Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Jordan
I do realize that. I guess I just wonder whether such an operation is really a good use of a student's time. And are they being compensated for the work? I think they should be. (Otherwise, they're just conscripted labor.) So who would pay for that?
Edit: I guess Google would...
|
I mean that the students can rip books for their own use. As for the time, let's get togeather half-a-dozen able students that are all using the same 5 textbooks, averaging 600 pages each. At a ripping rate of 400 pages per hour, it doesn't take even 90 minutes per student to have digital editions available.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Jordan
You don't have to be ignorant to not care about DRM. You just have to use the product the way the makers intended you to use it, and if the DRM properly accommodates that, the average user won't even notice it is there.
|
The issue is not how you use it. The issue is that the manufacturer's server to authorize content will eventually be removed after the manufacturer is not longer selling lots of new copies. The issue is that DRM will prevent me from using my content on a newer eBook. The issue is that the manufacturer may say the PDF will work on every PDf reader, but forget to mention that it does not work on my eBook that reads PDF.
Anyone who does not know that DRM is a technology, and that like any technology, it can break is ignorant. Anyone who does not know that because of the possibility of DRM breaking, that they are possibly going to be locked out of their content is ignorant.
Anyone who makes money off DRM infected works, and claims that DRM can not break, locking people out...Anyone who makes money off DRM infected works, and pretends that problems with DRM are only because of the user misusing the product is either ignorant or a liar. I learned about this attitude from a software company that answered a tech support call, and within 20 seconds blamed the hardware manufacturer...before they knew who the hardware manufacturer was.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Jordan
That's a good example of either bad DRM, or an indication that you were using it in a way that was not originally intended (I'm guessing the former here, although if you tried to use it on a computer the makers didn't foresee you using, that would qualify as the latter). This made you aware of DRM, and how it blocked you from doing what you wanted... if that happened to any average person, they would also "care" about DRM.
|
Exactly. Anyone who does not anticipate moving their S/W to new H/W is ignorant. Anyone who does not know that DRM will endlessly complicate this move is ignorant. I learned about this from the copy protection on Sierra Online's old games (e.g., King's Quest.)
Anyone who does not know that authorizing servers will be dropped when companies declare bankruptcy is ignorant. Anyone who does not know that the same companies will have the money (while in bankruptcy) to sue and prosecute anyone cracking their software is ignorant. I learned about both of these from Lotus 123.
Anyone who does not know they will need their old software many years later is ignorant. Anyone who does not know that DRM will prevent them from accessing their software years later is ignorant. For example, most people keep tax records on their PCs. Imagine a future, 20 years from now, when you need a 2005 tax return. You dont' ahve the PDF due to years of occasional data loss,b ut you do have the file that is native to the tax program. You fire up your new MAC with OSXV, and run a VM to emulate ancient XP. You pull your still pristine box off the shelf, and try to install the ancient 5.25" CD in an external drive (nobody uses optical drives anymore; you have to get this one off eBay.) You get a message: "This tax program is not licensed to run in a virtual machine." After fiddling with options for a few hours, you get it to think it's not in a virtual machine. Then you are ready to zap the fixed tax return to the IRS, but wait! the program will not print without contacting the authorizing server, which has not existed since 2010. ARRGGGHHH! You grab the tax return with screen shots and try to OCR it, but the program garbles the screen shots. Finally, you hand-copy the data, missing a zero on a line, and triggering a more in-depth audit that takes months.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Jordan
Your experience actually doesn't mean that DRM is bad...
|
I've been cheated time after time by companies that deliberately kept their software from working on my PCs. That is bad in my view, but you find it acceptable. We have different morals.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Jordan
just that badly-designed DRM is bad. Ask iTunes users how bad DRM is, and most of them will probably tell you it's not bad at all (well, the ones that won't just ask, "What's DRM?").
|
Itunes users still use DRM. The people who still use DRM are not going to rate it badly. Ask former iTunes customers why they switched, and they will likely mention something related to DRM, such as buying a song to play on their car's stereo, only to find out that they were ripped off.
Users ignorant of DRM have not seen the effects of it, yet. They will. All those iTunes users will be converted one at a time to anti-DRM enlightenment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Jordan
Not that I'm really defending DRM. I'm defending those who use software the way the makers intended it to be used, and therefore don't run afoul of their DRM systems... those people are not necessarily "ignorant."
|
These people who use software the way it was intended don't access 20 year old data. They don't upgrade. They don't mind when a Sony Libre deletes the book they wrote after 90 days.
These people who use software the way it was intended don't mind the possibility that one day all their data will be wiped. A virus could uses 3 or 4 venerabilities to infect 99% of internet connected PCs, then wipes the hard disks. Ignorant users don't know about this danger.
Microsoft's EULA for Service Pack 2 on XP demands that they can read anything on your PC. It demands that they can delete anything on your PC. It demands that they can change anything on your PC.
Ignorant users don't know about this. Even worse, Ignorant users in the medical field don't know that allowing Microsoft to read and change the medical records on their PCs is a violation of HIPPAA (in the states.)
Ignorant users in the education field don't know that allowing Microsoft to read and change thestudent records on their PCs is a violation of FERPA (in the states.)
Ignorant users in the human resources field don't know that allowing Microsoft to read and change the personnel records on their PCs is a violation of federal privacy laws (in the states.)
Ignorant users in the credit reporting field don't know that allowing Microsoft to read and change the medical records on their PCs is a violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (in the states.)
These people who use software the way it was intended have their software remotely shut down when Islamic nuts take over Thailand. Apparently, it is intended that anyone who publishes anti-government literature in an Islamic country should be executed.
More than anything else, I demand that my authoring system (which has never been connected to the Internet) work, without phoning home.
Andy