Barnes and Noble is up for sale

[darkwing_duck1]

Digital copies can easily be backed off site or redownloaded if necessary. In some ways, digital is easier to lose but in others it can be far more permanent because there's nothing special about your copy. If your house burns down, then you've lost all your physical books but your B&N or Amazon account is still intact.

Further, there is no form of eBook DRM that requires a device to be connected to the internet 100% of the time. That simply isn't feasible with our current level of technology.

Doesn't have to be all the time. The delete order can sit, waiting until the next time you log in to update reader software or purchase a new book and ZAP, away goes whatever they want to take.

It's already happened once.

 

[Arrqh]

Doesn't have to be all the time. The delete order can sit, waiting until the next time you log in to update reader software or purchase a new book and ZAP, away goes whatever they want to take.

It's already happened once.

If you were more familiar with the technology you would realize how this doesn't make any sense. Maybe you should be more familiar with the thing you're criticizing? It would help you make less uninformed comments.

In any case, I can't speak for the Kindle, but the Nook allows sideloading which means you can just drag and drop files from your PC into its storage space. If in the already impossible event that B&N decided that a particular file shouldn't be on my Nook, I can always put it back on.

 

[Rii]

The big kurfuffle about the Kindle books being deleted remotely were because someone was illegally posting content on the kindle system that they had no legal right to publish.

Not the consumer's problem.

The cost of those titles were refunded too, so it isn't like they lost anything

I'm sure you'd be just thrilled if someone walked through your door, threw some bills at you and made off with your television.

Boo hoo.

Yeah, that's just what Amazon's CEO said about the affair. Oh wait, no it wasn't:

Our “solution” to the problem was stupid, thoughtless, and painfully out of line with our principles.

 

[Venardhi]

It was essentially selling stolen property. If you buy a stolen TV, even if it is out of a legal retailer, and someone tracks it down you're probably going to lose that TV. It was Amazon's fault and they should have simply paid to replace each with a legal license in a way that most of the customers wouldn't have ever noticed. They did it badly, but it wasn't wrong of them to do it.

Their system is set up to be able to do that stuff, and it is one of the many reasons I never got a Kindle. Honestly I don't see the big deal other than exposing a huge flaw in their own system. The apologizing and groveling was to satisfy a vocal minority who have no actual understanding of how their system works, just like most public apologies are for. Do you think anyone actually believes a word they're saying in those perfectly scripted public statements in front of 20 cameras?

 

[Amaris]

Doesn't have to be all the time. The delete order can sit, waiting until the next time you log in to update reader software or purchase a new book and ZAP, away goes whatever they want to take.

It's already happened once.

If you were more familiar with the technology you would realize how this doesn't make any sense. Maybe you should be more familiar with the thing you're criticizing? It would help you make less uninformed comments.

In any case, I can't speak for the Kindle, but the Nook allows sideloading which means you can just drag and drop files from your PC into its storage space. If in the already impossible event that B&N decided that a particular file shouldn't be on my Nook, I can always put it back on.

I was looking at the B&N Nook, and I think I like it better than the Kindle, and the price is about the same. Question, if I may ask, does the Nook let you put public domain works in the library, or does it have to be authorized books from B&N?

 

[Venardhi]

B&N's ebook store on the nook has 950,000 public domain works built in and the device also uses .PDF .PDB and .ePub for sideloading content from other sources.

 

[Amaris]

Nice.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

Doesn't have to be all the time. The delete order can sit, waiting until the next time you log in to update reader software or purchase a new book and ZAP, away goes whatever they want to take.

It's already happened once.

If you were more familiar with the technology you would realize how this doesn't make any sense. Maybe you should be more familiar with the thing you're criticizing? It would help you make less uninformed comments.

YOU are the one saying that what happened didn't happen and "doesn't make sense" and I'm uninformed?

ANY system that relies on computers is vulnerable to being hacked/subverted via malicious code. It could be hidden in the upload/download function. It could be hidden in an Ebook itself.

In any case, I can't speak for the Kindle, but the Nook allows sideloading which means you can just drag and drop files from your PC into its storage space. If in the already impossible event that B&N decided that a particular file shouldn't be on my Nook, I can always put it back on.

and if they've inserted a persistent deletion virus into your Nook the new copy goes away too.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised...this IS a Trek board, and many if not most Trek fans are also technophiles.

Ironic given how often Trek told cautionary tales of technology left unfettered that ran amok...

 

[Caligula]

I had noticed, in the past half year, that when I'd go to get a book, often B&N wouldn't have it. "You can order it!" they'd say.

Got news for you. If I come out to your store and you can't even bother to stock books but want me to order it and then come pick it up, you can fuck yourself. I'll go to Amazon.

I've also had the same attitude towards my local video stores for some years now. Especially since Amazon's prices are so much more agreeable.

 

[Professor Zoom]

Nice.

and you don't have to only get your books at Barnes and Noble. There are many sites that have public domain books you can download and out on the Nook.

 

[Arrqh]

YOU are the one saying that what happened didn't happen and "doesn't make sense" and I'm uninformed?

I did no such thing. But you clearly don't understand the details of what happened and why and the technological limitations on what you're suggesting. Pretty much everyone in this thread has kindly tried to help you understand these issues better, and instead you're just ignoring everything we're saying. Why even bother starting a thread on a topic if you don't want to listen to what people are saying?

and if they've inserted a persistent deletion virus into your Nook the new copy goes away too.

Uh, then I rename my copy so this magical persistent virus you've made up can't find it. Heck, the Nook's OS is actually a version of Android and it's even rootable so I can take full control over the device if I want. You can also very easily revert it to older versions of the official OS if you are so inclined. Not to mention that besides the Kindle and Nook, there are quite a few 3rd party e-Readers that aren't even tied to a store and don't even have wireless capabilities in which case the user is entirely in control of what data is moved to and from the e-Reader. If someone has a privacy concern that is so overboard as to cause them to actually fear a Nook or Kindle like you do, they can get one of those.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised...this IS a Trek board, and many if not most Trek fans are also technophiles.

Ironic given how often Trek told cautionary tales of technology left unfettered that ran amok...

On the contrary, what's surprising is that someone who is a Trek fan would be a technophobe... and be so out of touch with what the technology actually is and what it can actually do and why that all they have are paranoid delusions that aren't grounded in reality.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

^Blah blahblahblahblah...

If there's anything I've learned from watching how things have gone the last few years, it's NEVER to underestimate the desire and ability of people to snake each other, and nowhere is that more evident than in business. It isn't just Kindle...remember when Microsoft was repeatedly locking down people's computers because it thought they were "hacking" Windows? They had to rewrite a large part of one of their OSes because people got tired of it (ME, IIRC)..

I'm far from technophobic. I just have a healthy appreciation for the evils that technology can cause if it is embraced without hesitation or due consideration and without strict limits to protect the greater good from those evils.

 

[Arrqh]

^Blah blahblahblahblah...

Well it's nice to know that you're interested in a real discussion!

If there's anything I've learned from watching how things have gone the last few years, it's NEVER to underestimate the desire and ability of people to snake each other, and nowhere is that more evident than in business.

Which still doesn't change the fact that you don't understand the technology involved, how it works and what is possible with it. And when people attempt to explain it, you flat out ignore it. Why aren't you interested in gaining a better understanding of the issues involved?

It isn't just Kindle...remember when Microsoft was repeatedly locking down people's computers because it thought they were "hacking" Windows? They had to rewrite a large part of one of their OSes because people got tired of it (ME, IIRC)..

So... Microsoft did a bad thing, people complained and then they adjusted it so people didn't complain any more? That doesn't sound like a good example of the horrors of technology to me.

I'm far from technophobic. I just have a healthy appreciation for the evils that technology can cause if it is embraced without hesitation or due consideration and without strict limits to protect the greater good from those evils.

Technology isn't evil, or good. It's just a thing. How people use it is what matters. To even suggest that technology can be intrinsically evil is to be technophobic and nothing about that is healthy in the slightest. Creating fanciful doomsday scenarios about magical viruses that couldn't possibly exist doesn't protect anything. It just distracts from the real issues out there that need to be dealt with and as such is counterproductive. Which is why being informed on the issues and technologies is so important... something you sadly have declined to do.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Technology isn't evil, or good. It's just a thing. How people use it is what matters. To even suggest that technology can be intrinsically evil is to be technophobic and nothing about that is healthy in the slightest. Creating fanciful doomsday scenarios about magical viruses that couldn't possibly exist doesn't protect anything. It just distracts from the real issues out there that need to be dealt with and as such is counterproductive. Which is why being informed on the issues and technologies is so important... something you sadly have declined to do.

Very eloquently stated, and something darkwing has been told before on multiple occasions.

 

[Professor Zoom]

Technology isn't evil, or good. It's just a thing. How people use it is what matters. To even suggest that technology can be intrinsically evil is to be technophobic and nothing about that is healthy in the slightest. Creating fanciful doomsday scenarios about magical viruses that couldn't possibly exist doesn't protect anything. It just distracts from the real issues out there that need to be dealt with and as such is counterproductive. Which is why being informed on the issues and technologies is so important... something you sadly have declined to do.

Very eloquently stated, and something darkwing has been told before on multiple occasions.

And probably will be told again on future occasions.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

Technology isn't evil, or good. It's just a thing. How people use it is what matters. To even suggest that technology can be intrinsically evil is to be technophobic and nothing about that is healthy in the slightest. Creating fanciful doomsday scenarios about magical viruses that couldn't possibly exist doesn't protect anything. It just distracts from the real issues out there that need to be dealt with and as such is counterproductive. Which is why being informed on the issues and technologies is so important... something you sadly have declined to do.

Very eloquently stated, and something darkwing has been told before on multiple occasions.

And probably will be told again on future occasions.

And it will be no more true then than it has been in the past. Technology that harms is bad and always will be bad. The only way to STOP bad technology is to keep it from getting loose in the first place.

As for the e readers (and anything else computerized): anything one man can program, another man can RE-program. And the company owning the program is just as likely to do it to their benefit as anyone else, even more so when you factor in the profit motive.

And you can't say that it hasn't happened because it already HAS (Kindle and ME). Why should anyone trust the companies when they say "we won't do it AGAIN"?

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Very eloquently stated, and something darkwing has been told before on multiple occasions.

And probably will be told again on future occasions.

And it will be no more true then than it has been in the past. Technology that harms is bad and always will be bad. The only way to STOP bad technology is to keep it from getting loose in the first place.

As for the e readers (and anything else computerized): anything one man can program, another man can RE-program. And the company owning the program is just as likely to do it to their benefit as anyone else, even more so when you factor in the profit motive.

And you can't say that it hasn't happened because it already HAS (Kindle and ME). Why should anyone trust the companies when they say "we won't do it AGAIN"?

It won't happen again--or at least not often--precisely because of the awful backlash Amazon got over it the first time. The last thing a company wants is to scare off their customers.

While the potential exists for some ebook sellers to remove some ebooks from some ebook devices, it is unlikely to become a widespread practice because customers would go apeshit and stop trusting the technology.

The hypothetical scenario that a major ebook seller would go out of business and then deactivate all their ebooks doesn't make any sense, either. Number one, such deactivation would have to be intentional--and why would a folding business waste time and money doing something that gets them zero benefit and just ruins whatever reputation they had left? Second, in a bankruptcy the assets don't just vanish, they are sold off. And again, whoever is buying this company's user base is not going to want to piss off all their new customers by invaliding their ebook libraries.

Arbitrary, remote deletion of ebooks is a potential problem, certainly, but it is not nearly as hard to grapple with as you seem to imply. Part of the solution can be technological--and part of it can be legal. But it is by no means a dealbreaker in the sense that you seem to think it is.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

The hypothetical scenario that a major ebook seller would go out of business and then deactivate all their ebooks doesn't make any sense, either. Number one, such deactivation would have to be intentional--and why would a folding business waste time and money doing something that gets them zero benefit and just ruins whatever reputation they had left? Second, in a bankruptcy the assets don't just vanish, they are sold off. And again, whoever is buying this company's user base is not going to want to piss off all their new customers by invaliding their ebook libraries.

Why would agricorps want to piss off farmers by selling seed that produce sterile plants?

Why would credit card companies, banks, etc jack their customers around on rates, fees, etc?

Or insurance companies?

Or Big Pharma?

Because they can. Because you deal with them or you don't deal at all.

E book companies might now do it NOW, while they're still a minor market factor, but put them in a position of being a major power in publishing, and they'll start acting like any other big business: do it our way or else...

There have not been laws to curtail those abuses of the public good and/or consumers. I have little confidence that the government would do anything to rein e book pubs either.

Therefore the only way to keep the consumer safe in this case is to keep ebooks confined to a tiny market sector, if not pushed out altogether.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

The hypothetical scenario that a major ebook seller would go out of business and then deactivate all their ebooks doesn't make any sense, either. Number one, such deactivation would have to be intentional--and why would a folding business waste time and money doing something that gets them zero benefit and just ruins whatever reputation they had left? Second, in a bankruptcy the assets don't just vanish, they are sold off. And again, whoever is buying this company's user base is not going to want to piss off all their new customers by invaliding their ebook libraries.

Why would agricorps want to piss off farmers by selling seed that produce sterile plants?

Why would credit card companies, banks, etc jack their customers around on rates, fees, etc?

Or insurance companies?

Or Big Pharma?

Because they can. Because you deal with them or you don't deal at all.

E book companies might now do it NOW, while they're still a minor market factor, but put them in a position of being a major power in publishing, and they'll start acting like any other big business: do it our way or else...

There have not been laws to curtail those abuses of the public good and/or consumers. I have little confidence that the government would do anything to rein e book pubs either.

Therefore the only way to keep the consumer safe in this case is to keep ebooks confined to a tiny market sector, if not pushed out altogether.

Wait, so now we're comparing ebook companies to life-and-death products like food and drugs? Come on.

The neat thing about consumer technology is that there are so many providers to choose from, and if you are savvy enough, you can pretty much "roll your own" whatever. This is nothing like agriculture, where most people have no idea how to grow their own food; or pharmaceuticals, where virtually no one is making pills in their basement.

 

[Professor Zoom]

E book companies might now do it NOW, while they're still a minor market factor, but put them in a position of being a major power in publishing, and they'll start acting like any other big business: do it our way or else...

Or else what? I go to another e-book company? I have the equipment. I can go and buy e-books from ANYone. Or I can also get them for free (public domain.)

And besides, these companies, like Amazon and Barnes and Noble, are just the middle men, what if publishers or even, gasp, AUTHORS, start selling directly to the consumer?

MORE choices.

So, frankly, I'm not to worried about being held hostage. They don't have much of a hold on me.

Oh, noes, you might be thinking, they can reach in and wirelessly do something to my nook. I can, however, turn the wireless OFF. So... what's the problem again?