/lit/ - Literature

Why would paper books need to be outlawed? As far as I know nobody outlawed parchment when paper became more affordable to manufacture in higher quantities and qualities. Paper books may become collectible relics that nobody actually reads anymore, but I doubt they will be outlawed.

>>3437978
>how soon in the future will paper books be outlawed?

Short answer, never.

Long answer, you're a nasty consumer whore.

>>3437978
physical libraries are for old men and pseudointelletuals who wanna show off

libraries & e-books master race

>>3438021
This.

You're more concerned with having books than reading them, OP. You're a slave to it.

Now that ereaders are becoming so good and affordable, I would understand collecting paper books only for their aesthetic, and how good can a big bookshell full of books look.
Otherwise you'd do much better donating them to a local library. People who collect thousands of them just to come as an avid reader are selfish.

>>3438115
>selfish
You're saying like this is a bad thing lol :)

>>3438125
Well, when we are talking about books and knowledge I see it as a bad thing, it's like stealing a book from a public library.

>>3438143
But I payed for it yo

>buy book 10 dollar
Last 50 years at least
>buy e-book 5 dollar
>buy e-reader 39 dollar
>energy bill
>energy bill for server storage
Last 2 years top
>buy new e-reader
Last 2 years top

Sure buddy. A very reasonable purchase.

>>3438115
>People who collect thousands of them just to come as an avid reader are selfish.

Are you for real? Fucking hippie.

>>3438164
>buy e-book
lol

>>3438164
The ebook is not going to magically dissappear, you know? And, most important, you can share it with anyone who wants to read it.

>>3438316
>falling for that

>>3438328
what? do you even know what you're talking about?

>>3438169
I hope you don't have ever complained about how little people is interested in literature or how little people like to read, while having a big home library full of dusty books that you have read once.

>>3438316
A computer breaks about every 3 years. Why would an ebook be any different? Why would i want to store my books on a temporary device when I can buy books that will last my life?

>>3438372
you can just download it again bro

>>3438013
>Short answer, never.
>Long answer, you're a nasty consumer whore.

You Fucking Bastard! You made me spill my tea.

>>3438013
>>3438021
>>3438029
>>3438115
>>3438316
>>3438352

E-books and e-book readers are the enemies of your freedom.

Save and catalog all your paper books. They last hundreds of years, require no readers or electricity, they can be shared. And most importantly, they can be read anonymously and traded without identifying yourselves.

Books are not just fun to read and nice to look at, they are one of the greatest symbols of freedom.

>>3438377
>implying

Amazon can and does delete books from you kindles.

>>3438372
Books aren't invulnerable. Pages can rip, or get stuck together if you spill something on it. If there's a flood they'll be badly damaged, if there's a fire they're gone. Pages yellow, binding weakens, etc.

>>3438406
Pic related. It's you.

Let me briefly touch on some things for you:

E-books can me made cheaply and spread out to all the 4 corners of the world within 5 seconds of uploading them.

Your paper books need to be printed in mass quantity, using up time, space, resources, and money, and then shipped out, using even more time, space, resources, and money.

Most e-books are available for free whereas even a paper book out of copyright will cost something, ordinarily.

E-books are far "freer" than paper books ever were. Oh, and nobody gives a shit to track what you read, so your "identifying yourselves" comment is truly asinine.

>>3438411
>Amazon can and does delete books from you kindles.

Cite a credible source.

>>3438430
It's funny because his representation of himself is a photo of an actual activist and respected personality in the field who shares his opinion, but your representation of him using a motivational style photo of some people in a Hollywood movie.

>>3438450
You know you don't have to sage on here, we're not on /b/
No one had to know you posted the first time and are defending yourself

>>3438450
It's funnier that even that because none of that shit invalidates anything.

>>3438021
So what's wrong with reading books just to show off?

e-books:
>free
books:
>not free

Freedom starts with free

>>3438406
Stallman doesn't agree with what you just wrote, so you'd have been better not posting his picture. He's against the amazon system of having to identify yourself to buy a book, but he's not against ebooks.

You can share ebooks without identifying yourself, and, in fact, it's much simpler and efficient to do it than doing it with paper books, do you even know how ebooks work??

>>3438411
I have a kindle, had never bought any book from amazon and I don't use the wifi connection. Good luck deleting my books.

>>3438501
It puts the books in a dust-collecting limbo. The ratio of book-to-reader in this scenario is 1/1 and sometimes not even that, as we all know how many people (especially here) buy books for their pretty shelves and then don't bother reading them. Gatsby did it.

But even if you read the books you buy, they then sit on a shelf until you force it upon a friend or acquaintance of yours, if and when that ever is.

>>3438423
Keep food out of your library. Build your house on high ground, and keep your wiring in good condition. All of these will protect paper books. Nothing can protect the books on you e-reader from being remotely deleted. And Undernet can be shut down, unlawfully if necessary, just like Megaupload.

>>3438430
You're assuming things won't change. SOPA and PIPA may have been defeated, and ACTA may be facing resistance, but the fight isn't over yet. Lobbyists are pushing for longer and longer copyright terms, so don't count on public domain.

And even though you and other in you country may read whatever you wish without facing punishment, know that the majority of the countries in the world are not democracies, and most of the world's population do not enjoy freedom of speech, and freedom of press.

As for the price of printed books, what is free as in freedom is seldom free as in beer. It's a price we have to pay.

>>3438448
https://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/18echnology/companies/18amazon.htmlr=0

>>3438510
I was trying to be concise. Stallman's, as well as my own complaint, is against the DRM that commercially sold e-books typically contain. See the button in the picture, 'DRM IS THEFT'.

>>3438519
That's nice for you. But that doesn't help most Kindle owners, who do buy their books from Amazon, and are quite vulnerable.

>>3438519
I steal books left and right, buy books from Amazon, and use the wifi all the time.

I've yet to have a single book get deleted. And I can't find any true incident of Amazon deleting stuff maliciously. The popularised case of the Norwegian girl seems to be some sort of digital error rather than Amazon telling the bitch which books she can and can't read.

>>3438406
Hundreds of years? My oldest book is from 1923 and it's falling apart.

Am I the only person who reads physical books out of nothing but personal preference?

I don't think it is superior to e-readers, just a preference I have.

>>3438547
>https://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/1technology/companies/18amazon.htm_r=0

Sweet Jesus, read the fucking thing before you link it:

>An Amazon spokesman, Drew Herdener, said in an e-mail message that the books were added to the Kindle store by a company that did not have rights to them, using a self-service function. “When we were notified of this by the rights holder, we removed the illegal copies from our systems and from customers’ devices, and refunded customers,” he said.

>Amazon effectively acknowledged that the deletions were a bad idea. “We are changing our systems so that in the future we will not remove books from customers’ devices in these circumstances,” Mr. Herdener said.

Amazon wasn't allowed to sell those copies of the books. They refunded all the customers, and they said they'll take measures to make sure the books they sell can be sold.

>>3438565
same. there are more of us but we don't bother to reply because people are silly

>>3438567
trolled hard

>>3438555
Putting the back door in the device in the first place was malicious. You don't give publishers the spare keys to your apartments so they can help themselves from your bookshelf. Suppose you've been shoplifting? Still not legal, with printed books that requires a search warrant. Why shouldn't you have the same protection for e-books?

>>3438567
Then they should take that up with the offending company and not bother the customers. It's still an inconvenience to have your books disappear from your device.

>>3438586
A very minor inconvenience, if any. The customers were refunded, and Amazon explicitly said they wouldn't do it in the future.

You're delusional if you think Amazon gives a shit what you read. The Orwell goof-up was a legal matter of a vendor trying not to get sued; it had nothing to do with your V. for Vendetta brand fright.

>>3438597
They have a power over the customers that they shouldn't have. Just because they promise not to abuse this power in the future doesn't mean they won't. You might not believe me, but large, multinational corporations are fully capable of telling lies. Or just forgetting their promise. Staff changes, old executives leave, new ones arrive, motives may change, and laws may change.

>You're delusional if you think Amazon gives a shit what you read
Then why do they need to keep a record of it?

>>3438621
blah blah blah

kill yourself yo

>>3438634
>kill yourself yo
That would be convenient for you, wouldn't it? If the person asking the uncomfortable questions would simply go away, you wouldn't have to rationalise your blind trust in Amazon.

>>3438621
>Then why do they need to keep a record of it?

Believe it or not, things happen to Kindles. About a year ago, I dropped mine face-first onto a rock the size of a watermelon. When I bought a replacement, Amazon had all the books I bought from them in a queue ready to be transported to the new device, free of charge.

That is, I didn't need to rebuy the e-book because of their "record". It's done for the benefit of their customers more than anything else.

Of course, companies lie and change policies and staff. I've been a customer to cable and water companies, man. Amazon has never done anything that, to me, is not on the up and up, so I'm willing to trust them until otherwise is proven.

>>3438639
I am with you on the Amazon thing, but I hope you don't condemn e-books in general because of it, 'cause I see you too passional about this, and e-books are an amazing thing for keeping the knowledge available to be shared with everybody.

>>3438517
Why do people have to justify keeping books? I see this all the time on /lit/.

>>3438661
Selfishly withholding resources.

I like having a book in my hands and I want to have a few minutes a day not looking at a screen.
That might look irrational or pretentious or whatever for others, I couldn't care less about that though.

>>3438652
I understand the argument, but it would have been trivial to let customers opt out of that scheme and instead keep their own backups.

>>3438657
No, the objection is against the digital handcuffs that often come with the files, and the back doors and other malicious features in the proprietary reader software.

For instance, all of the Free Software Foundation's publications are available both in printed and as a download in pdf and source form, the latter two both free of charge and free of digital handcuffs.

I'm also an advocate of doing the same for scientific publications, something Aaron Swartz faced 50 years and $1 million in fines for.

>>3438673
I lend people my books all the time. In fact that's one of the greatest pleasures of having them.

>>3438406
There's a big and important difference between "e-books" as a general category and the e-books that are bought and sold to be read on e-readers.

I sorta follow the alt lit community where people use the term "e-book" to refer to book-length pdfs and Word documents of writing that they post on their own websites and swap via any number of different kinds of networks. In other words, about as easy to track as pirated music, or any other illegal content you decided to post on the internet, would be.

>implying I won't have a Faraday cage to protect sensitive electronics from EMP
>implying I won't get a solar power charger for the end of times
>implying I can't remove the DRM for my books
>implying Amazon has any control over my device when set in Airplane mode
>implying I won't install another OS

I wonder how you printfags will feel like when you use your precious books for fuel so you don't freeze or starve to death.

Lack of character support and formatting issues have driven me back to hard copy.

>>3438560
The oldest one I could find at short notice is an August Strindberg book published in 1905, which is in excellent condition and should last another hundred if stored correctly. Quality is variable and many are considerably flimsier, of course. Now books are unfortunately not made with archival in mind any more. But I like to see what my ancestors were reading, I consider it part of my family history.

Also, funny story, a friend was looking at my section of children's books, all of which I had when I was little. She was amazed at their pristine condition, as her kids tore their books to shreds. So I guess I was a book nerd and conservationist sperglord before I could even read. I also have my mother's childhood books in the same pristine condition. I also raged when my classmates in elementary school wanted to burn their books when summer started (they were terrible books, but burning them is just barbaric)

>>3438742
I'll make sure to make that distinction in the future.

The problem with relying on unauthorized copying (like Stallman I object to putting those who share creative works in the same category as those who attack ships) for freedom in reading is that what is difficult to track now, may be easy in the future, as technology and legislation change. And I already mentioned Megaupload, who had not broken any law, yet had their hardware illegally seized and service shut down. Which tells me you shouldn't put too much faith in your freedom from unreasonable search and seizure, which is a part of most democratic constitutions. And of course the authors have a valid claim too.

>>3438794
>implying I don't have 18 cubic metres of stored firewood before I need to dig into my first editions

>>3438814
I sympathize, I'm also very concerned with proper typesetting and formatting. I do all my written documents in LaTeX for this reason.

>>3438580
same here. haha thanks for making me feel understood

>>3438867
Agreed that the authors have a valid claim.

Again, I'm coming at this from a mostly alt lit perspective, where the authors themselves often choose to distribute for free or use a pay-what-you-want system.

And policies and technical innovations could make it more difficult, just as a government trying to ban certain physical books could make it... harder to obtain certain physical books. But I think the web is evolving fast enough that wiping out all virtual copies and means of distribution of something couldn't possibly be any easier than doing the same for physical copies. (There are always darknets, etc.)

Personally, I love having the physical book in hand. If I read from an e-reader I get too distracted and end up playing games or other non-sense.

>>3439065
If playing sudoku or solitaire or whatever is more interesting than reading to you why even bother.

Had a kindle, gave it to a friend after a year.

I never had a hobby, so when I sold my kindle I started collecting books. I go for hardcover copies so this is a bit expensive but I guess so is golf.

>>3439065

>>3439086

Good question. I used to be a prolific reader. It's become harder for me to get into books as I get older. I have a smartphone, tablet, basically the internet everywhere I go, and I seem to lose interest in a book alot quicker than I used to. Maybe I have ADHD.

I am sick of people being narrow minded about technological issues.
I use both and fuck you.

>kindle
read for free
great for travel, subway
GOD tier for reading in other languages (insta dictionnary) by far the argument that made me buy it.
physical control (comfortable for doorstops, font, font size, spaces)
again, books for free
useful back up in case pc or library get destroyed (notes, importants documents etc..)
+10% reading speed due to physical control properties (took me a while to notice it)

>physical books
Love of the medium (audiophiles love a good cd/vinyl collection or a good quality audio file, good speakers etc..) This is the same thing. A good quality book with a sober cover is immensely valuable.

Keeping track of what you read: it's easier. Physical copies are great for organizing thoughts and knowledge. When I kindle-read I tend to forget what I read and it becomes blurry after a while. Having the physical copies make me think about it more when I look at them.

Easier to flip randomly open and read a few lines.

Collection fetish.

Decoration, eye candy.

Control, intellectual aura, social ladder
I'm not going to lie, when someone intimidating comes to my house, the assurance of them seeing my books gives me moire control and influence. It also gives me power.
Great social lubricant when a date/friend comes to my house, good conversation starter.


I completely understand people not needing one or the other, don't impose your views on others though.

>>3439677
Perfect book for you.
http://www.amazon.com/Shallows-WhaInternet-Doing-Brains/dp/03933397

>>3439899
>Collection fetish
Agreed, that's what my reading habit is all about eventually.

>>3439677
>Good question. I used to be a prolific reader. It's become harder for me to get into books as I get older. I have a smartphone, tablet, basically the internet everywhere I go, and I seem to lose interest in a book alot quicker than I used to. Maybe I have ADHD.

Maybe you've just become goddamn lazy.

>>3437978
>One day I plan to own a home
Stopped reading there. 2bourgeois4me

>>3441021
Deriding one of those basal and common dreams throughout history. The How utterly ignorant. That is probably the most bourgeois comment in this thread.

>>3441088
Home ownership is for domesticated sedentary faggots and there's nothing you can say to change that.

ITT amerifats killing trees for no actual real purpose other than brag off.

>>3441098

ITT manchild NEETs, students, and broke kids mad that they aren't physical book master race

>>3441098
I've sequestered a few tonnes of carbon in my library. What have you done for the environment lately?

>>3438580
Yep.

>>3441098
9/10
The ecological footprint of an is much higher than a wall of books generates.

>>3441797
of an e-reader, that is

>>3441098

>implying the paper industry is in any way harming the environment other than in transporting it

>>3438411

mfw they deleted Orwell

>>3442442
>mfw most of orwell's work belongs on the other end of a memory hole anyway

install chinese firmware on your kindle or keep it in airplane mode if you're paranoid though. thing works fine if you just treat it like a usb drive that can read books