Why do NEETs and booktubers reject pdfs?

[Anonymous No.16716410]

The whole practice of spending money on physical books is the embodiment of immature book-LARPing for people who enjoy the aesthetic much more than the genuine utility or pleasure of reading. Pretty much all of my friends who actually understand books have no qualms with scourging for a goddamn PDF online and getting the whole thing for free. The only people who actually blow money on books are the type to debate hardbacks vs paperbacks, namely, women trying to pull off an art-hoe neo-tumblr aesthetic who squeal autistically and try to keep up with modern slang as much as possible, and men in suits who are the very definition of the word "pseud" who try to distance themselves from zoomer culture as much as possible. Nobody in their right mind will actually reject the opportunity to read *everything* that has ever been recorded for the incredible price of zero dollars, aside from LARPers for whom the entire thing is a schtick. Those are the types of people to identify as "readers". How can it not be an entire personality quirk, if it requires so much money to upkeep? For them it is essentially glorified golf. What disgusts me the most is how all of you fell for it, too. There's much more productive ways to spend your NEETbux.

[Anonymous No.16716413]

They're cool if you have a big e-reader.
Reading off computer screen is annoying.

If one has a book-sized e-book, then epubs are better.

[Anonymous No.16716420]

>>16716410
i like the feel of flipping pages desu

[Anonymous No.16716460]

Reading on a screen or e-reader is never as satisfying as a book. That being said the backlight on an e-reader blows books out of the water.

[Anonymous No.16716464]

nooooo you can't spend money on books

[Anonymous No.16716495]

>>16716410
Although I own a large collection of (mostly inherited) physical books I prefer the freedom of having digital copies. Archive has always been a friend to me and allowed me to access works I would have never read when I did not have the money to purchase. It allows you to freely transition from one book to the next without commitment. There are downsides, as mentioned by other posters here, but I value the freedom that comes with these PDF files and online libraries. I learned to travel light and not have too many valuable possessions, even now that I have money and a stable living situation I still find myself preferring to read digital copies for free - illegally or legally.

[Anonymous No.16716513]

>>16716410
Three reasons: screens hurt my eyes; most of the books I read (mostly philosophy) are not available on kindle; I like to underline and write comments on my books

[Anonymous No.16716514]

>>16716464
>Can't figure out why NEETs of all people shouldn't be spending money on books
I thought this board was suppose to be high IQ.

[Anonymous No.16716520]

>>16716410
what's wrong with enjoying the aesthetic? you sound like a boring faggot

[Anonymous No.16716532]

>>16716410
Not the same thing. The brightness of the screen, missing the feeling of the touch and the smell of the pages, missing the sensation of holding the book with your hands; I do read pdfs out of necessity, mostly for scientific papers and textbooks, but I don't have any second thoughts regarding putting my money into books.

[Anonymous No.16716537]

I can’t retain information I read off a screen worth a damn. I bought textbooks in uni for this reason too. My brains ability to process and store information is fucked if it’s from a screen. But books don’t have this issue for me.

[Anonymous No.16716562]

>>16716532
You are stunted by your physical form, it's a bit sad to see, really

[Anonymous No.16716565]

>>16716520
Nothing's wrong with enjoying the aesthetic, but you shouldn't pretend to be into books if you do. You aren't enjoying books, you're enjoying the feeling of elevating yourself from a social standpoint to a point of superiority. I only say this because I want to avoid interacting with people like that when I discuss books, because I don't expect them to actually attempt to think critically when they're too busy frolicking in the "aesthetics" of books

[Anonymous No.16716646]

If you steal books you are giving consent to be stolen from for now, and the debt must be repaid either in life or after death, and you can never truly claim to have ownership of your mind if you never paid for its contents. Do not steal books. You would do well to spend your income on buying things you've stolen in the past while you can still pay in easy currency.

[Anonymous No.16716647]

>>16716410
Personally it's a matter of experience, reading a physical book has far more to it than a pdf, the sensation of paper at the tip of my finger, the anticipation of turning the pages to find out what comes after, even the subtle difference between the smell of freshly printed books and older ones, it all stimulates my senses to a degree which pdfs and e-readers generally lack.

[Anonymous No.16716652]

>>16716410
because pdfs are soulless as fuck

[Anonymous No.16716654]

>>16716410
A lot of books I'm interested in are not scanned or are scanned in such crappy quality that I might as well just buy the physical copy to spare myself the torture of reading it.

[Anonymous No.16716655]

>>16716646
>you can never truly claim to have ownership of your mind if you never paid for its contents
Cope

[Anonymous No.16716788]

>>16716513
I read on my phone and I have none of the problems you listed. Blue light? Eliminated with an AMOLED black background and a pure red font. Availability of philosophy PDFs/epubs? All the major thinkers are up on LibGen. Even if you're reading some obscure medieval or early modern philosopher whose works have yet to be translated, you're more likely to find him on Google Books and archive.org than your local bookshop. Plenty of APPS give the opportunity of underlining, annotating and bookmarking all your favorite passages. I use Librera for this purpose.

[Anonymous No.16716823]

>>16716410
>pleasure of reading
Although mental satisfaction remains, the physical pleasure that comes from reading physical print is far superior to reading from a screen, even going so far as to say that reading from a screen is actively painful at times. So for pleasure, buy the cheapest book available, and buy the version with the most unsuggestive cover for utilities sake. You're telling me $1 is too much to ask for a real printed book? If you were being honest, then high quality, modest hardcover books are the most pleasurable and utilitarian form of writing for both storage and consumption, as electronic devices and the files inside them are not only also susceptible to degradation, but also depend upon electricity to function - physical books don't. Maybe one could own an ereader? To spend so much on a single device dedicated to a sole purpose would suggest investment in long term returns, eg. hundreds of books (for free, only benefit), but this too is only marginally beneficial, as there can't be more than 100 truly worthwhile books in existence. I can tell a man like you is never planning to have children and share the joy of genuine sentimentality when passing a well-loved book down to your son or daughter. Not to mention the fact that you are proposing consuming literature in the same fashion as one does video games or pornography, and the fact that you make this post might tell me that you see no problem with downloading terrabytes of hard fucking videos to watch in an instant. You sick bastard. Apart from this, there is no problem with reading PDF's on your computer, its probably a good choice for most pieces of writing.

[Anonymous No.16716835]

>>16716410
>>16716823
I forget to mention, the best method would actually be obtaining free PDF's and then printing them out

[Anonymous No.16716842]

>>16716823
Tangible copies of books are also susceptible to degradation. Also, if you're that worried about battery power, buy or build a solar charger.

>inb4 but what if the sun turns black

[Anonymous No.16716853]

>>16716835

you'd end up paying more for ink

[Anonymous No.16716859]

Why do 4channelers demand that everybody reads the same way as them and refuse to believe that different things work for different people?

[Anonymous No.16716868]

>>16716410
I buy used paperbacks from 50 years ago. E-readers are gay

[Anonymous No.16716871]

>>16716853
Sure, like everything which was my point, but you're really suggesting obtaining a solar charger just for an e-reader? I think solar power is unsustainable at the moment, and quite frankly, why would I bother doing that so I can read for free, which was the original point, when I could just steal a book? You could easily steal a book from a thrift shop that marks up prices like a real company in response to the vintage trend despite being run for charity, and that would still be more moral that getting a solar charger made in china (how else would you justify the price), which means you contribute directly to the destruction of the planet just to read and store free books online until you have to buy another solar charger just to fix your first solar charger.
>>16716842
Oh well, at least you wouldn't be a faggot who buys real books

[Anonymous No.16716879]

>>16716410
I hate reading from a screen (hurts eyes and I already do it for study) and while in theory kindles are good I haven't enjoyed them when I use them, though they are more convenient. I like the aesthetic and idea of having a full bookshelf where I can pull out something I'm interested in at any time, though my current one is full so I have piles scattered on the ground.
Only times I'm reluctant are when a book is super expensive (beyond reason) or when it's impossible to get my hands on.

[Anonymous No.16716885]

>>16716646
is unemployment money from the government my own money to use legitimately

[Anonymous No.16716898]

>>16716871
I occassionaly buy books in bookshops when I happen to eye a particularly interesting title in them. Otherwise, I just get them on any of my electronic devices. I do this because either they're too expensive or out of print. I can't steal the first because no bookshop near me sells such titles and I can't buy the second because their prices went to the moon. And as for the solar charger thing, it's not perfect, but it is an option.

[Anonymous No.16717359]

>>16716410
Naah man. Sometimes is just too distracting reading on your cellphone.

[Anonymous No.16717398]

>>16716565
>but you shouldn't pretend to be into books if you do
I enjoy ideas, and one of the ideas I enjoy is the importance of aesthetic in the spiritual sustenance of human beings.
Shilling pdfs sounds like a flaccid attempt at moving past the material into the all-consuming maya, which is an idea i don't enjoy.

[Anonymous No.16717572]

>The only people who actually blow money on books are the type to debate hardbacks vs paperbacks
>starts a thread arguing the inferiority of physical books from digital formats
>mfw
Anyway, why not use both OP?

[Anonymous No.16717604]

>>16716410
I dunno. I like the freedom of PDFs & epubs. But I also like physical books too. Nowadays I only buy the most important books in physical copy. It's great because I can download obscure academic books and don't have to pay 60 dollars for them so I can read them once.

[Anonymous No.16717626]

>>16716410
I got an ereader and while it's great for engaging books, one of the things that keeps me going through larger books with big interludes is the feeling of accomplishment in seeing the amount left to read gradually shrink over time. You don't really get that with ebooks, and it can feel soulless how samey the pages sometimes are.

I got through 60 pages of Hinterlands yesterday in one sitting because it's simple and accessible, so even on my laptop it's fine. On the other hand, I'm not even 60 pages into The Incoherence of the Philosophers after a month of reading because on an ereader the back-and-forth between the translated/untranslated page versions and the density of the text makes it feel almost unreadable.

tl;dr pirate easy books for your ereader, anything dense buy as a full text.

[Anonymous No.16717639]

>>16716859
>4channelers

[Anonymous No.16717660]

>>16716788
>I read on my phone
Kek

[Anonymous No.16717696]

>>16716410
>hurrr I'm so smart look how many books I own
>durrr no you're not smart my ereader can hold way more books than that
Faggot LARPer hypocrite. ebook-only posters are no different from shelfie fags. All these arguments about book formats are just another way for /lit/ posters to appear intelligent while not actually reading anything.

[Anonymous No.16717891]

>>16716410
If you know, you know.

[Anonymous No.16718018]

>>16716410
pdf is a dogshit format epub is way better

[Anonymous No.16718061]

>>16716410
Reading on a screen hurts my eyes and doesn't have the same "feel'" as reading a physical one. Nothing pseudo-intellectual about it, I just don't like it

[Anonymous No.16718072]

>>16716537
It sounds psychosomatic

[Anonymous No.16718078]

>>16716410
>scourging for a goddamn PDF online
>scourging
What

[Anonymous No.16718106]

>>16716788
>I read on my phone

[Anonymous No.16718114]

>>16717626
Does your copy of the Incoherence have the untranslated portion of the work on verso and the translation on recto? The only trouble with that would be that you have to press twice to skip the verso, otherwise it's all good.

[Anonymous No.16718134]

>>16717660
Why yes, I do indeed read ePubs on my Samsung Galaxy A51, what gave it away?

[Anonymous No.16718151]

>>16718134
That's about as convenient as sleeping in a cardboard box because you can technically sleep in there and it's free, but then actually paying 100s for it

[Anonymous No.16718228]

>>16716410
pdfs are gay

[Anonymous No.16718242]

>>16718151
I don't see the comparison. Tbh, I'd love to get an ereader for the sake of battery life but the ones I like are pretty expensive. They also don't have as much features as my phone does. For example, most are limited in the kinds of files they can open. I don't have this problem with my phone, because I can just get an app that does open it. The bluelight issue has already been addressed above, you simply set the background to black and the font to red. Don't forget the storage space as well, phones have more space and can take even more with SD cards. There's also no worry of getting distracted because you can turn off the Wi-Fi, though this isn't a point against ereaders.

[Anonymous No.16718275]

>>16718242
>Tbh

[Anonymous No.16718286]

I literally can't stand reading good fiction or philosophy using my eReader. I use epubs/pdf for shitty nonfiction dreck and textbooks, nothing else.

[Anonymous No.16718287]

>>16718275
cope

[Anonymous No.16718290]

>>16718287
>cope

[Anonymous No.16718293]

>>16718275
testing desu
DESU
Tbh

[Anonymous No.16718306]

>>16718293
He's using Cyrillic you stupid fuckass retard bitch.

[Anonymous No.16718313]

>>16718306
A capital T in the roman alphabet does the trick

Tbh tBh tbH
TBh TbH tBH

[Anonymous No.16718319]

>>16718313
Romans are gay and so are alphabets. Go be gay for letters somewhere else.

[Anonymous No.16718328]

>>16718319
You seem upset, tbH

[Anonymous No.16718341]

>>16718328
>Tbh I try to recite the alphabet whenever some roman is balls deep down my throat

[Anonymous No.16718420]

>>16716532
>muh book smell

[Anonymous No.16718473]

>>16716410
because if I did my reading on my PC then I'd be sitting on my computer chair staring at a screen literally all day. Book time is when my eyes get a break from the screen and body gets a break from PC posture

[Anonymous No.16718494]

>>16718473
This. Health is exceptionally important and reading a physical book is just healtheir

[Anonymous No.16718499]

>>16716410
I have 2 overflowing bookshelves, but that's nothing compared to the equivalent of a town library in pirated PDFs and epubs on my computer