Reviewed article

markdown/Building-a-better-digital-reading-experience.md

@@ -71,76 +71,91 @@ Except that, in the past few months, the Internet Archive has also started
 implementing anti-scraping features, and you'll most likely get a Cloudflare
 screen if you try and access an article from an external scraper.
 
-## A little ethical note before continuing
+## An ethical note before continuing
 
 _Feel free to skip this part and go to the technical setup section if you
 already agree that, if buying isn't owning, then piracy isn't stealing._
 
-I _do not_ condone nor support piracy.
+#### Support your creators (even when you wear your pirate hat)
 
-I mean, sometimes I do, but being a creator myself I always try to make sure
-that, if piracy is the only way to freely access content wherever I want, then
-creators are not being harmed.
+I _do not_ condone nor support piracy when it harms content creators.
+
+Being a content creator myself I know how hard it is to squeeze some pennies
+out of our professions or hobbies, especially in a world like the digital
+one where there are often too many intermediaries to take a share of the pie.
 
 I don't mind however harming any intermediaries that add friction to the
 process just to have a piece of the pie, stubbornly rely on unsustainable
 business models that sacrifices both the revenue of the authors and the privacy
 and freedom of the readers, and prevent me from having a raw file that I can
-download and read wherever I want though. It's because of those folks that the
-digital reading experience, despite all the initial promises, has become much
-worse than reading physical books and magazines. So I don't see a big moral
-conundrum in pirating to harm those folks and get back my basic freedoms as a
-reader.
+download and read wherever I want just I would do with a physical book or
+magazine. It's because of those folks that the digital reading experience,
+despite all the initial promises, has become much worse than the analog one.
+So I don't see a big moral conundrum in pirating to harm those folks and get
+back my basic freedoms as a reader.
 
 But I do support creators via Patreon. I pay for subscriptions to digital
-magazines that I will anyway never read through their official mobile app.
-Every now and then I buy physical books and magazines that I've already read
-and that I've really enjoyed, to support the authors, just like I still buy
-some vinyls of albums I really love even though I could just stream them. And I
-send one-off donations when I find that some content was particularly useful to
-me. And I'd probably support content creators even more if only they allowed me
-to pay only for the digital content I want to read, if only there was a viable
-digital business model also for the occasional reader, instead of everybody
-trying to lock me into a Hotel California subscription ("_you can check out any
-time you like, but you can never leave_") just because their business managers
-are those folks who have learned how to use the hammer of the recurring
-revenue, and think that every problem in the world is a subscription nail to be
-hit on its head.
+magazines that I will anyway never read through their official app. Every now
+and then I buy physical books and magazines that I've already read and that
+I've really enjoyed, to support the authors, just like I still buy some vinyls
+of albums I really love even though I could just stream them. And I send
+one-off donations when I find that some content was particularly useful to me.
+And I'd probably support content creators even more if only more of their
+distribution channels allowed me to pay only for the digital content that I
+want to consume, if only there was a viable digital business model also for the
+occasional reader, instead of everybody trying to lock me into a Hotel
+California subscription ("_you can check out any time you like, but you can
+never leave_") just because their business managers are those folks who have
+learned how to use the hammer of the recurring revenue, and think that every
+problem in the world is a subscription nail to be hit on its head. Maybe
+micropayments could be a solution, but for now cryptobros have decided that the
+future of modern digital payments should be more like a gambling den for thugs,
+shitcoin speculators and miners, rather than a solution to directly put in
+contact content creators and consumers, bypassing all the intermediaries, and
+let consumers pay only for what they consume.
 
-I also think that the current business model that runs most of the high-quality
-content available online (locking people into apps and subscriptions in order
-to view the content) is detrimental for the distribution of knowledge in what's
-supposed to be the age of information. If I want to be exposed to diverse
-opinions on what's going on in different industries or different parts of the
-world, I'd probably need at least a dozen subscriptions, while in earlier
-generations folks could just walk into their local library or buy a single
-issue of a newspaper every now and then.
+#### The knowledge distribution problem
 
-If we have no digital alternatives for such simple and established ways to
-access and spread knowledge, then piracy is almost a civic duty. It can't be
-that high quality reports or insightful blog articles are locked behind
-paywalls, subscriptions and apps, and all that's left for free is cheap
-disinformation on social media. Future historians will have a very hard time
-deciphering what was going on in the world in the 2020s, because most of the
-content that was available online is now locked behind paywalls, the companies
-that ran those sites and built the apps may be long gone, and if publishers
-keep waging war against folks like the Internet Archive, then they may start
-looking at our age like some kind of strange digital dark age.
+I also believe that the most popular business model behind most of the
+high-quality content available online (locking people into apps and
+subscriptions in order to view the content) is detrimental for the distribution
+of knowledge in what's supposed to be the age of information. If I want to be
+exposed to diverse opinions on what's going on in different industries or
+different parts of the world, I'd probably need at least a dozen subscriptions,
+while in earlier generations folks could just walk into their local library or
+buy a single book or a single issue of a newspaper every now and then.
+
+I don't think that we should settle for a world where the best reports, the
+best journalism and the most insightful blog articles are locked behind
+paywalls, subscriptions and closed apps, without even a Spotify/Netflix-like
+all-you-can-eat solution being considered to lower access barriers, and all
+that's left for free is cheap disinformation on social media and AI-generated
+content. Future historians will have a very hard time deciphering what was
+going on in the world in the 2020s, because most of the high-quality content
+needed to decipher our age is locked behind some kind of technological wall.
+The companies that run those sites and build those apps will most likely be
+gone in a few years or decades. And, if publishers also keep waging war against
+folks like the Internet Archive, then future historians may really start
+looking at our age like some kind of strange hyper-connected digital dark age.
+
+#### The content consumption problem
 
 I also think that it's my right, as a reader, to be able to consume content on
 a medium without distractions - like social media buttons, ads, comments, or
-other stuff that distracts me from the main content, and if the publisher
+other stuff that distracts me from the main content. And, if the publisher
 doesn't provide me with a solution for that, and I have already paid for the
-content, then I should be able to build a solution myself. Even in an age where
-attention is the new currency, at least we should not try to grab people's
-attention when they're trying to read some dense content - that's just common
-sense.
+content, then I should be granted the right to build such a solution myself.
+Even in an age where attention is the new currency, at least we should not try
+to grab people's attention when they're trying to read some dense content. Just
+like you wouldn't interrupt someone who's reading in a library saying "hey btw,
+I know a shop that sells exactly the kind of tea cups described in the page
+you're reading right now".
 
-And I also demand the right to access the content I've paid for however I want.
+And I also demand the right to access the content I've paid however I want.
 
 Do I want to export everything to Markdown or read it in ASCII art in a
-terminal? Do I want to export it to EPub so I can read it on my e-ink device?
-Do I want to export it to PDF and email it to one of my students for a research
+terminal? Do I want to export it to EPUB so I can read it on my e-ink device?
+Do I want to export it to PDF and email it to one of my colleagues for a research
 project, or to myself for later reference? Do I want to access it without
 having to use their tracker-ridden mobile app, or without being forced to see
 ads despite having paid for a subscription? Well, that's my business. I firmly
@@ -152,14 +167,25 @@ bring to my students or my colleagues for a project, or leave it on a bench at
 the park or in a public bookshelf after reading it.
 
 If some freedoms were legally granted to me before, and now they've been taken
-away, then it's not piracy if I keep demanding those freedoms.
+away, then it's not piracy if I keep demanding those freedoms. The whole point
+of a market-based economy should be to keep the customer happy and give more
+choice and freedom, not less, as technology advances. Otherwise the market is
+probably not working as intended.
+
+#### The content ownership problem
+
+Content ownership is another issue in the current digital media economy.
+
+I'll probably no longer be able to access content I've read during my
+subscription period once my subscription expires, especially if it was only
+available through an app. In the past I could cancel my subscription to
+National Geographic at any moment, and all the copies I had purchased wouldn't
+just magically disappear from my bookshelf after paying the last bill.
 
-And content ownership is another problem. I'll no longer be able to access
-content I've read during my subscription period once my subscription expires.
 I'll not be able to pass on the books or magazines I've read in my lifetime to
-my kid. I'll never be able to lend it to someone else, just like I would leave
-a book I had read on a public bookshelf or a bench at the park for someone
-else to read it.
+my kid. I'll never be able to lend them to someone else, just like I would leave
+a book I had read on a public bookshelf or a bench at the park for someone else
+to read it.
 
 In other words, buying now grants you a temporary license to access the content
 on someone else's device - you don't really own anything.
@@ -168,12 +194,12 @@ So, if buying isn't owning, piracy isn't stealing.
 
 And again, to make it very clear, I'll be referring to *personal use* in this
 article. The case where you support creators through other means, but the
-distribution channel and the  business models are the problem, and you just
+distribution channel and the business models are the problem, and you just
 want your basic freedoms as a content consumer back.
 
 If however you want to share scraped articles on the Web, or even worse profit
-from access to it, then you're *really* doing the kind of piracy I can't
-condone.
+from access to it without sharing those profits with the creators, then you're
+*really* doing the kind of piracy I can't condone.
 
 With this out of the way, let's get our hands dirty.