Comment by dgudkov
7 years ago
It's not about scanning. It's about printing (replicating) a book - it is significantly more expensive to replicate a real book than a digital book.
7 years ago
It's not about scanning. It's about printing (replicating) a book - it is significantly more expensive to replicate a real book than a digital book.
Well, he is arguing it’s not. I imagine you’ve seen a photocopier. You don’t need the copy to be the same print quality, size, or even bound at all.
In fact copying entire books was done daily where I went to university and took no longer than 15m, at something like five bucks each. You’d bring that stack of A4 home, and maybe hand it down if it survived the semester.
I'm largely referring to digital reproduction. A tablet, or better, e-ink reader, can hold 1,000s of texts for the price of a single mid-priced academic work. And in most cases, sufices.
Photocopying / xerographic printing is modestly expensive, though a high-quality laserprinter reduces costs to about a penny per printed side. Stock choice (acid-free rag, for durability) is a larger cost.