recentpopularlog in

robertogreco : ondemand   7

My experiences printing a small batch of books – Medium
"A comparison of four online printing services: Blurb, BookBaby, Lulu, and Nook Press"



"Printing services I compared

I wanted to find a printing service that would allow you to get a small batch of 15 copies, preceded by a 1-copy proof print, relatively cheaply. I found these four:

• Blurb
• BookBaby
• Lulu
• Nook Press

A few others I learned of were too expensive (Lightning Press, Infinity Publishing, Best Book Printing), offered only paperback (CreateSpace), or seemed cumbersome (Lightning Source required a new account to be approved manually!?) If there are more that fit the bill, please let me know.

I ordered one copy of the book from each of the four services. Here’s how they compared."
papertnet  books  lulu  blurb  printing  print  publishing  marchinwichary  2016  bookbaby  nookpress  ondemand 
october 2016 by robertogreco
Robert Reich: Why Work Is Turning Into a Nightmare | Alternet
"How would you like to live in an economy where robots do everything that can be predictably programmed in advance, and almost all profits go to the robots' owners?

Meanwhile, human beings do the work that's unpredictable - odd jobs, on-call projects, fetching and fixing, driving and delivering, tiny tasks needed at any and all hours - and patch together barely enough to live on.

Brace yourself. This is the economy we're now barreling toward.

They're Uber drivers, Instacart shoppers, and Airbnb hosts. They include Taskrabbit jobbers, Upcounsel's on-demand attorneys, and Healthtap's on-line doctors.

They're Mechanical Turks.

The euphemism is the "share" economy. A more accurate term would be the "share-the-scraps" economy.

New software technologies are allowing almost any job to be divided up into discrete tasks that can be parceled out to workers when they're needed, with pay determined by demand for that particular job at that particular moment.

Customers and workers are matched online. Workers are rated on quality and reliability.

The big money goes to the corporations that own the software. The scraps go to the on-demand workers.

Consider Amazon's "Mechanical Turk." Amazon calls it "a marketplace for work that requires human intelligence."

In reality, it's an Internet job board offering minimal pay for mindlessly-boring bite-sized chores. Computers can't do them because they require some minimal judgment, so human beings do them for peanuts -- say, writing a product description, for $3; or choosing the best of several photographs, for 30 cents; or deciphering handwriting, for 50 cents.

Amazon takes a healthy cut of every transaction.

This is the logical culmination of a process that began thirty years ago when corporations began turning over full-time jobs to temporary workers, independent contractors, free-lancers, and consultants.

It was a way to shift risks and uncertainties onto the workers - work that might entail more hours than planned for, or was more stressful than expected.

And a way to circumvent labor laws that set minimal standards for wages, hours, and working conditions. And that enabled employees to join together to bargain for better pay and benefits.

The new on-demand work shifts risks entirely onto workers, and eliminates minimal standards completely.

In effect, on-demand work is a reversion to the piece work of the nineteenth century - when workers had no power and no legal rights, took all the risks, and worked all hours for almost nothing.

Uber drivers use their own cars, take out their own insurance, work as many hours as they want or can - and pay Uber a fat percent. Worker safety? Social Security? Uber says it's not the employer so it's not responsible.

Amazon's Mechanical Turks work for pennies, literally. Minimum wage? Time-and-a half for overtime? Amazon says it just connects buyers and sellers so it's not responsible.

Defenders of on-demand work emphasize its flexibility. Workers can put in whatever time they want, work around their schedules, fill in the downtime in their calendars.

"People are monetizing their own downtime," says Arun Sundararajan, a professor at New York University's business school.

But this argument confuses "downtime" with the time people normally reserve for the rest of their lives.

There are still only twenty-four hours in a day. When "downtime" is turned into work time, and that work time is unpredictable and low-paid, what happens to personal relationships? Family? One's own health?

Other proponents of on-demand work point to studies, such as one recently commissioned by Uber, showing Uber's on-demand workers to be "happy."

But how many of them would be happier with a good-paying job offering regular hours?

An opportunity to make some extra bucks can seem mighty attractive in an economy whose median wage has been stagnant for thirty years and almost all of whose economic gains have been going to the top.

That doesn't make the opportunity a great deal. It only shows how bad a deal most working people have otherwise been getting.

Defenders also point out that as on-demand work continues to grow, on-demand workers are joining together in guild-like groups to buy insurance and other benefits.

But, notably, they aren't using their bargaining power to get a larger share of the income they pull in, or steadier hours. That would be a union - something that Uber, Amazon, and other on-demand companies don't want.

Some economists laud on-demand work as a means of utilizing people moreefficiently.

But the biggest economic challenge we face isn't using people more efficiently. It's allocating work and the gains from work more decently.

On this measure, the share-the-scraps economy is hurtling us backwards."
robertreich  2015  economics  sharingeconomy  society  work  labor  ondemand  uber  efficiency  unions  insurance  benefits  downtime  responsibility  wages  employment  freelance  regulation 
february 2015 by robertogreco
Print-on-demand | Experimental Book
"I know a few of you are thinking about print-on-demand (POD) for the photobook project. POD is fast and cheap and has totally changed the nature of self-publishing. It’s quite good for some things, and not so great for others.

A few reasons to use POD:

— easy, quick mock-up of an idea, even if you plan to produce it in another way;
— cost: some formats allow you to print a book for under $10;
— with very low up-front costs, you can produce a few machine-made, perfect-bound books with a more commercial feel;
— your books can be purchased through a digital storefront;
— if you plan on producing 1–100 books——more than that and it makes sense to look at other formats;
— if you plan to make changes to your book and you’re unsure how many to print;
— to have access to formats that are not typically available outside of a commercial context (newsprint, magazine).

A few reasons not to use POD:

— you give up control of some aspects of the production of your work;
— frequent printing/binding errors (printer will usually offer a credit);
— you’re limited by the specs of the POD printer (size, finish, paper);
— not cost-efficient for producing more than a few books (especially if over 100);
— cost (you’re bound by the printer’s set pricing).

Popular POD printers:

— Blurb.com
— many soft- and hardcover book formats
— special finishes specifically for photobooks (much more $)
— magazine format (including printing on inside front and back covers)—I can show you a sample of this if you’re interested
— digital storefront
— upload PDF via website

Lulu.com
— many soft- and hardcover book formats
— digital storefront
— upload PDF via website

Newspaperclub.com
— various newsprint formats
— free shipping to most places
— scheduled printing 2x per week
— upload PDF via website

Espresso Book Machine (various locations)
— lower quality
— b/w interiors / color covers
— very fast (sometimes on-the-spot)
— physical, walk-in locations only

Magcloud.com
— magazine format from HP

I’ve had mostly good experiences with Blurb, Lulu, Espresso and Newspaperclub, but I’ve never used Magcloud."

[via this thread: https://twitter.com/rogre/status/405790451791175680

@soulellis What do you use for digital printing on demand? Lulu? Blurb? Other?

@rogre all of the above plus @newspaperclub. but for 530 [http://soulellis.com/projects/530-2/ ] I found a digital printer in Reykjavík, who was able to print 50 books only.

@soulellis @newspaperclub Thank you.

@soulellis Any preference or noticeable differences between Lulu and Blurb?

@rogre Blurb good for magazine format and photobooks, Lulu good for thick text-based pubs. Also --> http://experimentalbook.wordpress.com/2013/10/17/print-on-demand/

@soulellis Perfect. Thanks so much. ]
books  publishing  paulsoulellis  printondemand  lulu  magcloud  espressobookmachine  newspaperclub  blurb  printondemnad  printing  selfpublishing  ondemand  self-publishing  epublishing  digitalpublishing 
november 2013 by robertogreco
Anonymous Press
"1. Anonymous Press (Α–Π) is a self-sufficient publishing platform.

2. Every publication by Α–Π is a byproduct of an individual and a database, i.e. Google Image Search.

3. Human author defines the topic, the content and the form is generated from the most relevant images found online.

4. Each publication is added to a public library.

5. Every item in the library can be printed on-demand and is available to everyone for a small fee covering shipping and production costs.

6. Publications are sorted in a chronological order.

7. Α–Π does not own, nor is responsible for the content generated by its users."
database  human  magazine  publishing  anonymouspress  publishers  googleimagesearch  on-demand  ondemand  printing 
february 2013 by robertogreco
The Speculist » Blog Archive » In the Future Everything Will Be A Coffee Shop
"Eventually you could have local campuses becoming places where MITx students seek tutoring, network, & socialize—reclaiming some of the college experience they’d otherwise have lost.

Phil thought this sounded like college as a giant coffee shop. I agree. Every education would be ad hoc. It would be student-directed toward the job market she’s aiming for.

This trend toward…coffeeshopification…is changing more than just colleges:

Book Stores Will Shrink to Coffee Shops…

The Coffee Shop Will Displace Most Retail Shops…

Offices Become Coffee Shops…Again…

What Doesn’t Become a Coffee Shop?…

…houses of worship…

What will remain other than coffee shops? Upscale retail will remain…[for] experience…Restaurants remain. Grocery stores remain.

Brick and mortar retail stores will be converted to public spaces. Multi-use space will be in increasing demand as connectivity tools allow easy coordination of impromptu events…"
restaurants  multipurpose  multi-usespace  impromptuevents  events  coffeeshopification  thirdspaces  thirdplaces  howwelearn  howwework  work  enlightenment  stevenjohnson  amazonprime  amazon  shopping  espressobookmachine  coffeehouses  coffeeshops  coffee  on-demandprinting  highereducation  higheredbubble  highered  information  reading  ebooks  stephengordon  future  retail  deschooling  unschooling  sociallearning  self-directedlearning  mitx  mit  learning  srg  glvo  2011  universities  colleges  education  opencoffeeclubdresden  3dprinting  ondemand  ondemandprinting  bookfuturism  books  cafes  openstudioproject 
february 2012 by robertogreco
Calvin and Hobbes and the Trouble with Nostalgia | Splitsider
"In an explanation of Hobbes’s dual reality (a living, breathing, wiseass wild tiger to Calvin, and a stuffed animal to everyone else), Calvin and Hobbes creator Bill Watterson explains “I show two versions of reality, and each makes complete sense to the participant who sees it. I think that’s how life works.” We see the world through Calvin’s eyes. This perspective distinguishes the strip from Peanuts, in which kids talk like adults, or Cathy or Doonesbury, in which adults talk like adults. Watterson constantly fought with Universal Press Syndicate and newspapers to get more space, and to break the rigid rules of comic strip formats in order to formally explore Calvin’s imagination. As a result, no daily comic in wide circulation during the Nineties provided such regular and creative insights into a child’s interior life. In Calvin and Hobbes, Watterson takes us inside Calvin’s dreams, his fears, and the stories that he makes up for himself."
calvinandhobbes  nostalgia  comics  books  edg  srg  classideas  perception  billwatterson  reality  children  childhood  multiplicity  parenting  intelligence  imagination  memory  1990s  patience  ondemand  2011  sadness  loneliness  alienation  school  experience  structure  confusion  ajaronstein 
june 2011 by robertogreco

Copy this bookmark:





to read