The science fiction of scarcity is definitely more interesting. Not that it’s wrong to posit futures in which some or all needs aren’t scarce, and what happens or matters then.
Be it unintentional or not, the economy isn’t the same after many workers have gone Galt, dropping out of the full-time workforce on an extended, if not permanent, basis. This hits close to home. I didn’t start out intending to participate negligibly in the economy until the economy rejected me. Now it’s about stability, bare adequacy or making do, and refraining from helping the economy any more than necessary until at least 2017.
Today’s example was a real education for me, as I did not know the history of Pepsi, or how there came to be a longstanding two cola rivalry.
Read about Walter S. Mack Jr and how he turned an obscure drink owned by a candy company into a huge success, at the same time helping to normalize racial equality of opportunity.
Had copyright law remained as it was in 1957, quite a list of works would have become public domain on January 1, 2014. As noted at the link, famous works will tend to remain available, if not as inexpensively so as might be the case, but I am concerned with orphan works. When I look up books I liked as a child and cannot find them in print, or in print at a price one can afford, then the copyright holder either has no interest in holding them in copyright, or there is no living copyright holder, heir or assign who is aware or interested in that status. Such works have no reason to remain protected. Even if that protection lies only in fear that someone who can legitimately prove ownership might come out of the woodwork after all, if any interest is shown.
Worst are the academic publications that are behind overpriced paywalls that keep the useful arts and sciences from being promoted. Congress ought to be ashamed of extending copyrights to unconstitutional lengths, and courts out to be ashamed of going along with it. At least, I assume they have, since there must have been challenges. Copyright should not be controlled by media corporations. That was never the idea.
I’ve had a book idea in mind for a few years, but in part due to the Kindle and 99 cent success stories am newly excited about getting around to it. Thing is, while a business book, it’s true and autobiographical. How much need I change the names to protect the, well, sometimes innocent? Including my own, such as using a pen name?
I am most concerned about naming clients, which would not be necessary to the story and lessons it will convey, but also concerned about naming partners, who are also friends, which is one of the lessons to be detailed. Yeah, I think I’ve answered my own question, but still…
I don’t have a great history of reading and reviewing books sent to me for the purpose.
Rob sent me More Space, which Deb read a lot of and enjoyed, but I stopped reading when I hit a dull chapter, then never picked it up again. No excuse, since each chapter was standalone and I could simply have skipped to the next. What I read of it, well, it really should have sold better.
I’ll try to do better this time. How can you miss with a book that invokes Underdog on page 7? There’s no need to Fear! Barry Moltz is here!
Review or not, thought I’d point out the book. That way people can check it out regardless of any later lapse or delay on my part.