Connexions: An Open Source Initiative to Kill Textbooks | Hacker News Reader

Connexions: An Open Source Initiative to Kill Textbooks

collegemogul.com

24 pointsCollegeMogul18 comments

I hope this happens for my childrens' sake. (Thankfully, that is a long way away.) In addition to being too heavy to haul around, textbooks are expensive and constantly outdated, forcing students to sell them for often 10 cents on the dollar. Chegg's textbook rental is great, but this could result in free books with even better and always up to date content.

When I was studying in the US, I always bought the previous edition of all textbooks second hand. I quickly figured that they was little difference between editions and they seemed more like a ploy to get us to buy new books...

When studying in France, I didn't buy any textbooks and got all of them from the university (a good use of taxes from my point of view :-) )

That works often, but a lot of publishers have a fun little trick where they barely change the content but do change the problem sets.

I find it far-fetched that a kindle will replace a phsyical textbook. There is something about a physical book that just can't be replaced in my head just yet.

> There is something about a physical book that just can't be replaced in my head just yet.

The $100 you're shelling out every year for the new edition?

The $100 you're shelling out every year for the new edition?

Have no fear, the Kindle supports this cherished feature of the paper-book experience.

(Seriously. Publisher removes old book from central location, publisher uploads new book. What are you going to do, buy copies of the old one used from the non-Amazon place you can load your Kindle from?)

It is generally acknowledged that e-readers aren't yet as good for technical books where you will flip around somewhat randomly, and want high quality photos, etc. We need somewhat higher resolution, color, and a nice interface for flitting around from place to place.

Novels, on the other hand, are read pretty much linearly, and are great on an e-reader. (Honestly, I've always hated fighting with bindings on physical books.)

On the other hand, I constantly find myself wishing I could CTRL+F while looking for something in a textbook.

On the other other hand, perhaps at lower levels forcing students to read for information might have positive side-effects. Ctrl-Fing and quick search functions do make the Internet a different experience from the textbook, after all.

That's why I love getting my hands on those leaked PDF copies of textbooks. Hope there aren't any publishers on here. ;)

> We need somewhat higher resolution, color, and a nice interface for flitting around from place to place.

Laptop works fine for this. A reader is for reading linearly.

"I just watched a presentation by Richard Baraniuk's, a professor at Rice University and founder of Connexions."

haha.. I just used one of his papers in a completely unrelated thing. What are the odds?

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0CE3DF173CF...

I feel uncomfortable with a mission statement targeting to "kill" something when it's not an unquestionable problem like cancer or HIV.

What is the added value of the project ? What problem would be solved ? That is important.

The murdering rationale is for VC who get excited with the idea to rob market shares from the corpse. And some really want to believe.

Do you just like attempting extended metaphors?

We all know what "kill" means. In this case, it means finding a problem that inconveniences every students on the planet, and removing it to make way for a new problem.

Problem solved: removing textbooks. Added value: removed textbook dependency. Answers in commas because they're so incredibly evident upon reading the title.

Why the down vote ?

"Removing textbooks" is not solving a problem and beside textbooks are not a problem or the problem addressed. Regarding the added value, removing a dependency does not require to "kill" the object of dependence.

Of course I understood the underlying idea. But you misunderstood my point.

The thing is that the "mission statement" is wrong. This is indeed so confusing that you are unable to clearly state the _real_ problem and added value although it is "so incredibly evident".

Killing may be familiar to you, as well as down voting. Not in my place.

You're focusing way too much on the concept of killing here. That's why I downvoted you. You said nothing useful, and attempted an over-the-top conceit to express yourself. As somebody who values content over outrage, and as a writer who thought your conceit was poorly-written, I downvoted you.

The thing is that the "mission statement" is wrong. This is indeed so confusing that you are unable to clearly state the _real_ problem and added value although it is "so incredibly evident".

You're talking in circles. Stop that. Nobody likes it. The mission statement isn't "wrong", it says exactly what its goal is.

Killing may be familiar to you, as well as down voting. Not in my place.

Your place? Hacker News? Your life?

Look. I can respect people who disagree with me. I can even respect people who mangle the English language with every statement they make. What you're saying is both garbled and wrong. State yourself clearly and I'll address the points you make.

You seem to believe you have a monopole of knowing what all people like and don't like, on what is right or wrong, what is good or bad, what is the right understanding of things and such. These assumptions explain your poor judgment.

How condescending to write "State yourself clearly and I'll address the points you make". It matches well your narcissism. BTW, I had to laugh when I saw your email address : i.am@me.com !

Enough time (and points) waisted on this topic :)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com