USA Today: Real Books can defeat Amazon and ebooks

[TimW]

Originally Posted by QuantumIguana

I've never read anyone's thoughts. I have read the words they have written as a result of thoughts, but their actual thoughts are forever unavailable. Thoughts are mental activity.

I tried reading someone's mind once. Turns out I wasn't any good at it...so I used a Klingon Mind-Ripper instead.

[j.p.s]

Originally Posted by Ninjalawyer

It's that lack of precision that always makes me ask someone, "what real book are you reading, as opposed to any pseudo-ebook travesty you may have perverted your eyes with?"

It also annoys me to no end when someone says they watched a movie, but then it turns out that they just watched some fake "movie" on Netflix rather than hauled out a projector and reels.

Movie is too plebian. They are films, even if they were shot in digital video and never ever printed to um, er, film.

[j.p.s]

Originally Posted by QuantumIguana

I've never read anyone's thoughts. I have read the words they have written as a result of thoughts, but their actual thoughts are forever unavailable. Thoughts are mental activity.

Just today, I heard a claim (which I do not accept) on Radio Lab that people do not begin thinking until they think in words.

[GA Russell]

Originally Posted by j.p.s

Just today, I heard a claim (which I do not accept) on Radio Lab that people do not begin thinking until they think in words.

jps, that's something I first heard almost fifty years ago.

The thinking along those lines is that one's thoughts are limited to the vocabulary one knows.

Therefore, a Frenchman will have an idea that an Englishman will not, and vice versa, because the words of every language have their own nuances.

[crich70]

Originally Posted by GA Russell

jps, that's something I first heard almost fifty years ago.

The thinking along those lines is that one's thoughts are limited to the vocabulary one knows.

Therefore, a Frenchman will have an idea that an Englishman will not, and vice versa, because the words of every language have their own nuances.

I remember hearing that only a native can speak a given language properly because we learn our native tongue (English, Spanish, Russian, etc) back when we are very young and the brain is developing. Therefore though we can still learn other languages later we don't quite master them no matter how close we get to doing so.

[QuantumIguana]

Originally Posted by crich70

I remember hearing that only a native can speak a given language properly because we learn our native tongue (English, Spanish, Russian, etc) back when we are very young and the brain is developing. Therefore though we can still learn other languages later we don't quite master them no matter how close we get to doing so.

Some people seem to pick up new languages pretty easily, for others, it's a real struggle. Part of the problem is that language as it is taught is seldom the same as language as it is actually spoken. It's much easier to learn language when you are very young. It's why we didn't babytalk to our daughter. We spoke real language to her, so we could give her something to learn. By "babytalk" I'm not referring to the tone of voice people use when speaking to small children, but the pseudo-language people often use.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by j.p.s

Just today, I heard a claim (which I do not accept) on Radio Lab that people do not begin thinking until they think in words.

Probably Sapire-Whorf:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity

The principle of linguistic relativity holds that the structure of a language affects the ways in which its respective speakers conceptualize their world, i.e. their world view, or otherwise influences their cognitive processes. Popularly known as the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis, or Whorfianism, the principle is often defined to include two versions. The strong version says that language determines thought, and that linguistic categories limit and determine cognitive categories, whereas the weak version says only that linguistic categories and usage influence thought and certain kinds of non-linguistic behaviour.

[rollei]

Only thing real books can do where e-books cannot

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by rollei

Only thing real books can do where e-books cannot

Wallpaper!

[ApK]

Originally Posted by rollei

Only thing real books can do where e-books cannot

Hmm....not so sure...get a big enough video panel, and I bet some one can make a Calibre GUI that looks just like that.....

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by ApK

Hmm....not so sure...get a big enough video panel, and I bet some one can make a Calibre GUI that looks just like that.....

Or:

http://www.cnet.com/news/epson-sees-...tion-business/

And you could play XBOX, too.

[TimW]

Originally Posted by rollei

Only thing real books can do where e-books cannot

By the size and weight of that shelf, one possible answer:

"Cause the structural collapse of your home."

[shalym]

Originally Posted by TimW

By the size and weight of that shelf, one possible answer:

"Cause the structural collapse of your home."

Wow...if you think that shelf is too big or heavy, don't come to my house. Even after doing multiple purges my shelf is bigger and more full of books than that one. From looking at it, that shelf doesn't have any books piled on top of the others, and only has books one row deep. If I hadn't discovered e-reading I really would be drowning in books right now.

Shari

[Glorfindel]

Originally Posted by Phogg

I thought "Codex" referred to Felicia Day.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grCTXGW3sxQ

I thought you used them to play differant video formats.

[crich70]

Originally Posted by TimW

By the size and weight of that shelf, one possible answer:

"Cause the structural collapse of your home."

Or provide kindling for a fire if you are freezing (ala a disaster movie). That's something ebooks will never be able to do. Not that I advocate burning books in general.