/lit/ - Literature

>>21301364
>complete works of menno simons
Pic rel is this copy of the complete works of menno simons. It is a shitty scan, impossible to read.
>on the economy of babbage
Not 3rd edition, this is the first one.
>istitutes of gaius
Mb sorry. This one i found it on zlib, forgot about it because usually they dont have scans. I was browsing through my reader, i just picked the books that were pdf.
>Z-lib is blocked and difficult to access for you?
This one. They have a page that should redirect you to the website which is not blocked but half the time it's blocked or it redirects you to the article page and the book page is blocked.
>having zero idea what books are there?
Books, or articles? I dont use it for articles, but for books.
>He said you are anti-intellectual, not that a site is anti-intellectual.
As anon clarified, he said that calling writers "bloodsuckers" was anti-intellectual. If we use the three books you found on libgen and consider that
https://libgen.is/search.php?req=Artificers&open=0&res=25&view=simple&phrase=1&column=def
https://libgen.is/search.php?req=Lebor+gabala&open=0&res=25&view=simple&phrase=1&column=def
https://libgen.is/search.php?req=Leechbook&open=0&res=25&view=simple&phrase=1&column=def
are not present on libgen, we may agree that this is not a website made for literature made for scholarly purposes, but for genre lit.
So i clarified that the writers whose books are posted on libgen were predominantly novelists, so me being against them cannot be considered "anti-intellectual", because those writers do not write intellectual content.
The books that we may agree are written by "intellectuals", as we have just seen, are either absent, restricted to TOR (campbell biology), poorly edited, or not updated.
As i just discovered from the accounts of other fellow anons, the article section is filled with useful information. And I can agree on that. I used it for example to learn about chinese esoteric cults.
As I said, the access to zlib is very restricted here in italy. So I use scihub, or archive.org. I didnt know that these two had the same database, but me saying that zlib was not a good website to find academic material is false. I am sorry for that, I used anecdotal evidence to come to that conclusion.
From what we have seen, we can conclude that zlib is useful for academic articles, but lacks a good chunk of academic books. I hope you agree with me.
This leads to the question why i called writers "bloodsuckers" in the first place.
As i explained, novelists imho are not contributing to society in any actual form. Literature was always a prerogative of the rich. It was a hobby, which was made a profitable activity when capitalism was created. Novels were considered a retarded version of poems back in the 19th century.
Now, poems are not a widespread genre in this day and age, so we can agree that the LIVING writers (which are all novelists) are the main reason foe the closure of zlib.
1/idk how many