Sorry! You need to sign inor sign up before you can comment.

27 comments
Sort by:
charlie2861 0 karmaJune 2013
i would've loved it if and the end it just said 'TITS.'
junklit 0 karmaJune 2013
I have a copy of the Odyssey that is four times older than me. You can't explain that...
conniethedon 0 karmaJune 2013
what's a book?
Thizzin +1 karmaJune 2013
"So you're saying you look at a bunch of pages with squiggly lines ad you know all that? You're like... a wizard" — Gilly, Game of Thrones.
digitalbum 0 karmaJune 2013
This is EXACTLY what I thought of when I saw this post. You beat me to it, sir (or madam).
uberdoom +8 karma10 gift!June 2013
Carl FUCKING SAGAN, people.
SuckerManiac331 0 karmaJune 2013
Okay, I've read all the comments. Everyone's points here are all valid which is surprising on the internet. However, I prefer books simply over the feel. There is nothing better then opening the cover of a book and smelling that distinct book smell (or is that just me). E-Books are good for an quick novel fix and are much more portable, but I'd be extremely sad if they replaced books completely.
Alkan23 -4 karmaJune 2013
Cool, but I think Carl could have demystified the concept of physical information and not compare it to magic. That's why science is awesome: we get to learn new things and not see things as if they're supernatural. I like when natural phenomenon is described as "elegant," not "magical." Nonetheless, I still love Sagan, and he is truly missed.
flamuck +1 karmaJune 2013
Sufficiently advanced science is indistinguishable from magic.If A=B, then B=A; therefore, magic is science.Logic.All levity aside, Carl Sagan was a fan of pointing out the wondrous nature of the universe- he may use the word "magical" simply to point out how amazing such a concept is. He obviously doesn't really think it's magic- just that it's an astounding technology that we use every day and take for granted, and we should take a moment to consider just how amazing it is.
Alkan23 0 karmaJune 2013
Haha. "Logic." Logic requires consistent definitions. Your definition of magic and my definition of magic are completely different. Also, "magical" is a vague word that usually means "spectacular," without referring to a metaphysical concept. The thing about information is that it appears to be very magical. Like, we can cure cancer and understand other people with information. Information isn't a physical object, so it has an ethereal quality (sort of like energy), but it isn't actually metaphysical (obviously). Likewise, I find it to be far more beautiful to describe the true nature and power of physical information, because information is more important than the medium. For instance, my body is made out of different stuff than it was when I was a baby, but how am I the same person if I'm a completely new set of atoms? I am physical information.
Polymathyisgood +2 karmaJune 2013
I don't think you understand the definition of magic.
texasman208 +5 karmaJune 2013You're Awesome
I approve of this message. Fuck E-readers, Carl knows what is up.
digitalbum 0 karmaJune 2013
I have a kindle, I like it. And Carl, RIP, died before they were invented. He might have owned one.
SideshowJon36 +1 karmaJune 2013
I love the smell and feel of real books, but since I move pretty much once a year, it's handy to have my library weigh a couple ounces instead of a ton.
Nemesis115 0 karmaJune 2013Thumb Up (Batman)
That smell. That smell.
DUBWoBWoBwobWOBWUb [m] +11 karma5 gift!June 2013No.
A fair point, but you see books are amongst a sea of products that require paper, the obscene amount of water to process that paper, and the energy that is required to process that paper. Now I know everyone hates the 'Sustainability' speech, but 100 years ago the world population was only 1.65 billion, and providing books for a minority of those people certainly was not an easy task. The paper and lumber industries soared. Owning literature was in vogue and a sign of status as well as an attribute of intelligence in that era. But now, the estimated world population sits around 7.1 billion people. With literacy and education rates at an immeasurably all-time high book and paper production is one of the largest multi-billion dollar a year industries in the entire world. So, what am I saying? That bound paper books will continue to be a treasure in the world of literature, but in the face of these exponentially rising numbers they are no longer a long term solution for the relay of information. Sure we could most likely continue to produce paper to fill the needs, but the fact is; technology is moving forward. These stories can either be transferred to digital, or be damned to whittle away into obscurity and out of circulation. Great novels and works lost because someone was too nostalgic too be bothered to transfer these great works into a format where they will be adored and admired for generations. I have a growing library of bound books myself, but E-reading is realistic and perfectly enjoyable.
redspeckled +4 karmaJune 2013
You have some really valid points, but e-reading is a really privileged experience. Plus, if you did a life-cycle analysis on a book versus an e-reader, it is likely a much higher draw of energy to create a metal object that relies on software. Yes, an e-reader has a wealth of benefits to it. It is much more portable than taking your personal collection of favourite novels (unless you have Hermione's bag), but technology can fail, and books are the hard copies that can be preserved. 5 karma to you though, for actually holding my attention for your entire comment.
DUBWoBWoBwobWOBWUb [m] +4 karmaJune 2013Gentleman's Approval
Good point about a possibly inevitable 'dark ages' situation; that was not factored into my line of thinking. I guess that makes backing that information up in a fool-proof format all the more important. I think the 'cloud' will one day transcend our increasingly primitive forms of storing information. But that is another complex theory for another day.
Kitya [m] +3 karmaJune 2013
Are ... Are stories not stories once they're in electronic form?
digitalbum 0 karmaJune 2013
True dat. Or on a Kindle, or napkin, or painting, or iPhone, or lite-brite, or painting, or tattoo, or freagin' etch-a-sketch. If done well.
Gunryo +6 karmaJune 2013
I appreciate my e-reader for its utility in providing me with consistent, on-the-go resource texts and emergency novels when I'm in a pinch. However, there's something to be said for the transcendental qualities of both media; in a room surrounded by loaded bookshelves, as I am now, I feel as though I am in the presence of greatness. I am reminded of the scene in Harry Potter where Harry approaches Voldemort in the companionship of his predecessors -- this is what it makes me feel like to be surrounded by my intellectual forefathers. On the other hand, it's bewildering to look at my smart phone and realize that, loaded onto it, is enough information to fill a skyscraper. To consider that makes me feel very large and very powerful, even as contemplating my placement in the universe as a whole makes me feel very small and pointless.
texasman208 +10 karmaJune 2013
It loses part of the experience of owning an actual book. I know some people like electronic books, but it's just not the same. Also that collection of books in the pic would all fit on one thing and just feel...empty. I'd rather have a library, rather than a bunch of books on one tablet. But hey, that's just like, my opinion
Nemesis115 +1 karmaJune 2013
I agree! A story is a story no matter what you use to read it, but an e-reader and a book are two completely different things, to me.If you download a 200 year old story on to an e-reader, it's just an old story, but buying a 200 year old book is a completely different experience, it's like holding history in your hands. I do own an e-reader though, and they are good, but I only resorted to buying one because I currently have no more room to put my books. That and the fact that it's easier to carry 100 books around on a little machine than it is to carry 100 books in a bag.Owning books is sooooo much better though. There's nothing more beautiful than a room filled with books.
Kitya [m] +1 karmaJune 2013
While I do prefer books, I'm also a student, and poordom is a factor. The other day I actually got critised for reading from a Kindle, and I'm like, "Bitch, the story's the same, I'm just bypassing the printing costs."
Nemesis115 0 karmaJune 2013
Well if you read a lot, Kindles do work out a hell of a lot cheaper than buying actual books. Save a lot more space too. I'll always be a book guy, but I do sneakily give my Kindle some lovin' too.
Nemesis115 +1 karmaJune 2013
I agree! A story is a story no matter what you use to read it, but an e-reader and a book are two completely different things, to me.If you download a 200 year old story on to an e-reader, it's just an old story, but buying a 200 year old book is a completely different experience, it's like holding history in your hands. I do own an e-reader though, and they are good, but I only resorted to buying one because I currently have no more room to put my books. That and the fact that it's easier to carry 100 books around on a little machine than it is to carry 100 books in a bag.Owning books is sooooo much better though. There's nothing more beautiful than a room filled with books.
deleted_user +2 karmaJune 2013
I used to think like that till I got a kindle. I love actual books but e-readers are amazing things.