Why are the most pedestrian people such staunch proponents of physical books? Do they really think that rejecting digital books makes them seem more literary and well-read?

File: 94 KB, 676x635, dfsfpture.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 20:12:26 2013 No.3687212 [Reply] [Original]

Why are the most pedestrian people such staunch proponents of physical books?

Do they really think that rejecting digital books makes them seem more literary and well-read?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 20:15:26 2013 No.3687222 >>3687212 They're posting about Rowling, so seeming more literary or well-read is probably pretty far from their minds.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 20:17:25 2013 No.3687229 >Do they really think that rejecting digital books makes them seem more literary and well-read? Yeah. It's why they have to invent stupid reasons about how they buy paper books to sniff them or "feel the paper". Jesus.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 20:18:25 2013 No.3687232 >>3687212 They said the same thing about news print. Let them babble.

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 20:19:25 2013 No.3687238
File: 464 KB, 1000x750, 1363946783673.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

You are the dumbest nigger in the world

>And I mean it in the classic sense of you being ignorant as fuck

The physical book is an aesthetic choice, some people like the look and feel of it more.

>Kinda like how you like your fedora and not shaving.

Anyway, your example has nothing to do with being well read, it's got everything to do with enjoy the feel and the physical enjoyment of a paper book.

>You're a pretentious asshole
>2patrician4me

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 20:24:25 2013 No.3687249 I think the best option is to have both. Some people prefer digital books, some prefer physical. I prefer physical books but won't claim it is anything more than personal taste.

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 20:26:26 2013 No.3687254

>>3687238
i've never seen a respected or accomplished author defend paper books. it's usually only the people who rely on the sales of their 800+ shitfest beach books like rowling. mind, of course, that they still allow their precious books to be digitized and adapted to hell and book because it nets them extra cash

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 20:26:26 2013 No.3687257 >feeling it creak What kind of books is she reading? They made out of wood or something?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 20:31:26 2013 No.3687267 >>3687257 Oh, you know, those 115 page YA romance vampire serials she reads don't have very good binding.

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 20:32:26 2013 No.3687268

Preferring physical books to digital ones is a bit like storing all your data on floppy disks just because you prefer them. I guess that's an okay thing to do, if you really insist, but it doesn't make you much of a purist any more than it makes you a retard.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 20:43:25 2013 No.3687290 File: 1.36 MB, 306x132, 1362749642610.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3687254 When you accidentally leave your entire library on the train, remember making this post.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 20:46:25 2013 No.3687298 >>3687267 Why do you assume a writer of YA fiction enjoys reading YA fiction?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 20:46:25 2013 No.3687300 File: 31 KB, 635x484, alg-chef-albert-roux-jpg.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3687290 >What are backups. Also, >buying ebooks

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 20:50:25 2013 No.3687309

>>3687268

Wait, what? Physical books are still VASTLY superior to digital books at the present moment. This will likely change once a few kinds are worked out but at the moment I'm pretty sure the majority of people here still prefer the physical thing.

>being able to flip through pages with your thumb to get back to a passage you want to recheck instead of thumbing a leftwards arrow 45 times or touch-scrolling on a screen that's too small

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 20:51:25 2013 No.3687310 File: 40 KB, 500x375, AdamLanza.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >ifuckinghatesociety13

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 20:52:25 2013 No.3687312 >>3687268 >Preferring physical books to digital ones is a bit like storing all your data on floppy disks just because you prefer them No it's like preferring physical books to digital ones.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 20:52:25 2013 No.3687314 >>3687309 >being able to jump to pages using the scroller at the bottom of the screen

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 20:52:25 2013 No.3687316 >>3687309 On this kindle you can just hit the "Go To" and accurately navigate to any location within the book, even searching by text. You can even use your thumb if you like.

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 20:54:25 2013 No.3687318

>>3687309
You poor fucker. You must not know all e-books have a CTRL + F function.

Not only can I easily find the "passage" I want, I can do it without flipping through a bunch of fucking pages to find it. I can tell you how many times the word "abortion" is used in "A Confederacy of Dunces" within 15 seconds.

Stay with your chimpshit; just be sure to get out of the way of your superiors: Kindle master race.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 20:55:25 2013 No.3687325 >>3687310 is that docevil

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 20:56:25 2013 No.3687327 File: 102 KB, 584x573, 1362936596812.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3687300 >Because kindles grow on trees >scrolling instead of opening a book >What ARE backups?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 20:57:25 2013 No.3687331 >>3687298 Why is your reading comprehension so limited?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 20:58:25 2013 No.3687334 File: 55 KB, 648x481, whensuddenlybeta.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3687318 >Being this beta. >I bet you thought the bluetooth was pretty neat too.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:00:25 2013 No.3687338 >>3687268 I prefer digital books but you're an idiot.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:01:25 2013 No.3687340 You know, stories were told verbally long before they were ever printed. Surely, there were people who rejected the printed word and preferred traditional storytelling. They were probably retarded and old.

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:01:25 2013 No.3687342

>>3687314
>>3687316
>>3687318

You retards. You don't know the page number and you might not know a key word. What then? Or what if what you're reading requires multiple check-backs (a text book, or some modernist trash)? You gonna type the page number in every time you want to flip back? Write down the information on a separate piece of paper? Look at all of this primitive nonsense you have to endure when you could just flip back physical pages with ease.

>poor

Most of the reason you guys are so defensive about ebooks is because you can't afford to spend money on physical books.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:03:25 2013 No.3687348 >>3687342 >Or what if what you're reading requires multiple check-backs (a text book Hyperlinks.

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:04:25 2013 No.3687349

>>3687342
>Write down the information on a separate piece of paper?
Most e-readers have a highlight function where you can create a separate in-line list of all the text you've highlighted and any notes you've taken about those highlighted passages.

Good luck highlighting a physical book instantly when you don't have a pen handy or it runs out of ink. Further, you can e-mail those passages and notes to yourself for future reference.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:05:25 2013 No.3687351 >>3687342 My Kindle, the most basic that they sell, allows me to both bookmark pages to quickly get back to them, and also to highlight and store passages as notes.

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:05:25 2013 No.3687353

>>3687342
You can also bookmark things. Honestly, the only time using an ebook will cause you to waste extra time finding something is if you've entirely forgotten where it is in the book and are rapidly scanning every page for it.
>Most of the reason you guys are so defensive about ebooks is because you can't afford to spend money on physical books.
So now something not costing money is an inherent negative?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:07:25 2013 No.3687356 >>3687342 m8 I could just as easily get books from the library. Money has nothing to do with it.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:08:25 2013 No.3687358 >>3687327 buying 5 kindles is cheaper than buying the 300+ books I keep on it.

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:09:25 2013 No.3687360

>>3687342
>Most of the reason you guys are so defensive about ebooks is because you can't afford to spend money on physical books.

why are you so mad that the internet has made literature infinitely accessible to anyone who wants it, but you're still convinced you need to buy books like a little blind consumer hog?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:09:26 2013 No.3687361 I still don't understand why we have these threads, do you guys actually care about how someone reads?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:10:26 2013 No.3687363 >>3687334 Bluetooth is made for truck drivers who can no longer talk on their phones due to new laws about handheld devices and driving. For that purpose it is excellent and irreplaceable.

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:10:26 2013 No.3687364

>>3687342
>Most of the reason you guys are so defensive about ebooks is because you can't afford to spend money on physical books.
You know, there's a whole building full of free physical books called a public library. You can even take them home and keep them in your possession indefinitely. What a novel concept.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:10:26 2013 No.3687365 >>3687290 And then I connect to Amazon from another device and get them back.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:11:26 2013 No.3687367 >>3687363 >truck drivers liberal arts majors

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:11:26 2013 No.3687369 >>3687367 nice one m8. epic win ;)

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:12:25 2013 No.3687371 >>3687367 Yeah, and the high-school dropouts have all become politicians.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:12:25 2013 No.3687372 >>3687290 Are you homeless? Riding around on trains reading tattered old paperbacks? Sorry, I'm living in the 21st century. I own and command my own personal transport vehicle and I read digital books.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:12:26 2013 No.3687370 I don't like reading from a screen. That's all there is to it for me.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:13:25 2013 No.3687376 >>3687371 no, we prefer physical books because it makes us feel smarter

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:16:26 2013 No.3687381 >>3687376 I don't think you meant to reply to me.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:16:26 2013 No.3687382 Having shelves full of physical books makes me feel more intelligent than a Kindle on my desk.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:16:26 2013 No.3687383 >>3687372 Does it hurt being this pretentious? >I mean, the loneliness of have no one around to talk to because you're too smart for everyone. >>Your fedora is on too tight >>>I forgot you don't go anywhere with your digital books.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:18:25 2013 No.3687388 >>3687383 >being on /lit/ >criticizing others for being pretentious and unsociable

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:18:25 2013 No.3687389 >>3687254 Name a respected or accomplished author who is alive to defend paper books.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:19:25 2013 No.3687392 >>3687358 This. You can buy one or two e-readers a year and still be off cheaper than buying what you read.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:19:25 2013 No.3687393 File: 293 KB, 200x133, 382.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] U GUISE AER ALL PLEBS I HAVE THE NEW KINDLE APP ON MY IPHONE6 >WAVE OF YHR FUTER

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:20:26 2013 No.3687394 >>3687389 Thanks for proving my point.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:22:26 2013 No.3687397 >>3687389 >defend paper books Is anybody either 'defending' or 'attacking' other than internet nobodies with too much time on their hands like /lit/? It's not like this is a big deal. It's a consumer option.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:23:26 2013 No.3687398 >>3687388 >Being on /lit/ >Thinking everyone is living in a basement with a kindle stealing books off the internet just like you are

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:25:25 2013 No.3687403 >>3687398 >stealing books Is it even possible to steal something that you can otherwise obtain at no cost?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:26:25 2013 No.3687405 >>3687403 Yes, obviously.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:27:25 2013 No.3687407 >>3687405 You should probably read more. Expose yourself to some new ways of thinking.

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:27:25 2013 No.3687408

>>3687397
I for one like own paper books, they are more satisfying to own and cherish.

>Also I've read enough sci-fi dystopian novels to know that if they ever wanted to all your e-books would be wiped out with no trace when they wanted to get rid of them.

1984 451 shit would only require an EMP over North America, claim it's terrorists, but then never replace the offensive "terrorist" literature.

>Just a hypothetical really, but I still like paper books.

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:28:25 2013 No.3687410

Because electronics are fragile and easily broken and outdated. I dont like to have to worry about charging my books or breaking them by stepping or sitting on them. Or having the nonreplaceable internal battery permanently drained. Or have to fuck around with cracking software or god forbid bullshit amazon adds. The odds that any ereader will work and have all the books I had on it after two or three years without being broken or outdated is basically zero. I've had the some physical copies of books for over ten years.

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:28:25 2013 No.3687411

>>3687408
Yeah, but
>I like owning paper books
is all you're saying and that seems to be all the picture in the OP is saying (I think, anyway, I'm not sure who's talking exactly)

That's hardly a 'defence', just a preference- because again, all this is is a consumer choice.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:29:25 2013 No.3687414 >>3687408 see >>3687394 lel

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:29:25 2013 No.3687416 >>3687407 >>3687403 stealing an authors work off the internet means you aren't giving them money for their work. >You're basically stealing their livelihood >>You're treating them like fanfiction >>>You're disgusting

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:30:25 2013 No.3687417 >>3687410 B-but muh future

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:31:25 2013 No.3687423

>>3687416
Do you really think that buying a book from a book store equates to more money in the author's pocket? Are you that naive?
And what about books I take out from the library? Are you saying that libraries are anti-author?

There's a library near my house that offers free e-book rentals directly from their website. I'm able to legally obtain digital copies of any digitized book they have on the shelf.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:32:25 2013 No.3687424 >>3687407 Could you find me a 'new way of thinking' that argues that >>3687403 is impossible?

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:32:25 2013 No.3687425
File: 80 KB, 576x436, 1279801276409.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>3687411
I was agreeing. It is a consumer choice. Some people still like to write letters with typewriters.

>Some people still like to listen to vinyl records.
>Because it's about the quality of the experience for people who aren't swine.

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:33:26 2013 No.3687428

>>3687416
No, I'm only 'stealing' by copying a file if I would otherwise have bought it. Since I otherwise wouldn't have bought it, it's not stealing, it's merely the chance to some exposure. If I couldn't pirate I would have had a crate of books (like now) and no music. Fuck everything.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:33:26 2013 No.3687429 I think there's something autistic about reducing the experience of reading a book to merely viewing the words that the book is composed of, and obstinately refusing to see otherwise.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:34:26 2013 No.3687431 >>3687416 i don't think you know how anything works, but you're a very well-behaved shopper

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:35:25 2013 No.3687435
File: 232 KB, 500x339, tumblr_m0g9zyKxSQ1qc3tdbo1_500.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>3687423
>I LESTEN TO THE RADIO FOR FREE SO IT MEAN I NO STEAL, SO WHEN I DOWNLOAD BOOK WITH NO PAY ARTHUR HE STILL MAKE MONIES FOR HARD WORK AND SACRIFACE

Is that really your argument?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:35:25 2013 No.3687437 >>3687429 But the story is what matters. Bound paper has just been easiest and cheapest method of consuming the story until now.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:37:25 2013 No.3687438 >>3687437 Autist spotted.

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:37:26 2013 No.3687440

The only reason contemporary authors like Rowling defend paper books is because it helps them make money

You can't justify charging $25 for a digital book, but people will shell out even more than that for a hardcover or a "special edition" paperback

If the story were any good, why the fuck would it matter how you read it or what material you read it on?

There are people who claim books by Dickens are meant to be read out loud, but that doesn't stop people from reading the books

When it comes down to it, an ideal scenario for literature is instant access, convenience and versatility

Digital books offer these three in abundance, physical books much less so in comparison

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:37:26 2013 No.3687441 >>3687429 I love you. I love you for saying what we're all trying to say.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:38:25 2013 No.3687445 >>3687435 I'm saying that I don't pirate books, I download licensed books legally from my local library's website. What's your argument?

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:38:25 2013 No.3687446

I just can't stand modern aesthetics, including the endless digital accoutrements and minimalism.

Plus I enjoy having books around. And the idea that you can see what people are reading, they what you are reading in public ... I don't know, it sort of tells you something about them; with the e-reader phenomenon of course attending the ubiquity of online social networking, it's one more step in the direction of showing everyone everything about you online, but retreating from people in general in person. Just feels vaguely disconcerting to me.

There is no swimming against the stream with certain things, society will be shifting to e-books steadily and surely over the years, but at least for the time being I won't be among them.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:38:25 2013 No.3687447 >>3687440 >defending again... is she actually defending them?

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:38:26 2013 No.3687443

>>3687423
>Do you really think that buying a book from a book store equates to more money in the author's pocket?
Not that anon, but yes.
>And what about books I take out from the library?
IIRC libraries pay a very small amount every time the book is borrowed, so also yes.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:38:26 2013 No.3687444 >>3687438 Brilliant 300 IQ alpha male philosopher spotted.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:39:26 2013 No.3687449 >>3687364 Nigga, I practically lived in the library from age 12-16. I like books to keep for my own + they don't have much of what I read these days.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:40:25 2013 No.3687450 >>3687441 Too bad it's a shitty argument from someone who is so engrained in the traditional way of doing things as to blind himself to the original purpose of his own preferred medium.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:40:25 2013 No.3687451 >>3687447 Sure, she's saying that she will always prefer to read from physical books and will always intend to have her books published on and read from physical copies.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:40:25 2013 No.3687452 >>3687440 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aQ2X1YBfjQ

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:41:25 2013 No.3687455

>>3687411
Why do you need a defense? What's the attack? If I wanted to buy an ebook, I would pirate it. Not just because I don't want to pay, I think information should be as accessible as reasonable and I would do my best not to support capitalist restrictions on the internet.

When I pay $5, $10, $80 for a book, it's for the physical book, not the information inside. I don't have any reason to pay for an ebook.
I've been considering paying $5 to get a digital copy of a game magazine (the issue is a full review on a publisher's work, it seems to be the only extensive information available in english), because the physical copy is $20, which is overpriced, and I can't find the pdf or scans online. But then if I did buy the pdf, I'd upload it because it should've been free in the first place.

I mean, it's going to be more common for things to be published ebook only, I just hope the piracy scene, or consumer ideology, will be able to catch up. If they did go that route, I hope they follow alt lit's website 'ebook' format rather than pdf, epub which are just poor interpretations of the classic form. I'm sure the change in publishing medium will have a large effect on the experience of reading literature and the literature that's written.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:41:25 2013 No.3687457 >>3687450 >Implying the means of accomplishing a given purpose cannot possess certain qualities that are worthwhile and worth preserving in themselves.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:42:25 2013 No.3687458 >>3687455 >reads gaming magazines >is presumably not 12 years old well, your credibility just went out the window

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:43:26 2013 No.3687459 >>3687455 >Why do you need a defense? What's the attack? That's precisely what I'm asking. People be blowing this shit out of all proportion.

Kekkafuza !IDCVJudge6 Tue Apr 23 21:43:26 2013 No.3687460

>>3687443
>IIRC libraries pay a very small amount every time the book is borrowed, so also yes.
what are you even talking about?
>reading books by living authors
lol
paperbacks are good for letting people on trains know what you're reading, for everything else there is a kindle. especially for anything 800+ pages

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:44:25 2013 No.3687463

Are e-books really "taking off" the way people here talk? I know that whenever I go to Amazon to look at book reviews there are almost always several angry reviews about how terrible the Kindle edition is, or whatever. It seems like publishers aren't doing a good job producing digital editions. Now, I suppose people here may not be purchasing digital books in this way, but the majority of e-book users will be.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:44:25 2013 No.3687464 >>3687450 >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cT8pNJxVDM4

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:44:25 2013 No.3687465 >>3687455 >Why do you need a defense? What's the attack? I'd consider anyone's Luddite pro-physical defense and attack on progress.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:44:26 2013 No.3687462 >>3687458 What if it's a game theory magazine?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:45:26 2013 No.3687469 >>3687457 Maybe, but they're vastly outweighed by the actual purpose, which is to relay information in a convenient and affordable manner.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:45:26 2013 No.3687470 File: 50 KB, 934x960, artdink-aquanauts_holiday.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3687458 Nope, the magazine is obscure and independent and the publisher in question is independent, Japanese, obscure and experimental. Come at me.

>>	Kekkafuza !IDCVJudge6 Tue Apr 23 21:46:26 2013 No.3687472 >>3687463 wouldn't it only get better? i would assume digital music started out with shitting 60kb rips and progressed to the FLAC /mu/ bullshit it is today.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:46:26 2013 No.3687473 >m-m-muh battery ran out I'm flipping through Game of Thromes like it's nobody's business and you can't read your precious knee cheese b/c u battewy went ded.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:48:26 2013 No.3687480 All of you are plebs, I only read books on my kindle app on the Iphone 7 Get with the times oldfags.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:49:25 2013 No.3687481 >>3687470 seems like you're trying pretty hard there, i hope you don't pull a muscle

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:50:25 2013 No.3687485 >>3687472 To make an accurate comparison, digital music would be iTunes, I think.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:50:25 2013 No.3687487 >>3687469 Physical books are affordable and convenient.

Kekkafuza !IDCVJudge6 Tue Apr 23 21:51:25 2013 No.3687488
File: 51 KB, 591x600, 1347205397604.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>3687473
>m-m-muh cellphone/laptop battery ran out

I'm talking to my friends in person like it's nobody's business and you can't talk to yours b/c battewy went ded

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:51:25 2013 No.3687490 >>3687481 Fuck you really get me

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:52:25 2013 No.3687491 >>3687487 But not as affordable and convenient as digital books.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:53:25 2013 No.3687494 >>3687460 The kindle is more pretentious because it's basically asking people to ask you what you're reading.

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:54:32 2013 No.3687496

>>3687491
They're just as affordable, if not more so, because you can purchase older and used copies. You can buy used books on Amazon for $0.01. Comparing buying physical books to illegally obtaining e-books is dishonest and doesn't real speak to your preferring method of distribution working, unless you'd like to have it exist parasitically off of scanned print works.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:55:26 2013 No.3687498 >>3687496 really speak*

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:55:32 2013 No.3687497 >>3687494 wut

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:56:26 2013 No.3687500 >>3687469 Affordable? Copyrighted ebooks are extremely overpriced. Do you think books didn't drop in price with the invention of the printing press? But then how could the publishers or authors make any money?

>>	Kekkafuza !IDCVJudge6 Tue Apr 23 21:56:26 2013 No.3687501 >>3687494 how so? on a train, reading mein kampf seems more pretentiousness than reading an anonymous novem on a kindle

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:57:26 2013 No.3687504

>>3687238
>>3687300
>>3687309
>>3687310
>>3687327
>>3687334
>>3687383
>>3687388
>>3687393
>>3687398
>>3687408
>>3687416
>>3687425
>>3687435
>>3687457
>>3687458
>>3687464
>>3687473
Please make sure to quality check your posts in order to make sure you are not misuse chan features like the quoting feature, like you did in this post. The quality of posts is extremely important to this community.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:57:26 2013 No.3687506 >>3687504 >>>/jp/

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:58:59 2013 No.3687507 >>3687496 The matter of legality isn't an issue. I wouldn't pay for either even if it meant I had to steal a book from Barnes & Noble. You also ignored the aspect of convenience, which undoubtedly goes to digital books.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:58:59 2013 No.3687508 >>3687500 >buying ebooks >buying books in general

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 21:59:59 2013 No.3687510 If you seriously care about how someone else reads books one way or the other, you are a moron

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:01:25 2013 No.3687513 >>3687465 I'm not sure what you're trying say. Are you calling me a luddite?

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:01:25 2013 No.3687514

>>3687507
Yes the matter of legality is an issue because publishers will only continue to embrace e-books insofar as they can generate a profit from them. If your argument that they are more affordable reduces to, "Well we can obtain them illegally for free," then I think that you are basically refuting yourself, as profit needs to be generated for their to ever be any eventual obviation of physical works. Otherwise e-books will be dependent upon physical books from which you can obtain your e-books parasitically as I said. E-books only have a chance of superseding physical books as long as people are buying them.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:02:25 2013 No.3687517 >>3687514 for there*

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:03:25 2013 No.3687522 >>3687510 I care because the more people who cling to retarded attitudes about their preference for physical books, that means fewer books will be digitized

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:08:55 2013 No.3687531 >>3687522 There's more than enough people with e-book readers to provide a financial incentive to digitize books.

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:08:55 2013 No.3687532

>>3687514
>Major publishers continue to produce physical books
>Books are contiously scanned and uploaded
>People download the free ebooks
>Major publishers go out of business or switch models
>Publishers publish ebooks

I don't understand where you get off calling piracy parasitical. They're taking the cultural works and spreading it to a larger audience. Publishers set a price because it costs them money to produce, market and distribute a book, they're compensated for their service. They've no inherent right to set an inflated artificial value based on consumer expectations of an old model. The service the publisher is providing is different, and the price should be adjusted. Are they providing any service? They're working hard to hide behind copyright laws and consumer misinformation, I suppose.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:10:25 2013 No.3687535 >Not having both an e-reader and physical books What's so bad about e-readers, anyway? You can always buy physical copies of books you like, you know.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:12:25 2013 No.3687537 >>3687532 market forces can suck my dick

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:12:25 2013 No.3687539

>>3687514
Eventually the ever present drive to streamline and make everything efficient will lead to digitization regardless of the profit. As more and more books are added to the public domain, and older physical mediums (in other things besides books) are phased out to allow for digital mediums to take over, the idea of still having books as ink printed on paper will weigh too heavily on the minds of a completely digital world. Just as things like facebook (or a government run equivalent) will become mandated, so will the use of digital books. Before long, everyone's phone/handheld computer/brain chip will be capable of holding unlimited amounts of books, and you'll be hard-pressed to find any significant population still holding on to the ancient format of bound paper.

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:13:25 2013 No.3687540

>>3687535
I know.

>implying owning either is exclusive
Ebooks are even nicer with stuff like bibliotik. If I dl something from there and like it, more often than not I'll buy the physical copy.

>inb4 piracy
Would you rather I buy the book from amazon and return it?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:13:25 2013 No.3687541 >>3687539 That's insane.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:15:25 2013 No.3687544 >>3687532 Oh, and even if all books were freely available on the internet, I'd still buy books until the price starts rising, and likely only download ebooks for research or if the book is rare/out of print.

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:15:25 2013 No.3687545

Luddites gonna.

And make up more rationalizations.

Ebooks superior. No need for indexes just search.
No need to write off, just copy.
No need to move a huge library of paper when moving.
Have access to all my library everywhere.
Can share books without losing a book (=copying).
Much cheaper.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:16:25 2013 No.3687546 >>3687539 >>>/x/

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:18:25 2013 No.3687551 If there were a way to beam a book directly into your mind, would there still be people saying they prefer physical books?

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:18:25 2013 No.3687552

I live in a place where as soon as I leave my home with an ebook reader, someone will steal it from me. So, I read physical books outside my house(mostly are in my own language) and ebooks inside my house(English or other language I can't otherwise read without importing it). I love both ways and I'm happy ebook exist so I can read some books I'd not be able to do so without spend too much money.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:19:26 2013 No.3687554 >>3687546 Are you implying he's a conspiracy theorist for suggesting that digital technology will grow more ubiquitous in the near future?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:20:25 2013 No.3687556 >>3687554 > things like facebook (or a government run equivalent) will become mandated, so will the use of digital books. >not a conspiracy theorist

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:20:26 2013 No.3687555

>>3687546
It's not a conspiracy theory, it's happening all around you. You think music will still be available in physical format in 30 years? How about movies? What makes books so special? That they've been around longer. Tough luck, convenience outweighs tradition in today's world of easy quick access to information at no cost. You really think governments will allow this to cause a crash of any kind in the industry? The industries themselves are obsolete as they are, and they know it. They'll try to fight to their last dying breath, but they know that eventually, they'll either have to adapt or fold.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:21:25 2013 No.3687557 >>3687555 Counterpoint: you think there's going to be a mandatory state-run equivalent of facebook

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:21:25 2013 No.3687558 >>3687540 >Paying for things you'll never read more than once I'll never understand. Pirate first, and if you buy it, like it. Or if you're a poorfag just kind of...not pay for it?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:21:26 2013 No.3687559 >>3687552 >as soon as I leave my home with an ebook reader, someone will steal it from me. You should probably just kill yourself or move away.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:21:26 2013 No.3687560 >>3687558 Do you really only read books once?

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:22:26 2013 No.3687563 >>3687558 Even if you're not a poorfag, why throw money away at another bloated industry under the guise of "supporting" an author? The author doesn't get shit when you buy their books.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:22:26 2013 No.3687566 I don't own an e-reader but I'm pretty sure most books are not available in digital format.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:22:26 2013 No.3687567 >>3687560 Some of them, yeah.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:22:26 2013 No.3687568 >>3687556 >public profiles which employers now use to screen employees before hiring >police now use them to create a profile for suspects and criminals I'm telling you now. In the future, everyone will have a public profile created at birth.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:23:25 2013 No.3687570 I use both, I have my Shelves of books for reading at home, and when I'm on the go I have all those books and more because it's more convenient. I don't see why doing both is impossible.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:23:25 2013 No.3687571 >>3687558 >implying I never read books twice I'm sorry that I don't fit the Elitist's Code of Reading. >>3687563 It makes me feel good.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:23:26 2013 No.3687569 >>3687566 You'd be surprised.

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:24:25 2013 No.3687572

>>3687557
It's not that hard to conceive. It may not be facebook unless facebook is bought by the government, but everyone will have a profile with their name, picture, and some basic information, all connected to a cloud network. This will be set-up at birth along with social security numbers and family registrations.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:27:26 2013 No.3687575 >>3687571 >buying things makes me feel good Huxley was right.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:29:25 2013 No.3687582 i work for amazon in the kindle returns department and can honestly say i've yet to see any returned kindle have any decent books on it. they're always almost entirely full of the free downloads + james patterson/mom-type stuff

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:29:25 2013 No.3687583 >>3687575 Owning things makes me feel good. Giving money to people who I'd like to have money makes me feel good.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:30:25 2013 No.3687586 >>3687575 No, I guess I like it for the same reason the anti-ebook luddites do, it feels good to hold, to see on my shelf.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:30:25 2013 No.3687588 >>3687559 Is not that simple to leave your family behind nor is it easy to leave Brazil to any country that is not in South America. I'm waiting to finish uni so I can try find a job oversea.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:31:25 2013 No.3687589 >>3687588 >Brazil Well, I assumed you were some white American pussy living in a "black" neighborhood who assumed everyone was out to get him. I take back what I said.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:32:25 2013 No.3687590 >>3687583 >Giving money to people who I'd like to have money makes me feel good. Who do you think gets the money, when you buy a book? Unless you're buying it directly from the author, it's not the author.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:32:25 2013 No.3687592 >>3687254 Will Self and Nicholson Baker are both apposed to ebooks.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:35:26 2013 No.3687600 I'll still be here when your gadgets come crashing down and you look around dazed and confused; startled that there is in fact a world that exists beyond the network.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:37:25 2013 No.3687603 >>3687600 Says the guy typing it on the internet.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:37:26 2013 No.3687601 >>3687600 The network is far too profitable, people who desire to maintain it's existence will not let it come crashing down. I don't know what kind of science fiction novel you're living in, but these kinds of this don't happen when moneys involved.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:37:26 2013 No.3687602 >>3687575 >consumerism >huxley Why are you on /lit/? Go read a book

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:38:25 2013 No.3687605 >>3687600 Fortunately, I still have access to physical books, so I can enjoy the benefits of both

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:39:25 2013 No.3687608 >>3687590 He could mean supporting the publisher, which often does mean indirectly supporting the author and other authors like him.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:41:25 2013 No.3687611 >>3687608 Sure, but it's not like the author gets a percentage of every book that gets sold. That's not how book deals work, not at all.

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:47:25 2013 No.3687619

>>3687611
I think he means that keeping publishers in business will keep the book deals coming for future authors. It's a good point, but I think that's just keeping an obsolete industry in business. I think it would be okay if all authors went straight to self publishing and there was formed a real market for literary fiction online. This way authors would get more money and there would be no middle man required other than a small amount going to the file host site.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:49:25 2013 No.3687624 >>3687619 They wouldn't get more money, though. They'd get almost no money. Every author would sell exactly 5 books.

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 22:52:25 2013 No.3687627

>>3687624
I don't think so. There would be curators just like there are for music, and a user friendly directory with good sorting options of the entire literature market would help bring up to the surface the books that people actually want to read. If anything, this modernization might popularize reading again.

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 23:17:26 2013 No.3687667

I prefer real books because they allow me to flick through them. I also think being able to actually feel the book that you hold in your hands adds to enjoyment of reading.
In addition to this, they also keep old-fashioned libraries and bookshops in business. If ebooks ever took over, these places would either have to change or go out of business, and some of them may be run by people who are either technophobic or too old-fashioned to easily learn about them.
Finally, there are probably a lot of great books out there that have not been turned into ebooks yet. Did you know that there is, or at least was, a rumour that the "Harry Potter" books are not on Kindle?

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 23:18:26 2013 No.3687670

my preference is audio book on CD or DRM free mp3 like podiobooks and LibriVox

I like dead tree books more than ebooks

dead tree books take up a good deal of room and cost money to move long distances but can easily be loaned can read another in the collection when someone is reading one.

ebooks are cheap to move and indie authors can sell licence to ebook for under $5 that would cost over $25 for a short run on dead tree book
ebooks give near instant access to most books in Public Domain through Project Gutenberg

the biggest downside of ebooks is you licence them more than you own them like dead tree books

I do not think either is better but both have advantages and dis advantages

Dead Tree Books more likely to survive the zombie Apocalypse and maybe we should have stayed with stone tablets or scrolls

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 23:21:26 2013 No.3687677

I'm kind of stuck on this question.
I like reading real books but I like reading E-books too.
Especially,E-books tend to win when it comes up against hardcovers. No bookwrist.Definitely a plus.
But a book is still a book..I like the feel,the smell,etc. I'd be very very sad if paper books became extinct.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 23:24:25 2013 No.3687682 I think real books cause reading off an electronic device isn't that good for u. Also there's places like the old fashioned ones called the library where ppl can get books for free!!! Lol

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 23:35:25 2013 No.3687705 File: 29 KB, 200x200, 65793_consider the following.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Most people only read a single book at a time. I can understand why they would be hesitant to shell out $100 or so to carry an entire library at one time.

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 23:46:25 2013 No.3687738 >>3687212 People become attached to the positive escapist experiences they have while reading books and don't want to give that up.

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 23:55:25 2013 No.3687764

>>3687212
It doesn't.
However, I prefer a hard copy in most cases.
The digital book makes a lot of sense.
I dig being able to write in my books, being able to place a sickynote on a page, being able to grab it and not worry about whether or not it's charged. I don't have to worry about being distracted by on-board games or internet, I don't have to worry about viruses.
I can lend a friend a book.
It seems more useful for me.
I don't see myself as superior to digital-reader users.
It just works better for me.
I will likely have some sort of reader at a point in my life.

Anonymous Tue Apr 23 23:59:25 2013 No.3687768

>>3687566
All books are available in digital format, pretty much. If they can be bought, they are.

Use 1dollarscan.com to get books scanned. Whenever I wanna read a book that I cant find online, I just buy a cheap copy in the US and have it scanned. Then i get a PDF, and then i upload that to ebook sites, thus expanding the global ebook library. :)

>>	Anonymous Tue Apr 23 23:59:25 2013 No.3687771 >>3687705 Those are quickly made up in saved expenses on books, if they read any significant amount.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 24 00:16:25 2013 No.3687810 >>3687764 This. Notes on a kindle just arent as easy as writing in the margins or underlining/circling things or dog-earing a page. I like hard copies for practical reasons.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 24 08:17:09 2013 No.3688608 >>3687254 Pynchon didn't want his books made digital

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 24 08:22:08 2013 No.3688621 >>3687212 I don't know anyone that 'rejects' digital books, you ass hat. Some people just like the feeling of holding a hard copy in their hands, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Anonymous Wed Apr 24 08:37:06 2013 No.3688655

>>3688621
Some people just want to drive gas guzzling SUVs, nothing wrong with that. Some people just like tropical hardwood furniture, nothing wrong with that. Some people just like tiger skin carpets, nothing wrong with that. Some people just like to dump chemicals, nothing wrong with that etc etc.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 24 08:47:06 2013 No.3688671 File: 11 KB, 276x320, Lol.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3688655 Are you serious?

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 24 08:48:06 2013 No.3688673 >>3688655 I agree. So what's your point?

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 24 08:50:07 2013 No.3688677 >>3688655 he's talking about all the wasted materials and pollution created by the milling of paper, the cutting of forests and the chmical processes and gasoline use involved in the printing, transporting and packaging of books.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 24 08:52:49 2013 No.3688688 >>3688673 I believe he is saying some people wants the option where you destroy your natural environment.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 24 08:55:06 2013 No.3688698 >>3688671 >>3688673 The point is to suggest that these type of decisions can amount to more than 'just sorta like holding dis I just kinda prefer ivory chess pieces man that's all there is to it man nothing wrong with it bro'.

Anonymous Wed Apr 24 08:55:06 2013 No.3688700

>>3688655
>>3688677
>>3688688
LOL. LOL! I hope that is his point, because if so, he's a fucking retard. He does realize that the construction of computers and e-readers and anything you need for electronic books is far more harmful to the environment than the production of books right?

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 24 08:56:06 2013 No.3688703 >>3688698 Well, lucky me. That IS your point. You're a fucking retard.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 24 08:57:06 2013 No.3688705 >>3688700 E-reader (including all the servers to push the books to you etc) is more resource efficient as soon as you start your 21st book on it. Nice try though. Don't forget logistics are to be included in the comparison.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 24 09:00:06 2013 No.3688714 Maybe I just like my hardcover copy of rincewind the wizzard because it's physical and not dependent on being on some screen or electronics to exist. I can read it anywhere. It also has nice cover art.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 24 09:01:49 2013 No.3688717 >>3688705 Bullshit. The production of electronics are one of the leading causes of environmental degradation. Also, you know what the leading cause of deforestation is? Pastures. For cattle.

Anonymous Wed Apr 24 09:08:49 2013 No.3688730

>>3688717
>Bullshit. The production of electronics are one of the leading causes of environmental degradation.
Obviously, since most people have a shitload of devices and just a handful of books, not to mention all the technology that is needed in all kinds of professional ways. Like on the ships dragging your books around the earth, for example. Still, if you read a lot, the e-reader leads out to be less straining on the environment. it also contributes to a more fluid and free way of distribution and takes power away from established publishers and distributors.

Just look at Iranman with his digital Kharms smuggled beyond the censors via the glorious internet.

Anonymous Wed Apr 24 09:10:49 2013 No.3688732

Actual/ physical/ leaf literature is the only way to prevent the loss of... Havent you read 1984? I mean, all the other stuff thats come to pass & you doubt whether the powers that be would very much like to have the ability to chang some books, erase others completely?

Im not being clear. Why dont you fear your precious literature being tyranized? Keeping it exclusively online makes that truly possible. Its not safe.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 24 09:20:48 2013 No.3688746 >>3688732 You should send two equally sized teams of people out, one to destroy all physical copies of Mein Kampf and one to destroy all digital copies and see who gets closest to success.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 24 09:21:48 2013 No.3688751 >>3688746 All you need to do is knock out the power-grid and you have successfully destroyed all digital copies of it.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 24 09:25:48 2013 No.3688761 >>3688751 Yes, all hard disks will evaporate. Lel. Also, you make it sound like knocking out all the electricity in the world is easy.

Anonymous Wed Apr 24 09:35:48 2013 No.3688796

>>3688730
all the mining, manufacture and transport of a typical ereader doesn't use up a tenth of the resources, nor create as much pollution, as a yera of life for a jersey cow. For the damage a dog does in its entire lifetime, you could have eighty ereaders. Do some math.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 24 09:41:48 2013 No.3688811 This thread is fucking stupid. Just thought I'd drop by to let you all know.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 24 09:42:48 2013 No.3688814 >>3688796 Are you responding to the right post? I'm in favour of e-readers.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 24 09:45:49 2013 No.3688823 >>3688814 No one is in DISFAVOR of e-readers you twit.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 24 09:47:48 2013 No.3688831 >>3688823 I'm confused. Why are you complaining about dogs out of nowhere? The dogs are not the issue here.

>>	Anonymous Wed Apr 24 09:50:49 2013 No.3688845 >>3688831 There is no issue here. You're arguing against no one.

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/lit/ - Literature