Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Flying Dice]

I'm split. Electronic publishing provides ease of access and much wider variety, but it still loses out on the tactile sensations and the smell of a good book.

That said, most paper-and-glue publishers can go fuck themselves. They're the reason so many areas of work are filled with derivative trash: they're terrified of risks, and thus only publish three things in general: established authors, authors who ape popular themes and motifs, and authors taken under the wings of established authors. People have started publishing online because it's both less expensive and vastly less difficult than convincing an agent for one of the traditional publication companies to give a new author a chance.

Ever complain about shelves being filled with dozens of copy-paste zombie/steampunk/[whatever] books, "urban fantasy" about fucking undead and werewolves (in both senses of the word), crappy YA fantasy that wouldn't know an original idea if it was impaled on one, &c.? Yeah. That's the publishers at work. Occasionally a talented, good, and new author will manage to slip through the cracks, but it's damned rare these days, and you won't find them on the shelves of the mainline brick&mortar stores.

[Frumple]

"urban fantasy" about fucking undead and werewolves (in both senses of the word)

SPEAKING OF WHICH!

I actually saw this in a dollar store today. I was impressed.

Didn't buy it, because no, but impressed.

E: Ah, the reviews.

Best Zombie Romance Anthology EVER!
 By fredtownward VINE VOICE on October 2, 2010
Format: Paperback
It will probably come as no surprise to learn that this is the ONLY zombie romance anthology ever.

[Graknorke]

There's a deluge of speampunk novels? This is the first I've heard of it.

Publishers are pretty much ruled by risk-avoidance though. What else do you expect from a huge company that is obliged to not make a loss for its shareholders? Can't be throwing around stacks of money on something that might be a total flop, so instead you hedge your bets on things that'll probably shift a bit.

[Rolan7]

I have a full bookshelf (and a box somewhere) of books I read and really stood out to me.  It's basically just a fashion statement, though every now and then I'll flip through one again.  I've sent several off to young cousins over the years...  But a few I just can't bare to part with.

Ebooks on phones are easier to read, though, at night.  No need to hold them up to catch the headlights of cars behind you.  Or awkwardly balance a flashlight, or have an overhead light shining in your face.  Just a single click or mousetap to advance, too.  And the place is saved automatically without having to bend a corner or use a bookmark.

Books actually have smells?  I always thought that was a joke, but I wouldn't know.  Holding books is awkward though.

[Frumple]

Books totally have smells, especially the older ones. There's a particular scent of must that comes with a collection of books that is indeed both very compelling and quite unique.

In retrospect, I wonder if they have old book smelling candles...

E: They do! Not spending 16 bucks plus shipping for one. But they exist!

[Lord Shonus]

The biggest problem with books is the amount of dust they produce.

[LeoLeonardoIII]

Watched Idiocracy with the girlfriend. It ends, channel changes back to normal TV, and the show that's on? World's Funniest, the host is the same guy who was President Camacho in the movie, and they're playing a clip where a guy skateboards off a thing and hits himself with his board in frustration.

Guess we're well on our way to 2505.

https://xkcd.com/603/

1: Randall's retort doesn't have anything to do with my point, which was that I saw a dumb clip show of people doing dumb painful things hosted by the guy who played Camacho, immediately after turning off the movie. Completely anecdotal.
2: Randall doesn't cite any sources or even make any specific argument - just "nyah!". Believing in his opinion is the opposite of skepticism. I have to assume that the guy who made a [citation needed] comic would at least raise an eyebrow upon hearing that his word is taken as any kind of proof.
3: Randall cannot possibly counter Idiocracy's intelligence reduction argument, because he can't have enough data. Only relatively recently have industrialized societies been able to support the survival of people stupid enough to die of it, paired with the social will to actually keep them alive, and the recordkeeping of high enough quality to report from. Talk to me in 2050 and you'll have some data. Until then I'm operating off the anecdotal evidence that people around me do stupid things, so I assume they're stupid. That's as far as my actual real-world philosophy extends in this matter.

[Frumple]

... I think the best part of that mini-rant is that assuming that people doing stupid things are stupid is, itself, quite stupid :V

Differing capability in varying fields, environmental factors that may be temporarily causing poorly thought out actions by an otherwise capable person... the list just kinda' goes on. There's a lot of reasons a person who is not stupid may be acting stupidly. Assuming someone's stupid is a recipe for an unfortunate surprise...

[Loud Whispers]

Reminds me of how after I'd watched idiocracy, America's got talent was on - and some bloke got a standing ovation for hitting himself in the balls.

[Graknorke]

Could we not instead just accept that xkcd does not good moral authority make? Randall is exactly the kind of person he makes fun of, most of the time. Smug, condescending know-it-alls.

[Tawa]

Reminds me of how after I'd watched idiocracy, America's got talent was on - and some bloke got a standing ovation for hitting himself in the balls.

That guy also made it onto World's Dumbest, if memory serves.

Could we not instead just accept that xkcd does not good moral authority make? Randall is exactly the kind of person he makes fun of, most of the time. Smug, condescending know-it-alls.

Well, at least he's not this kind of lifeless asshole.

[Tack]

Black text on a white background, even the faded, yellowish white that books end up being with time, is one of the worse color contrasts for reading, imo.

Hahaha, clearly we must educate you

[Frumple]

Stuff that's unreadable doesn't count :V

Though that might be legible in default scheme, I'unno. I'm not sure why I would inflict that on myself to check, though.

[Tawa]

It actually looks very nice on default. It just rapes your eyes on Darkling.

[ArKFallen]

Why even try to read blue on Darkling without highlighting it?
Similar to yellow on the default.