The theory is simple: instead of buying a household item or a piece of clothing or some equipment you might use once or twice, you take it out and return it.
The theory is simple: instead of buying a household item or a piece of clothing or some equipment you might use once or twice, you take it out and return it.
I agree with the first part, but they are using the terms interchangeable of renting and borrowing. Talking about renting and subscription in the same vain as borrowing.
I just don’t want the very cool idea of a library economy to be conflated with the “you own nothing” subscription/rent everything economy.
They both have similarities but the actual ownership matters IMHO or else you get rent seeking/enshittification.
That’s fair, I’d agree the article does a terrible job of differentiating, and a company calling itself a library in it’s name doesn’t make it a library, just a rental service playing pretend for profit.