I have a hard time getting behind some of these criticisms of audible and the like. Its annoying, as I am against most DRM schemes out there. But to pretend those came from "big tech" is laughable, at best. A ridiculously large portion of "tech" is perfectly fine with sending copies everywhere. Is literally how many of us get our operating system. Music files and shareware copying were huge before the internet. Mod f…
Depending on what you are looking for from an audio book, there are options. If you expect essentially a professionally made radio production of the book (multiple voice actors, effects, etc) then a real audio book is hard to beat. On the other hand if you just want to listen to the book being read, check out https://github.com/aedocw/epub2tts ... It does not sound as good as a pro human, but it's not far off in my o…
Kickstarting a book to end enshittification, because Amazon will not carry it
41–50 of 182 posts
Re: Kickstarting a book to end enshittification, because Amazon will not carry it
#42Re: Kickstarting a book to end enshittification, because Amazon will not carry it
#43I find it awesome that Cory writes you personally when you pay for the book.
How would he manage to do that for thousands of people?
He's constantly giving away his books. One theory is that he makes much more from "consulting" and political work around Silicon Valley. So the books are just loss leaders.
Re: Kickstarting a book to end enshittification, because Amazon will not carry it
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
How would he manage to do that for thousands of people?
Maybe his sales aren't so big? He's constantly giving away his books. One theory is that he makes much more from "consulting" and political work around Silicon Valley. So the books are just loss leaders.
Re: Kickstarting a book to end enshittification, because Amazon will not carry it
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
Audible reportedly only pays 25% to authors, bumping it up to 40% if they agree to exclusivity on Audible. Which of course a lot of authors do because they need the money, and then no other audiobook marketplace can compete.
Right, but that was my point on the numbers. As a customer that has several hundred audio books due to Audible, yes, I know that the authors get a smaller cut of the sell than they do if I buy the audio book in a store. But their larger cut of my store purchases is effectively 0. Audible has grown the market to numbers that were basically pipe dreams of the past. To ignore that in the calculation is really dishonest.…
Imagine if Apple started telling companies "You have to pay us a 60% cut, unless you agree to not have an Android app in which case we'll do 30% instead."
You could argue that Apple is entitled to make that arrangement because they essentially created the mobile app software market, but I have a hard time imagining that people would be OK with it.
Re: Kickstarting a book to end enshittification, because Amazon will not carry it
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right, but that was my point on the numbers. As a customer that has several hundred audio books due to Audible, yes, I know that the authors get a smaller cut of the sell than they do if I buy the audio book in a store. But their larger cut of my store purchases is effectively 0. Audible has grown the market to numbers that were basically pipe dreams of the past. To ignore that in the calculation is really dishonest.…
My problem isn't just with the royalty rates, it's making the default rate so low and using it as leverage to push authors into exclusivity contracts. Imagine if Apple started telling companies "You have to pay us a 60% cut, unless you agree to not have an Android app in which case we'll do 30% instead." You could argue that Apple is entitled to make that arrangement because they essentially created the mobile app so…
I'm very sympathetic to all of these concerns, at large. However, as things are done, many authors will make the most money by agreeing to this contract, and customers get the cheapest option there. The only people actually getting hurt, right now, are the other platforms. To paint this in any other way is not at all honest. And that is the part that is annoying me.
There is also a moral hazard "they will switch some day" argument to be made, i suppose. But I don't like hinging current practices on future hypotheticals. Making a choice today should be possible with the understanding that you can make a different choice in the future.
Re: Kickstarting a book to end enshittification, because Amazon will not carry it
#47A better link: https://pluralistic.net/2023/07/31/seize-the-means-of-comput... Unfortunately BoingBoing has slowly become enshittified itself; they also deleted my account for no reason while I was hospitalized for nearly 2 months, then when I came back home noticed that the ad-rticles where they sell overpriced low quality products (seriously, get better suppliers!) don't permit user comments anymore, presumably bec…
Re: Kickstarting a book to end enshittification, because Amazon will not carry it
#48I have a hard time getting behind some of these criticisms of audible and the like. Its annoying, as I am against most DRM schemes out there. But to pretend those came from "big tech" is laughable, at best. A ridiculously large portion of "tech" is perfectly fine with sending copies everywhere. Is literally how many of us get our operating system. Music files and shareware copying were huge before the internet. Mod f…
Not the part that controls the market share.
Re: Kickstarting a book to end enshittification, because Amazon will not carry it
#49Related to this, Cory Doctorow's appearance on Future Tense podcast (Australia) is truly excellent. After being introduced, he goes on an 8-minute disquisition. We should all aspire to rap tech like Cory Doctorow can. https://pca.st/yr3hd7f9
Re: Kickstarting a book to end enshittification, because Amazon will not carry it
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
My problem isn't just with the royalty rates, it's making the default rate so low and using it as leverage to push authors into exclusivity contracts. Imagine if Apple started telling companies "You have to pay us a 60% cut, unless you agree to not have an Android app in which case we'll do 30% instead." You could argue that Apple is entitled to make that arrangement because they essentially created the mobile app so…
But is your worry for the authors, for other platforms, or for customers? I'm very sympathetic to all of these concerns, at large. However, as things are done, many authors will make the most money by agreeing to this contract, and customers get the cheapest option there. The only people actually getting hurt, right now, are the other platforms. To paint this in any other way is not at all honest. And that is the par…
Yes. Shitty practices from a market player with significant monopoly power are bad for all of them.