Of course books are and will be heavily pirated in whatever format they are placed in. As we move toward handheld computers as powerful as today's laptops, there will be no issue about how readable this or that format is. Users will find a good way to read them, then the books will be placed in that format and people will trade them like they do already today, just in greater numbers.

This is the transition that is happening with all media formats and its ridiculous on Slashdot to even ask the question "Will this happen?"

I am only worrying about whether the writers and editors will be able to get paid for their work. If the book industry tries to do like the music industry and continues to charge as much for their product as they did when they had to physically distribute it, then they will lose out on billions of dollars they could have made by correcting their prices and getting their money through selling more products. And they have to make this price correction early on. If they wait until everyone becomes insulted by their greed like the music industry did then people will not feel bad about cutting them out of their profits. Digital media has come to the point where the consumer now has the power in the relationship and if the industries don't recognize that then it will be at their own peril. I think many of those who pirate would have been happy to pay something small instead for a legal version.

It seems like the ideal endgame of all of these digital media transitions is for there to be direct payment to the artists who actually create the content. If I could go to my favorite bands' or favorite authors' websites and pay something small directly to get their content like 20 cents a song or 2 dollars a book then I would buy a lot more of these things for sure. I think that is the prize we should be keeping our eyes on - freeing the artists from these archaic business models and the huge piles of middlemen that want to continue to get paid from the artists' work. The current debate about piracy really frames this whole transition in the wrong way. It continues to assume that these media companies will have a place in the future of media distribution. For hugely collaborative works like movies, tv and video games, I think there will be a need for media companies to create the products. But media that can be created by small groups or single artists like music and books, there is no need anymore for this huge infrastructure to bring it to the public. That's the bottom line for them, they are soon obsolete and few will miss them. But I for one will always want to compensate artists I appreciate and I think that is a common feeling, so we really need to explore ways of doing that much more directly. If we can transition to this more direct relationship between audience and artist then I think the problem is solved and our culture as a whole will be better for it.

While I agree with the sentiment that games don't cause people to commit crimes, in the interest of understanding the actual data for comparison - I think that those numbers actually could be explained purely as reporting bias. Japan is a very private and very male-dominated culture, which is one reason why this sort of "entertainment" would be able to flourish there in the first place.

In America "the squeaky wheel gets the grease" which is good. In Japan they say "the tall tree catches the wind" which is bad. It is a culture that discourages letting other people know your personal problems or standing out at all.

The degree of ridicule and shame that a girl would face in Japan after accusing a man of rape is very much larger than in the United States. So while you could be right, I don't think people should be so quick to underestimate the difference in culture. I think it could be realistic that a huge number of rapes go unreported in Japan and you also have to consider that the definition of rape between America and Japan could be much different (date rape, spousal rape . .etc).

Actually since the universe has already been created, it is not a thing for which chance can be calculated. It either was or was not created by your 7-foot tall bun-ghetti. We don't know and can't prove whether it was or not. But that does not imply odds. Chance is for the prediction of future events.

Sorry to seem pedantic about a +5 funny post, but I thought it was a distinction worth making.

I find it upsetting that we allow a computerized monitoring system to babysit our behavior anyway. As for the fact that it is surely being rigged in multiple places - that is just a sign that authorities have been given too much power over us in the first place. I believe in traffic safety, but I also believe in the freedom of not being monitored constantly.

I think that we should still be asking the question of whether these cameras should be allowed in the first place. By commenting whether the state, local or federal government should be allowed to get away with yellow light shortening tactics like this we're answering a loaded question that reinforces our acceptance that these cameras should be there at all.