
I will add more formats whenever my time allows it. Free formats that have some acceptance get the highest priority.
-- Marcello Perathoner webmaster@gutenberg.org
participants (5)
-
Bowerbird＠aol.com -
David H. Rothman -
Greg Newby -
Marcello Perathoner -
Michael S. Hart