/lit/ - Literature

>>20043025
yea

Yes, it's funny and entertaining.

>>20043025
I've been told it's reddit-core

>>20043114
how nice it must be to have all of your opinions formed for you by other people.

>>20043025
Yes it’s funny. Quite pointless at some parts in the middle but it’s self aware about the pointlessness. Idk I would say I loved it but I do want to roll my eyes a little at it.

>>20043114
>doesn't read certain books because some fag says you shouldn't
>smart

>>20043114
what the fuck is reddit-core

>>20043025
Only if you haven't gotten into literature yet

>>20043143
Anything which isn't written by Julius Evola

>>20043025
It's a quick entertaining read. Most read it in their mid-teens, I think, but you won't lose much coming to it a little late. You'll just get through it faster and be a little less impressed.

>>20043114
>I've been told it's reddit-core
People on /lit/ say a lot of stupid things. It's part of the price we pay for an anonymous space with no entry requirements.

>>20043114
All books are redditcore, get over it.

>>20043151
>implying Evola isn't beloved by the sort of reddit faggots who say things like "deus vult"

>>20043025
No, its some boomer consumer product and holds zero relevancy on an intellectual level.

>>20043025
It’s a bit overrated IMO.

>>20043114
that means it's good

>>20043459
What kind of subreddits are on /pol/'s level?

>>20043114
This. Fuck reddit!

>>20043114
Yeah it is and that's not a good thing

>>20043499
/pol/ is reddit

>>20043526
great bait but I'm too smart for it

>>20043114
It's one of those things that gets quoted obnoxiously often by obnoxious people, but much like Monty Python that doesn't mean it's inherently bad itself. I have a fondness for British comic authors like Adams and Pratchett in large part because they got so much of their craft from Wodehouse.

>>20043677
t. reddit

>>20043898
Pretty much this.
I liked some of the sequels better but I would stop before you get to So Long and Thanks For All the Fish

>>20043171
>It's part of the price we pay for an anonymous space with no entry requirements.
Are you telling me you didn't have to pay to be here? Is my gold pass meaningless?

Jokes aside, Douglas Adams is very funny and I thoroughly enjoyed most of his books, Mostly Harmless was "Ok" for me and I never got around to "And another thing..." so I can't help you there.

>Jokes aside,

>>20043025
>Is this worth reading?

1st book; yes, definitely. It has a great sense of humour and a very cool self-contained plot. The ending is actually the best thing about it.

2nd, 3rd, 4th etc books; no, definitely not. The sequels which the author was "forced" to write by the publisher are full on reddit, with incredibly stupid or simple jokes, exaggerations for the sake of exaggerations, and none of the charm or narrative consistency of the first book.

You can easily read any one of these books in a day, so just go read them and make up your own opinion.

>>20044311
>Are you telling me you didn't have to pay to be here?
You pay with your soul.

if you're in 6th grade

>>20043025
>>20043114
Well, it is, but that's because reddit is behind 4chan by about a decade, give or take, in terms of cultural advancement. It touches upon a lot of the deeper themes that are by now (and long since have been) plaguing them. I'd say it's worth a read still, though, if you haven't done it before. At least the first two or three of the "trilogy," though, it might make sense to see just how bleak and humorless the last one is, as if life itself were to imitate art, or, is it the other way around.

never read it because so many people says its so great. I do this about alot of things because deep down I think I'm an intellectual and better than others. In a few years, I will read this or listen to a famous pop song from 2015. And then I'll say "Alot of people hated it because it was so popular, but it truly was good." I'm beginning to realize I'm a retarded hipster

>>20044573
I like the part about him crash landing on Earth millions of years in the past.

>>20045123
There is a lot of good stuff in the later books. Fenchurch was good, it was interesting how suddenly you feel bad for Arthur and stop laughing at his misfortune.

>>20045152
>Fenchurch
Yeah that was sad. I liked the parts where they flew over the cities together. I was young enough when I read that (12-14) that I actually tried what Arthur did and wished I could fly.

i quit reading within the first page. douglas is so fucking pretentious

>>20045710
>douglas is so fucking pretentious
lol

>>20045710
But let me guess: when Robert Anton Wilson did the same thing in his gay sci-fi books you ate that shit up, right?

>>20043025
It's short why don't YOU read it and tell us if it was worth your while.
Stupid OP

>>20043171
>People on /lit/ say a lot of stupid things. It's part of the price we pay for an anonymous space with no entry requirements.
as if there is any space with entry requirements that don't have people saying stupid things. retard

>>20045854
>as if there is any space with entry requirements that don't have people saying stupid things. retard
You can not get rid of the stupid entirely but you can get pretty damned close.

42

There I just saved you a couple of hours

>>20043171
>People on /lit/ say a lot of stupid things. It's part of the price we pay for an anonymous space with no entry requirements.
You'd be surprised how many people stay away just due to this irrational fear of 4chan. Even amongst my edgey incel-tier friends from high school, some of them refused to go here.

b

>>20045894
but what is the question?

>>20046063
what is 6 times 9

>>20046167
Could it still be called "garbage in, garbage out" if perfectly good data gets fed to a broken system? That question has been nagging me for a little while.

>>20046497
No it can't

>>20046508
Is the system itself, a set of instructions, not data, that is then combined with a set of arguments, which are also a set of data, which then produces tarnished output, should one of the two aforementioned datas be themselves corrupted?

>>20043025
if you're 14

>>20043499
there is (or used to be, haven't checked now) a subreddit for 4chan screencaps.

>>20043499
genzedong

>>20043025
The edition I had as a kid was subtitled 'A trilogy in five parts.'
It made me giggle.

>>20043025
if you are looking for entertainment then yes.

>>20043025
It's pretty overrated but for a book it's pretty funny

>>20046536
The system is the base logic of the thing. If the logic is flawed then it it a bad system. This is why mathematics is important.

The data is the information. If the information is not true then it is bad information. This is why language is important.

>>20047558
i just looked and it's pretty much just /pol/ screencaps. who would've thought!

>>20047892
I'm failing to see a clear difference here. Logic and mathematics themselves have been described as languages, and a falsity of information could be described as a flaw. What is it precisely that might set apart a system from a simple set of information?

>>20048936
He is just saying that he is a plotfag.

>>20049610
It feels like there is a difference, just that I don't know what it is. Is it that a system can operate on data and not the other way around, or is it that it has an added dimension? That it's a subset of data? Or that a system cannot be fed into data, only that data can be fed into a system? Genuinely curious.