Re: I wonder if you can't be bothered to learn
So your argument hinges on the fact that you only have an English keyboard and would be reluctant to learn to use a different one?
72 publicly visible posts • joined 12 Aug 2010
Jesus - how fucked-up is your sense of morality?
Marriage equality - is just about that - let anybody marry whoever they want.
If you're not prepared to be monogamous nothing's forcing you to get married.
Marriage is specifically about committing to one person - whoever they are.
There is no genes for for sexual preference just as there are no genes for being a twat.
Screw it - you've given me a headache - you've still got your 50 mouths, but you've lost a pair of eyeballs - I used to click the ads.
I don't know why you had to dick around with the article layouts like this - I am not 12 - I come here to read some bile ringed tech news - not gawp at full screen images (ok they're not quite full screen, but on my laptop they are bloody close).
But sweetie - this site is targeted at geeks and techies - it's great that you work in publishing - but this isn't a reflective bit of paper - it's a back-lit screen - so in this environment so much brilliant white with a narrow typeface is actually more effort to read and results in more eye train particularly when you look how closely spaced the characters are compared to the line and paragraph spacing.
1999 has called they want their fugly portal layout back - seriously WHAT were you thinking - it's an abomination - particularly against the bloody geckos you have plastered all over the background - I thought the Guardian was bad - but Jesus Christ - this layout is so noisy - have you never considered usability?
""The bidding process, as reported by Reuters, was at times surreal, with Google making bids based upon such mathematical concepts as Brun's constant, the Meissel-Mertens constant, and even pi – one Google bid was, yes, $3.14159bn."
I hope Apple & co sue the arse off them - Google need to grow-up
Most people don't have a problem with the current set-up:
Imagine two researchers at different points in their work; A is carrying out a literature review and only needs to skim through the paper, B is experiencing a problem that the methodology described in the paper could solve.
How much is the paper worth to A? - it's only one of many - so probably pennines. For B the paper is essential, so they'd probably pay through the nose for it.
A is an undergrad and they can access the material through their University library at minimal personal cost - the University pays a subscription to access the archive, not a per document fee. B works for a pharamaceutical business and his research budget will cover the cost.
A and B would both prefer not to have to pay to read the paper, but considering the cost/benefits they are probably happy enough with the prices they are presented with.
The price of an article from a journal doesn't reflect its value - you can't easily put a dollar amount on knowledge, when prices stop reflecting demand/value there's usually another reason for them.
With a lot of publications you can get unrestricted access to their archive when you take out a longer term subscription - Newspapers do this a lot.
Now consider C - he's interested in the paper for personal reasons - he's not a member of a University and doesn't have a multi-million pound budget. To him $15 to read a paper seems grossly unfair, especially when it would only cost $120 a year to subscribe to the Journal - getting access to everything they've already published for free.
The $15 re-print fee in this case acts as an anchor to make the annual subscription look more attractive.
Journals use re-prints as a marketing tool to sell subscriptions, not as a direct source of income.