Of course. There are still people who make buggy whips, too. Those jobs haven't completely disappeared, but they are not the secure lifetime trades they were decades or centuries ago.

Know anybody in the business of delivering milk or ice door-to-door? Know any fullers, coopers or blacksmiths? Those used to be considered solid jobs as well. Dynamic economies constantly create and destroy entire categories of jobs. Why be upset when manufacturing high-tech devices is no longer something that can be profitably done?

The model I'm talking about is where you go to the library website and download an e-book which expires from your computer/ipod/whatever in precisely two weeks and automatically "returns" to the library, which then emails the next person on the waiting list.

Clearly the number of potential readers has to increase if only because there are far fewer reasons for an e-book to be removed from circulation than a traditional book. It seems clear, also, that there should be less turnover time with e-books since downloading is more convenient, there's no need to request from a different branch, wait until the library is open, etc...

To me, the big First Sale problem isn't with libraries; it's with e-copies that I actually bought. I ought to be able to transfer my copy of a Kindle book to somebody else. That's where publishers are over-reaching.

Here's their concern: if you sell an ebook to a library, they will rent that book out perpetually. There's no risk of somebody spilling coffee on it. The pages don't fall out. You never wonder why two pages are sticking together. You don't get the guy who borrows it and then returns 2 months late. The book spends far less time sitting reserved "on the shelf" waiting for the next guy to pick it up. The book is never retired. The next person in line essentially gets a brand new book to read, as if he had downloaded the copy new onto his Kindle.

Think about this from the publisher's point-of-view: a sale of a hard-copy book to a library may mean that, say, 3 people who would have bought the book new now won't. But, a sale of an unrestricted electronic copy to a library may mean that 7 people now won't. That dramatically changes their decisions about pricing and which books to publish. [Numbers pulled out of a hat -- I'm sure the industry has a great idea what the real ones are.]

It's a bit more than that. Consumers don't just care about taste -- they care about how the product looks in the store and how it has survived the trip from the farm where it was grown. As a result, farms produce fruit that still looks good after spending the week on that truck. Heck, in some places, they are legally required to do this. (Google "Uglyripe Florida Restrictions" -- the Florida Tomato Committee banned the export of ugly, but great-tasting, tomatoes because they didn't want their look to tarnish the image of Florida tomatoes.) And, unfortunately, when you're deciding to grow produce varieties based on *that* characteristic, you're often not selecting based on taste. That's why locally-grown produce often tastes better -- the farm doesn't have to ship, so doesn't have to make that trade-off. Whole Foods often sells heirloom tomato varieties, but they're all locally grown.

Well, I'll be happy to separate the organic stuff if a farmer wants to pay me for it. But, if it's like those cans, somehow the government wants to charge me to take away those nearly-pure cans -- if they were a resource, as you claim, then people should be paying me to take them away, not vice-versa.

According to the EPA, they're the third largest source -- http://www.epa.gov/outreach/sources.html . And, that's primarily from old landfills that predated modern regulations requiring modern landfills to capture methane. Since today's garbage isn't going into those old landfills, it's not affecting that amount.

The planet is not going to shrivel up and die if people don't compost. We're just talking about reducing the amount of land dedicated to landfills, or the cost of building more incinerators, both of which are substantially about money.

Besides, think about how many jobs would be created if municipalities hired people to sort recycleables and compostables out of household trash. Not composting is a public service. (Yes, that is a joke, although some people may not recognize it.)

"from a denier like you" sounds like an insult to me -- the implication is that I don't think for myself. If what you are saying actually happened, then I don't think you would need to turn to "Russia Today" for evidence -- you'd be able to find mainstream journalists who were kept out. Per capita, New York City probably has more people who consider themselves journalists than any other place in the world. Many of them are "freelance" -- not associated with any outfit; just trying to sell stories. It doesn't surprise me that a few of these people got caught up in the sweep. But, show me some evidence of a deliberate intention to block press access -- the reporter form the ABC affiliate going down there with a camera crew, then being pushed back by the cops, for example.

Aaahh yes. An insult. Truly the highest form of arguing. The Holocaust is widely accepted by every major news outlet; only the fringe folks disbelieve it. Here, only the fringe folks believe there was some conspiracy to keep the press out. I disbelieve this for the same reason I disbelieve claims in the fringe press about aliens. Show me some substantial evidence and I'll believe it.

"Russia Today" is not what I'd consider to be a reputable news source. Show me CBS, NBC, ABC, New York Times, Washington Post or other reputable sources saying that helicopters and physical barriers were being used to keep the press out. Right now, all you have is some lady who looks like she was one of the protesters.

The purpose of a EULA is to protect the company from liability and, sometimes, that means including specific language -- the "implied warranty of merchantability," and "indemnification" for example are legalistic, but have specific meanings that are not easily translated into everyday english. On the other hand, lots of lawyers have gotten used to writing in legal jargon -- "In the event that" instead of "If," for example, overuse of words like "hereunder" and "thereunder," etc.... And that stuff sure doesn't belong in a document they expect laypeople to read.

I posted about this subject a few weeks ago on my blog -- even included a set of sample terms written in fairly easy-to-read english.

In the US at least, EULAs are regularly enforced in court. If you are presented with a EULA and push a button that says "I Accept," then you have accepted, whether or not you actually read the EULA. http://www.internetlibrary.com/publications/cwahe_art.cfm

Again, how about some citations from reputable news sources.

It is duboius. They're using helicopters and they're using physical barriers. How do we know that they're doing it to "prevent news coverage" as opposed to simply implementing part of their plan to clean up the park? The morning news sure doesn't seem to be having any problems reporting it.