backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 59 comment(s) - last by Ryanman.. on Jul 7 at 1:22 AM


News posts from Textbook Torrents admin Stoney. The first post is on the bottom.
Textbook Torrents removes 78 books from its website after receiving a takedown notice

While sites such as The Pirate Bay and OiNK have enjoyed the majority of content owners’ wrath, a number of smaller BitTorrent sites have existed out of the limelight, catering to niche interests. One such website, TextbookTorrents.com, appears to have attracted the interest of an entirely new class of copyright holders: textbook publishers. The site allows users to upload torrents pointing to scans and PDFs of academic textbooks.

“On Friday, we received a request from Pearson Education, one of the bigger textbook publishers, listing 78 torrents that they wanted disabled,” reads a July 1 news post. “While they are acting on extremely shaky legal ground, we are not in a position to fight a legal battle with the organization. As a result, in the interest of allowing the continued existence of this place, I have acceded to their request and disabled access to the listed torrents.”

The site makes no effort to hide its intentions, and openly implores users to contribute moments after they sign up. To that end, it is remarkably frank in its calls for reform in the academic textbook community – overpriced, frequently-updated textbooks are a staple element in students’ complaints about education – and administrator Geekman  seems to see Textbook Torrents as a kind of rage against the industry machine.

“Textbook Torrents has always been about more than downloading free stuff. Overpriced textbooks are a problem for all of us, and the remarkable popularity of the site should send a strong message to anyone with ears to listen,” reads a follow-up post.

The site’s niche interest has allowed it to fly under the radar of publishers’ lawyers, and even when the lawyers do come out their stance is considerably softer than the movie, music, and even software industries. Textbook Torrents – which says it is acting pretty much alone in its efforts to post textbooks online – has been able to act freely, enjoying the freedom of its niche status.

But with all the doom-and-gloom publicity the site has received over its announcement of the takedown – Stoney readily admits that he’s seen “thousands” of new sign-ups since the July 1 newspost – many are wondering if the site can withstand its predicted, future legal barrage. Textbook Torrents acknowledges that eventuality, and instead uses a fatalistic stance to advocate the spread of similar Torrent trackers before it’s too late.

“Nothing lasts forever, least of all BitTorrent trackers,” reads the follow-up. “We stand at the leading edge of this movement, and we stand alone … Were the site to be taken down, a unique site would be lost and [its] niche would be empty once again.”

Despite the grim outlook, Textbook Torrents doesn't predict its end anytime soon. The site still openly welcomes any content adhering to its rules, and it will continue its unusual stance of promoting members who submit new material over members who seed torrents regularly.

Update: Corrected a misattributed quote.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Can someone tell me...
By Chosonman on 7/3/2008 9:04:33 AM , Rating: 2
What the difference is between going to the library and downloading books from the net?




RE: Can someone tell me...
By Integral9 on 7/3/2008 9:16:28 AM , Rating: 3
huh?... the net *isn't* the library?... I'm so confused....


RE: Can someone tell me...
By Chosonman on 7/3/2008 1:21:10 PM , Rating: 2
The net isn't supposed to be about the sharing of knowledge? Why was it created then? So someone can sell you a pair sneakers without you ever having to move your fat butt from a chair?


RE: Can someone tell me...
By porkpie on 7/3/08, Rating: 0
RE: Can someone tell me...
By Chosonman on 7/3/2008 3:39:42 PM , Rating: 2
RE: Can someone tell me...
By MeTaedet on 7/4/2008 4:02:30 PM , Rating: 2
Master of caviling...

That the library is not the internet and the internet not the library is immaterial here. The person to whom you responding was merely asking why, if these publishers don't take issue with their books being freely accessible in the library, they take issue with them being freely accessible on the internet. In both cases they are "losing" money. Apparently, the "loss" of money is only meaningful if it is happening by way of the internet? (Those two words are in quotes for good reason. Think about it.)


RE: Can someone tell me...
By Spivonious on 7/3/2008 10:02:47 AM , Rating: 3
The library buys the rights to loan out the books. Just like the radio buys the rights to broadcast the music, and the movie rental store buys the rights to rent the movies.

They all pay a higher fee than if it were a private copy.


RE: Can someone tell me...
By Chosonman on 7/3/2008 11:23:09 AM , Rating: 2
So someone can't just donate a book to the library?


RE: Can someone tell me...
By masher2 (blog) on 7/3/2008 12:47:55 PM , Rating: 2
You can't donate a book without first paying for it.


RE: Can someone tell me...
By Chosonman on 7/3/2008 1:07:50 PM , Rating: 2
ok... and so what's the difference?


RE: Can someone tell me...
By masher2 (blog) on 7/3/08, Rating: 0
RE: Can someone tell me...
By Chosonman on 7/3/2008 1:29:08 PM , Rating: 2
Let me rephrase my question... so what's the difference between a library and the internet? The sharing of knowledge? The donating? You seem confused.


RE: Can someone tell me...
By masher2 (blog) on 7/3/08, Rating: 0
RE: Can someone tell me...
By Chosonman on 7/3/2008 2:37:06 PM , Rating: 2
I guess then the use of photocopy machines in libraries should be forbidden too.


RE: Can someone tell me...
By gramboh on 7/6/2008 11:43:47 PM , Rating: 3
There ARE restrictions on what you can photocopy from library loaned textbooks.

Sorry guys, but Masher is dead on here, no idea why he was downrated, he clarified the rationale for the book publisher wanting the torrents down (you are an idiot if you don't understand the reasoning). This is a clear cut case.


RE: Can someone tell me...
By Oregonian2 on 7/3/2008 1:55:48 PM , Rating: 3
If I go down to a Barnes and Noble store and buy a book at the cash register. Am I now legally bound to limit the number of people who may look at my physical copy of the book? If so, how many and how am I bound to that number? What if some only read one chapter and decide they don't like it, does that count as a "read" toward my maximum?


RE: Can someone tell me...
By masher2 (blog) on 7/3/2008 2:08:10 PM , Rating: 2
You're limited by the physical form of the book itself. You can possibly allow ten people to read it simultaneously, though in an extremely inconvenient manner....which is why the book is priced accordingly.

You cannot, however, allow 10,000 people to read a book simultaneously -- a figure very easily reachabled for a torrent though.


RE: Can someone tell me...
By Chosonman on 7/3/2008 3:26:22 PM , Rating: 1
Where do you draw the line in your distinction? At 10 people? 100? 1000? 10,000?

One day every book in public libraries is going to be digital. What happens to your theory then?


RE: Can someone tell me...
By masher2 (blog) on 7/3/08, Rating: 0
RE: Can someone tell me...
By teohhanhui on 7/4/2008 7:06:28 AM , Rating: 2
I've not seen in any book that there's a stated limit of how many people could read it, simultaneously or sequentially.

Does the public library really have to pay a higher price for their book purchases? Most books are donated by community members and patrons anyway.


RE: Can someone tell me...
By Oregonian2 on 7/3/2008 7:02:14 PM , Rating: 2
You've now added simultaneous'ness which doesn't fit in with your comment about a library buying books and paying more for them -- because they can't lend a copy out to multiple people simultaneously no more or less than the copy I buy at B&N. My wife reads novels a lot (when she's not writing them). Takes maybe 2 days each. So sequential access could be maybe 150 people a year. If bound well, it'd maybe last for over a thousand people using it. But not simultaneously. Will the publisher sue my wife if she lends it out to ten people (making eleven users of the one copy that she bought)? What is binding her to that ten count that you suggest?


RE: Can someone tell me...
By masher2 (blog) on 7/3/2008 8:06:27 PM , Rating: 2
Come on now, you're just being silly. First of all, there's no limitation on how many people you can lend a book too sequentially. The limitation is for parallel access...and it's not part of the license itself, it's a physical restriction based on the book form.

A publisher bases the price of a book (or an album/movie/whatever) off the very fact that this limitation exists. That limit allows the high cost of generating the copyrighted material (authors wages, graphics, typesetting, etc) to be spread out among many people. That in turn generates both supply and demand.

If you think the model is inefficient, you're welcome to suggest something that works better. But the "free for all!" model fails badly.


RE: Can someone tell me...
By Some1ne on 7/6/2008 10:14:06 PM , Rating: 2
How about a "subsidized free for all" model then? As in, the government levies a "multimedia rights" tax against ISP's at a rate of $15 per user per month (or if you're a "government must eschew involvement at all costs" kind of person, then the various multimedia associations work out a deal with ISP's under which they will grant the ISP's and their users amnesty from DMCA/copyright suits so long as the proper fee is paid by the ISP...although given how poorly the multimedia associations have been handling things, I think it's entirely reasonable for the government to step in at this point). The ISP's then pass this extra cost on to their users. The money collected in this fashion is then paid out to intellectual property owners, ideally in a manner that is proportionally weighted by popularity (so if you put out an album and it gets downloaded 100 times, and someone else puts out one that is only downloaded once, you get 100x as much as they do). Of course, actively tracking and monitoring the popularity of all the content out there (and also filtering out people trying to commit fraud by making their content look more popular than it really is) may be a bit tricky, but on the plus side it would save the whole "copyright infringement detection" industry that has sprung up to help the MPAA/RIAA from immediate bankruptcy, as their skills could be repurposed towards a more useful end. Perhaps it would even make sense to establish an official national torrent tracker, and use the results from it to compute the popularity results. But anyways, the important things are:

1. Each ISP must make a monthly contribution into a communal "multimedia rights" fund, the amount that must be given being proportional to the number of users that each ISP has.

2. The money in the fund is then distributed to intellectual property owners, proportionally allocated by popularity.

3. Individuals are free to download, torrent, and copy to their heart's content, without fear of prosecution or need to feel guilt.

4. Artists are still encouraged to create, because if they come out with something popular, it will net them a large portion of the multimedia fund payout.

...seems like it would work fine to me, and at the very least it would be a hell of a lot better than the crap we have going on now, where the multimedia associations are trying to bankrupt and/or imprison individuals for pirating a few songs and/or movies. It also allows us to fully embrace the benefits provided by the great freedom of information that is made possible by the Internet, instead of trying to find ways to lock it down (regardless of how the intellectual property owners may feel, society is wholly improved by giving more people free access to information). I would gladly pay an extra $15 a month to be able to legally download anything I wanted. It would also encourage more users to upgrade to broadband, because the less you're able to download, the less you get out of your extra $15.


RE: Can someone tell me...
By Ryanman on 7/7/2008 1:22:45 AM , Rating: 2
what about computer illiterate people that just use email? why should they be forced to pay for those who regularly download media?

You could minimize the problem by saying everyone consumes a decent amount of said media, but the whole theory you put out underscores the problem with communal "plans". The weight of the entire thing is disproportionately put on the shoulders of those who don't take advantage of the communal service.


RE: Can someone tell me...
By eion on 7/4/2008 6:30:02 AM , Rating: 2
"The library buys the rights to loan out the books. Just like the radio buys the rights to broadcast the music, and the movie rental store buys the rights to rent the movies.

They all pay a higher fee than if it were a private copy."


There's no reason libraries would have to pay more for their books.
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#109


RE: Can someone tell me...
By tmouse on 7/3/2008 10:05:12 AM , Rating: 2
Well the library as we have come to understand it is long past its usefulness. In its day it was pivital, believe me I have spent years of my life tracking down old journals, dragging then to a reading booth while my arms grew several inches, and then spending months Xeroxing articles. The biggest problem was misfiled or unavailable texts, I love the new system where I can work from my office or at home, I may miss the smell a bit ;)

This is not to say I am against books, there is a feeling of a personal library that is not matched by the same information in PDF form, it’s merely, in my opinion, not as functional in many fields as it was. I also have less risk of being buried alive when a stack of journals falls over (that may be viewed as a plus or minus depending on whom you ask) ;)


RE: Can someone tell me...
By Larrymon2000 on 7/3/2008 12:40:02 PM , Rating: 3
Amen to that. Today, what can you get from a library that you can't get from the net, besides someone telling you to whisper?


RE: Can someone tell me...
By masher2 (blog) on 7/3/2008 1:25:59 PM , Rating: 2
> "Today, what can you get from a library that you can't get from the net"

A vast amount of information, depending on what field you're in. For rapidly advancing fields in the sciences or engineering, there is little if anything not available online. But a historian, for instance, still is largely trapped in libraries and halls of records.


What textbook publishers really need...
By Rugar on 7/3/2008 9:01:52 AM , Rating: 2
Is to change from a printed to an electronic format. There are a number of key reasons for this:

1) Lower production costs.
2) Shorter turnaround times for revised editions.
3) Integration of errata.
4) Eliminate unnecessary waste of paper.
5) Incorporation of multimedia formats as figures.

And here is where I piss the pirates off...
Ideally, this would include a format with strong DRM to prevent the books from being shared. Texts could be either "leased" or purchased outright with online access to updates and revisions for say 3 years or so.

I know everyone hates expensive textbooks, but much of the expense is due to the color printing and relatively small volume print runs. Moving to an electronic format that allowed the publisher to be relatively sure piracy would be limited would be a HUGE boon to the end user. It would also allow libraries to have electronic copies to share rather than putting books on reserve or you waiting till some yahoo brought their overdue copy back to the library.




RE: What textbook publishers really need...
By wordsworm on 7/3/2008 9:33:37 AM , Rating: 2
Perhaps another way to make things fair is to have the professors/school pay for the textbooks that they choose to use, pay a fee per student, and have them simply distribute the texts as they see fit- hard, soft, or electronic copy. Boy, wouldn't a solution like that make a lot of folks see red!


RE: What textbook publishers really need...
By tmouse on 7/3/2008 9:52:50 AM , Rating: 2
Not really, it would make the procurement seem less painful but the cost would be passed along in the form of increased tuition or course fees. I also think electronic books are the future, a standard reader could be included in the initial tuition and each course would add the fee for the book.Rugar has a good idea although it would not be if the cost savings were not passed along. In fast moving fields a text can be out of date befor publication. Like it or not; nothing is free the trick is keeping the costs reasonable.


RE: What textbook publishers really need...
By wordsworm on 7/3/2008 11:24:34 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
it would make the procurement seem less painful but the cost would be passed along in the form of increased tuition or course fees


Oh, I know that. In fact, that's where the debate would likely originate - students would demand the right to get their cheap-o texts rather than being forced to buy them. I was saying it so that the people who get degrees based on understanding those texts would be giving a portion of their fees to the authors of those texts. That's all I meant.


RE: What textbook publishers really need...
By Zoomer on 7/3/2008 7:20:48 PM , Rating: 2
One don't have to understand the texts to get a degree, one simply has to understand the material taught in courses.


By wordsworm on 7/3/2008 9:58:32 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, but it's someone whose material that you're trying to understand (such as research someone did), which was created by an author, who doesn't get any money if you don't buy their text. That in itself doesn't seem entirely fair.


By Rugar on 7/3/2008 10:03:15 AM , Rating: 2
The problem is, that would only obfuscate the real price of the books to the students. In the system you describe, the university would simply tack on the cost of the book copies to your fees. Since people without ownership are generally less careful than people with, there would be a much higher replacement cost for the texts which would also get passed along to the students.

It may be a Utopian dream, but I really think that a subscription service (iTunes like) for textbooks is long overdue.


RE: What textbook publishers really need...
By Spivonious on 7/3/2008 10:04:09 AM , Rating: 2
I hate reading on a screen. There's just something about holding that big paper book that gives me a nice sense of accomplishment when I finish it.


By wordsworm on 7/3/2008 11:07:16 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I hate reading on a screen.
I hear that. On the other hand, I appreciate the cut and paste ability, and the ability to store a lot of e-books on a hard disk. I did try Questia - useful for someone trying to write a fast essay - but not nearly thorough enough to do real research.


By Polynikes on 7/3/2008 11:42:18 AM , Rating: 2
They'd still charge the same amount, citing "technology development costs."


Thanks for the article
By wordsworm on 7/3/2008 8:28:45 AM , Rating: 2
I just downloaded close to 2,000 books over the last little while. Thanks for the link. I hope it's worth signing up on. Books are awesome.

I am on both sides of the fence on this issue. On the one hand, as an aspiring artist/writer, I hope to one day make a living at the craft, and bittorrents are definitely an enemy to it. On the other, I like getting free books. Living in S. Korea, I don't have access to a good English library. Questia isn't really even as good as the small local library I used to enjoy in Courtenay, BC.

If people don't make enough money to justify the cost of actually making books, it would have a negative impact on the production of new material or of improvement of new material. So, this is a pretty big issue.




RE: Thanks for the article
By xSauronx on 7/3/2008 8:53:02 AM , Rating: 2
The thing is, large books full of detailed information are available on a number of topics, and even when frequently updated do not cost half of what some textbooks do. I bought the Fedor 9 and RHEL Bible last week for $32. Its huge, far larger than most of my former school textbooks, and is an Nth edition based on fedora and RHEL.

If they can do it, why should book publishers be able to get away with changing just enough to require people to use a new book to keep up with a teacher without fundamentally changing the content or presentation of the content? I buy used textbooks whenever I can, or outright skip some after talking to an instructor, simply because of the cost.

A friend of mine said at her school (i think Washburn U in Topeka, KS) they rent the books out to the students, so that paying an exorbitant price isnt an issue. Good idea, if you ask me.


RE: Thanks for the article
By wordsworm on 7/3/2008 9:27:35 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
If they can do it, why should book publishers be able to get away with changing just enough to require people to use a new book to keep up with a teacher without fundamentally changing the content or presentation of the content?


That's the other way to abuse the system, I agree. As a lit student who enjoyed moldy lit, I was always irked by the fact that most of the lit was well past copyright protection - yet enough of it often remained offline, forcing me to either break copyright or break the bank.

What I'd like to do with books is what I did with music: I have a great (albeit not perfect) subscription to Yahoo Music. It's millions of songs that I can access anywhere I have my computer plugged into. (Compare that to lugging around CDs!) Being on about a 40kg max payload diet, books or CDs quickly become more than I want to lug around. I have a 'large' (200+) library 'at home,' as collecting them is a bit of a hobby.

I'd pay for access to a good online library - probably $100 or so per year - if I ever saw one. Questia is promising, but it's not as impressive as the library at Montreal's Concordia University (where I got high learning). But its reader is really cool.


RE: Thanks for the article
By Parhel on 7/3/2008 10:27:52 AM , Rating: 1
Textbooks are as expensive as they are for a lot of reasons.

First of all, when picking a textbook for a class, teachers and/or universities are more likely to pick whichever book was revised most recently. This might not make a lot of sense, but they do it, and it has driven everyone into a cycle of constant revisions even if the subject is completely static.

Secondly, production costs are high with textbooks. There are usually several authors, researchers and editors involved; textbooks are often printed on a four-color press; they usually produce a companion volume and extra content for teachers along with it, etc., etc.

Finally, textbooks are sold in much lower quantity than books at the local book store, so they have to charge more per copy to recoup the production costs.

Many students rightly get upset dropping $150 for a textbook, but in this situation there really isn't anyone ripping them off. Believe it or not, the publishers are operating on a slim margin. Maybe the business model will have to change for textbook manufacturers.


RE: Thanks for the article
By Larrymon2000 on 7/3/2008 12:38:45 PM , Rating: 2
Funny. Books have always been about education and bringing knowledge to the masses. Now we're worrying about people receiving knowledge and enlightenment for free, learning new abilities and skills that they may not receive otherwise, given the slow nature of library systems and major costs of texts (especially if you're using supplementary publications while studying in an academic environment).

You'd like to think that major bodies would encourage this, or at least adapt to address this new change. A lot of highly technical texts on maths, sciences, humanities, technology, etc are very very expensive, and limited in library copies and can't be on loan for very long. Just my two cents.


RE: Thanks for the article
By Yossarian22 on 7/4/2008 6:52:21 AM , Rating: 2
No they haven't. The primary purpose of books was the storing of information, not education and bringing knowledge to the masses. Hell, literacy rates were as low as 1% in the 1800s. Books are useless if you can't read them.


RE: Thanks for the article
By masher2 (blog) on 7/3/2008 12:50:29 PM , Rating: 2
> "Many students rightly get upset dropping $150 for a textbook..."

It may sound trite, but personally I think $150 for several hundred pages of knowledge direct from what is (usually) a leader in the field is the steal of a lifetime. I've been out of school more years than I like to think about, but I still buy several textbooks a year on various subjects.



RE: Thanks for the article
By Zoomer on 7/3/2008 7:27:22 PM , Rating: 2
Not if you bought a new 10th edition to replace your old 2nd edition for $200 and discover that it's 99.999% the same. And oh, it might come with a useless CD and web access card.


RE: Thanks for the article
By TomCorelis (blog) on 7/3/2008 7:31:22 PM , Rating: 2
Personally, I consider there to be a very high level of entropy for the transfer of knowledge from textbook to student. Authoritative or not, many textbooks are written poorly and seem to do little to take into account students' diverse learning styles. Beyond that, very few textbooks are actually engaging enough to capture the interest of all but the most studious of readers.

I do not consider $150 to be worth it if the product I'm getting is a oversized, obtuse tome that costs me just as much time to decode as it does to read -- if the book is going to cost that much, I would rather they hire a career writer as opposed to professors and industry professionals for who writing is a secondary function of their jobs.

Further, reading a textbook as a seasoned professional is a very different experience from reading a textbook as a student with little, if any, knowledge of the subject to be covered.


RE: Thanks for the article
By masher2 (blog) on 7/3/2008 8:01:19 PM , Rating: 2
If the cost of the book is too high, don't pay it. If your University requires it, then your quibble is with them, not the author, no?

Also, I should add that, while writing textbooks is a "secondary job" for a professor, it's one that supplements their meagre salary. Without the funds from their textbooks, you should consider the salaries (and thus the tuition) at a high-class university would be somewhat higher to compensate.


LOL
By Spivonious on 7/3/08, Rating: 0
RE: LOL
By Spivonious on 7/3/2008 8:25:16 AM , Rating: 2
Of course, I meant "mad" not "made". How about an edit function if there are no replies yet?


RE: LOL
By Yojimbo on 7/3/2008 9:10:08 AM , Rating: 2
it really is a racket. they change the numbers in the problem section and then release a new edition. then a student whose instructor assigns problems from the textbook has to buy the new edition instead of an old one, unless he photocopies them from someone with a new book. An instructor can't teach out of an old edition because he can't expect students to hunt down used books, as the old ones aren't sold by the publishers.


RE: LOL
By Spivonious on 7/3/2008 9:58:11 AM , Rating: 2
After my freshman year I had zero professors assign problems from the textbook. Come to think of it, I had very few that assigned homework. It was mostly projects, tests, and labs.

I do agree with you though. New editions come out way too often, and it's usually just chapter 2 is now chapter 4 and chapter 4 is chapter 2.


RE: LOL
By Spivonious on 7/3/08, Rating: 0
RE: LOL
By Rugar on 7/3/08, Rating: 0
RE: LOL
By legoman666 on 7/3/2008 10:13:01 AM , Rating: 2
Bah. I either buy the cheapo international edition from ebay for $20 or just get a pdf of the book. The pdf is lighter (just put it on my laptop), easier to search (where is ctrl-f IRL), and doesn't need to be transported. If the textbook publishers sold the pdf for $10-$15, I'd buy them instead of the physical book.

But of course, they'd probably screw it up with some sort of draconian copyright scheme with a DRM server that only stayed online for 5 months, thus rendering my $15 purchase useless.


RE: LOL
By SiN on 7/3/2008 11:25:22 AM , Rating: 2
they already did. I came accross a site a while back (cant remember what it was unfortunatly). They allowed you to view the text books online, but the information could not be saved nor could you copy and paste, must have been done in flash or something similar. I think it opperated a subscription fee, or per per view type payment.

Anyone else came accross such a thing?

Your right though, they should be able to make them available for a fee in PDF, the only problem is if you have a class of 30, and one of them gets a copy, soon the rest will have a copy and they wont have bought it from the publisher. we students are cheapos, unfortunatly.


RE: LOL
By HaZaRd2K6 on 7/3/2008 10:48:26 AM , Rating: 2
Yes, textbooks are expensive. Do they need to be, though? Absolutely not. Why should a standard hardcover book cost no more than $30, but a textbook with just as much in it should cost sometimes ten times that much? It's all just extortion, really.

And yes, tuition is also expensive. I've got a loan that I'll probably be paying off until I'm 40. Do I want to be in that position? Not a chance. Loans cost money, too. And guess what else? Students also have other expenses such as transportation costs to and from school (about $80 a month for me), interest payments (because I don't qualify for government aid, I had to get a loan from a bank and now pay about $110 a month in interest), books, "ancillary" costs and anything else schools can think of.

As someone else posted before me, the big issue with textbooks is that publishers release new editions when they really don't need to be released. Getting a loan or going to the library is not the point. The point is that education (at least in the upper levels) is nothing more than a business built on a model of extortion.

</rant>


RE: LOL
By UNHchabo on 7/3/2008 12:40:54 PM , Rating: 2
This is why I almost entirely stopped buying textbooks, even "required" ones, for class. I was a CS major, and all I really needed was language references. During my last year I bought one book, on AI, because of the algorithms involved. I don't need the "recommended" C++ reference when I already have a good one.

For liberal arts classes, I found the books to be entirely unnecessary.


Update - the site is down
By Segerstein on 7/5/2008 5:00:02 PM , Rating: 2
"Nowadays, security guys break the Mac every single day. Every single day, they come out with a total exploit, your machine can be taken over totally. I dare anybody to do that once a month on the Windows machine." -- Bill Gates














botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki