marvindanig

Yes, but a dimly lit room will cause more exertion on the pupillary muscles anyway, because the flux of light is way too low for all types of focused activity like reading. Both undivided attention and the flux of light have a significant influence on the pupillary state of the eyes.

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4634867/

100%. The nature of light that falls on the retina doesn’t change whether it’s reflected off of a surface or shine directly via an incandescent bulb.

What matters to the eye is the flux of light (i.e. intensity) and for that, the emissive screens are better since they are not dependent on ambient lighting. Great point!

Counter-intuitive, but a reflective screen is potentially more damaging to the eyes than a transflective (illuminated) one because with the reflective one, the reader has to depend on the ambient lighting entirely. Many times the flux of light falling into the retina of a reader may not be enough and prompt the pupil to open more widely than required, and set them eyes up for quicker degradation.

This is an excellent hardware project! Open hardware e-reader is definitely a step in the right direction.

However, I like to believe that the future of books is independent of hardware. Platform agnostic and liberated from hardware––so to speak. If hardware is the go-to consumer experience, then the dead-tree medium isn't doing bad either.

The real deal is a pure software solution that blends the world of books and the web together into a single unified resource that is both open and accessible to everyone. A Netflix of books, perhaps–although, I know this idea has failed a couple of times already. Just my 2 cents.

How is the web browser experience on the ReMarkable? It kinda sucks on the Kindle and forces me to consider an iPad to make up for open access.

You are comparing on-the-web text and conversations with downloaded longform artifacts (files) that do not register read events like the other smaller resources.

According to some purists, books have not even happened on the web yet, and one could argue that a book and a file are not the same products to begin with. First principles and all that.

There are some things that both a book index and even full text search cannot solve. For example, if the teacher asks why in the Pride and Prejudice does Elizabeth lose temper on Mr. Darcy?, those smart-on-the-surface solutions can't take you anywhere.

On the other hand my friend from the other school can easily tell me to go to page number 432 on the book to find the exact answer because labeled pagination has reference accessibility [1] along with random access.

[1] https://bubblin.io/blog/referential-accessibility

I read all my books on the iPad. No hassle at all.

Proprietary tablet vs. a browser feature on the open web–which option would you take?

That's a spurious claim! Pulp harvesting often destroys the native flora and fauna, and the cost of lost forests and animal habitat cannot be recovered.

You need a peer-reviewed research to know the difference between natural habitat and cultivated land?

Wow. Thank you for taking the time to respond at length to the demo I shared. This will help me improve/improvise it a little more!

Overall, there’s a lot of work before a book like this goes native on the web. Better still, it the experience is standardized across vendors—which I have attempted as far as possible with the available tech. I mean scrolling is skeuomorphism off of the physical scrolls too, but that’s the point of start for a root problem here. Native books have never happened on the web, and that’s one main reason why people continue to buy the dead-tree; the lack of availability, bad experience and all.

> Physical reference books are often accessed in a non-linear fashion, and often not alone. But let's forget that second part and focus on non-linear.

The demo does implement random access via page numbers on the tail of the url. This affords both random access i.e non-linear reading and referential accessibility [1].

https://bubblin.io/blog/referential-accessibility

1. They last a long time has zero significance because the content is outdated in a year or less.

2. You don't need studies to know the difference between a natural habitat and cultivated land. And that the former is non-renewable.

It looks like this comment is coming from one of those pulp-farming ambassadors spreading misinformation/whataboutism. This happens every time when a case for online publishing with direct payments to authors is put forward. Ha!

I agree with you on Kindles; they're certainly worse than having books on the open web, even if it were to be paid content.

I also agree with you that page turning experience is _the_ native control of a book and that it adds to the saccadic perception of moving forward with time.

B.t.w, I made this demo for exactly the reasons you mentioned, and I'm an older developer too!:

https://bubblin.io/book/a-florida-sketch-book-by-bradford-to...

> Should we? I spend my life staring

We probably should reduce felling trees for content that's read just once and then it goes outdated. I know a lot pulp-cultivation ambassadors say that it is a renewable resource, but in practicality pulp farming is not entirely renewable.

Cultivation takes place where an old forest once stood and was razed to the ground; and that loss of natural habitat is incalculable in costs–and to what end? A lifeless object on our bookshelf (which too is another dead tree) to show off with more outdated technical content?

Why the dead-tree?

Can we not try monetization of your book straight on the web instead, right here on your website? As developers we should lead the change away from pulp to electronic screens…

Edit: I mean, I'd be happy to pay the author (note, not donate*) for this corpus online.

I recently came across a US Government funded study [1] that used anecdata of 12 people–just 12 tired souls!– to put forth a seal on the claim that e-ink screens are better for the human eyes than emissive type of displays.

Edit: Reality however: the opposite is true. Only in some scenarios (like reading under open sun) does one type of screen outdo the other. In most usual cases, that is indoor reading, the emissive display is better for the eyes.

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5929099/

Right to repair is an absolute must. Period.

The funnest piece of information (and a notable one) is the amount of money these "smartest folks on the planet" put into all of these bullshit projects. And the list doesn't even include the photo-sharing apps that met Bay Area's standard of innovation for rest of the world to follow.

Ha!

Almost 200% of commenters and lurkers on this thread buy dead-tree books on the design patterns and best practices of a javascript framework from 2012. Yeah, not much hope with that here.

lol. I never mentioned the political leanings of the anti-vaxxer type; just that they are either very stupid people or misinformed by propaganda originating somewhere. it's interesting to see multiple downvotes on my comments from the folks who probably saw what's not written up there, just like you did. the "conservative/racist type" you said?

quick question: what made you put the labels conservative and racist together?

also, a liberal eating granola bar might be stupid, but their actions do not put anyone else in danger. an anti-vaxxer however is a risk to the society in that they are an active and potential host to a disease in circulation.

Well, given that a significant percentage of citizenry is anti-vaxxer-level-stupid, there isn't much improvement over people trusting their local Government either…

The ad industry isn't going away, if you're thinking of a world in the future sans ads. With the Brave's model, at least you are able to make some profit for yourself.

It's not utopian, but works from a capitalist's standpoint. And a lot of real users like it!

Awesome! Love the illustrations and the subtle animations underneath.

Quick feedback: My nephew prefers page turns (curling) on their iPad. I assume that he prefers it over a powerpoint style slides that we currently have on your book. Well, at least he spent some time flipping through the animated pages!

True, but you'll be surprised at how many people want astrology and stuff like crystals and scented stones and magical beans across the United States. It's huge and truly a contest between literacy and the belief system.

My experience: iPad with a pencil is much better. But it is a personal choice in the end, I'd say.

> Hardware wise, it looks great, but I seldom hear good things about the software, only that it is "improving" for years now.

It was pretty much DOA for me. Over the years I have learned/trained my hand to keep away from pen and paper. Well, mostly. Asking the same limb to now go back into taking notes by hand or drawing free-hand is a no-go for me. I learned this the hard way. And yes, laggy software makes it worse.

I recommend the newsletter The Flipside [1] by Annafi Wahed. She and the team are doing an amazing job bringing the two sides together.

Shout out to Annafi– how are you all doing there?!

[1] https://www.theflipside.io/

Not if they are black though, isn't it?! Then the execution is summary and pretty much live on-street.

Could you provide the source indicating that only 0.1% of cops are bad and the remaining 99.9% are good?

Meanwhile a reality check for you: https://twitter.com/ProfessorPenis/status/140430555390457036...

"the cops showed up with bear mace and rubber bullets for the protesters. THE PEOPLE administered aid. THE PEOPLE apprehended the driver. the cops did nothing but antagonize the crowd of people that were almost murdered."

I’d say it is less by Modi directly and more by the nazi inspired organization called the RSS that’s shaping up India lately. The only difference is that they won’t be repeating the hubris/mistakes of a Fuhrer style set up with a single point of failure.