Textbook manifesto (2016) • Hacker News Board

Re: Textbook manifesto (2016)

#151

Post by hackermailman » Mon, Apr 10, 2017, 2:02 PM UTC

The two biggest universities in my city have some sort of publishing agreement where they can print and bind the relevant textbook material to give to students for free and when possible they use open textbooks https://open.bccampus.ca/ though there is a government grant paying professors to maintain the texts.

The best thing about the open textbook site is other professors and TAs review the books like this Precalculus example https://open.bccampus.ca/find-open-textbooks/?uuid=2fdb8a19-...

Re: Textbook manifesto (2016)

#152

Post by kbutler » Mon, Apr 10, 2017, 2:11 PM UTC

elviejo wrote: post #139

Nullabillity wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> e.g. if I built a house on my land that looks exactly like my neighbors, I still own my property and the house; but if I took their house and put it on my property I wouldn't Uhm, no, that's exactly what copyright prevents (or tries to, anyhow).

Again that is the difference between parents and copyrights. With a patent you can't make a copy. With copyrights you can't claim you made something. For example if I see a dress in a magazine I can make one, what I cannot claim is that it is Dolce and Gabbana...

> if I see a dress in a magazine I can make one, what I cannot claim is that it is Dolce and Gabbana

That's actually trademark, which is distinct from copyright or patent.

And notably, clothing designs are not copyrightable, because they are "useful articles", not just creative expressions. https://www.copyright.gov/register/va-useful.html

Patent: Practical invention, prevents sale even of independent re-invention. 17-20 years.

Copyright: Tangible expression of original authorship, prevents duplication and derivation except for fair use, common stereotypes, etc. Does not prohibit independent re-invention, does not prevent re-use of ideas, just the expression. Has grown to progressively longer term (currently life + 70)

Trademark: Prevents false claims of source of product, even of "confusingly" similar designs. Includes "trade dress" (packaging/presentation). Valid as long as the trademark is used.

Design patent: hybrid - prevents duplication of ornamental design of a functional product, so it is like copyright, but has a duration similar to patent - 14-15 years.

Re: Textbook manifesto (2016)

#153

Post by kazagistar » Mon, Apr 10, 2017, 2:12 PM UTC

lvh wrote: post #32

In many European countries, this problem was resolved by what I feel is mostly student pressure. Our student union (for lack of better word) owned printing equipment and worked with most professors to do exactly what's suggested in this article: most professors wrote their own books (not 140 pages, though). Most of my textbooks were between 2 and 7 EUR, which I'm led to believe is approximately at cost. Occasionally,…

The only time we had to use a professor written paperback textbook the quality was abysmal and the layout unusable.

Re: Textbook manifesto (2016)

#154

Post by kazagistar » Mon, Apr 10, 2017, 2:18 PM UTC

a3n wrote: post #50

jabl wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a fellow European, my experience is similar (though our prices were higher but still substantially lower than the big-name commercial publishers.), but I suspect it would never fly in the US (communism, boo!).

Having been a US citizen for all of my 60 years, and often wondering "why things so f ked up?", I've come to understand or believe this about the US: If it makes money, it's good, regardless of whether it's good or bad for people or the environment. Once something is making money, it becomes a god-given right (cheap labor, insurance companies as health-care middlemen, etc). If you propose something that inhibits the…

The way I understand it: Making money means a market, market mean consumer choice rather then government mandate, which means freedom.

The fact that there is no actual consumer freedom in many cases like this one never manages to register; the idealism of a free market overrides all the messy practicalities of reality.

Re: Textbook manifesto (2016)

#155

Post by Chris2048 » Mon, Apr 10, 2017, 2:55 PM UTC

thanatropism wrote: post #138

jimmaswell wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I definitely learned calculus from the Calculus classes. I took calculus 3 recently for credits with no difficulty remembering anything relevant from 1/2. Some things I could give right now off the top of my head are the definition of an integral/derivative, squeeze theorem, mean value theorem, integration by parts, epsilon delta definition of a limit, second/third derivative tests, and a lot more. Test me with somet…

So what's the basic idea behind Taylor series? (A "proof sketch", or even a sequence of theorems relying on each other building up to the lightbulb step.)

If OP doesn't reply, can you? I'd like any insight I can :-)

Re: Textbook manifesto (2016)

#156

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Apr 10, 2017, 3:04 PM UTC

kbutler wrote: post #147

a3n wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. The government, like poor people, spend every dollar they take in, which allows that money to circulate. To use a cliche, a billionaire can only buy so many yachts, pieces of art or gold bricks; at some point, the excess is going to land in an offshore account or otherwise be underutilized. Billionaires grudgingly create jobs.

Every dollar given to the billionaire is willingly given because the product benefits the person at least a dollar (net benefit to both parties). "The excess" is invested in other companies that produce other things people are willing to pay for. Every dollar the government spends was taken from a taxpayer (cost one dollar), to provide a product people are not willing to pay a dollar for. This yields a net loss to so…

[deleted]

Re: Textbook manifesto (2016)

#157

Post by mattnewton » Mon, Apr 10, 2017, 3:04 PM UTC

kbutler wrote: post #147

a3n wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. The government, like poor people, spend every dollar they take in, which allows that money to circulate. To use a cliche, a billionaire can only buy so many yachts, pieces of art or gold bricks; at some point, the excess is going to land in an offshore account or otherwise be underutilized. Billionaires grudgingly create jobs.

Every dollar given to the billionaire is willingly given because the product benefits the person at least a dollar (net benefit to both parties). "The excess" is invested in other companies that produce other things people are willing to pay for. Every dollar the government spends was taken from a taxpayer (cost one dollar), to provide a product people are not willing to pay a dollar for. This yields a net loss to so…

>Every dollar the government spends was taken from a taxpayer (cost one dollar), to provide a product people are not willing to pay a dollar for. This yields a net loss to society, unless there are positive externalities.

Except this is not entirely true. Much of modern income is rent, and people are willing to buy things like defense, and much of the "dead weight loss" you are talking about is offset by collective barganing power.

Edit: Like you say, it's complicated and I'll be the first to admit don't understand how it all works but I don't think soaking the rich works well either, in theory or in practice, and government is often unfairly maligned by people who have something to gain by less government involvement.

Re: Textbook manifesto (2016)

#158

Post by jimmaswell » Mon, Apr 10, 2017, 3:47 PM UTC

thanatropism wrote: post #138

jimmaswell wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I definitely learned calculus from the Calculus classes. I took calculus 3 recently for credits with no difficulty remembering anything relevant from 1/2. Some things I could give right now off the top of my head are the definition of an integral/derivative, squeeze theorem, mean value theorem, integration by parts, epsilon delta definition of a limit, second/third derivative tests, and a lot more. Test me with somet…

So what's the basic idea behind Taylor series? (A "proof sketch", or even a sequence of theorems relying on each other building up to the lightbulb step.)

One of the things that was used less and less time was spent on, but they're convergent sum of a series that eventually approximates some function's value with increasing accuracy, from what I remember. You can get a sine value from one. Actually proving them, I can't remember how, but the class treated it pretty much as a short bonus topic.

Re: Textbook manifesto (2016)

#159

Post by Nutomic » Mon, Apr 10, 2017, 4:49 PM UTC

I studied Computer Science in Germany, and I didn't use a single book during my entire bachelor. The way it worked was professors always put the slides from their lectures online, so we could reference them as sources. Sometimes, additional references or texts were available online.

In addition to lectures, we had weekly classes where we applied the concepts from the lecture in practice. Exercises for these classes were also available online.

All of this material was free for students, and created by the professors and instructors specifically for the course.

Re: Textbook manifesto (2016)

#160

Post by thanatropism » Mon, Apr 10, 2017, 4:57 PM UTC

Chris2048 wrote: post #155

thanatropism wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what's the basic idea behind Taylor series? (A "proof sketch", or even a sequence of theorems relying on each other building up to the lightbulb step.)

If OP doesn't reply, can you? I'd like any insight I can :-)

(1) Rolle's theorem says that if f(x) if differentiable in the interval (a,b) and f(a)=f(b), there must be a point c such that f'(c) = 0.

Proving this one uses maths that, although simple, more analysis-like than calculus-like, but it should be intuitive if you try to draw a function with f(a)=f(b). It has to come up and down so it has a point where it has a horizontal tangent.

(2) The Mean Value Theorem is like Rolle's theorem, but "tilting" or "rotating" your function, so that if f(b) = r(f(b)-f(a)) then there's a point c with f'(c) = r. And this is already an order 1 Taylor series! It gives

f(b) = f(a) + (b-a) f'(c) for some c

(3) Now what remains is just induction. For an order-2 series, write the order-1 series for f'(c) as a function of f'(b). You'll start to see the pattern. If you really want to put a bow on it, you can assume the order (n-1) series exists with the known formula and prove the order (n) series works out.