3 ms·

Are you completely unable to distinguish between "it is theoretically possible" and "it is extremely difficult due to the dominance of a handful of giant compan

• rsj_hn 6y ago
  Complaining that it's very difficult for all 130 million books to get public attention is missing the whole point. Of course it's hard. It will always be hard. Moreover, the idea that there is a handful of gatekeepers is completely unremarkable to anyone who knows what a "gatekeeper" is. Yet we want gatekeepers because they make it easier, not harder for people to find books. It would not be any easier for anyone in a world without gatekeepers and a big pile of 130 million books sitting in front of everyone. None of this is interesting or subtle, and all but a handful of people are aware of these issues and find them banal, which you have mistakenly interpreted as meaning that people are unaware of these issues. We are aware and don't care. What we do care about is whether there are more barriers today than say, thirty years ago, and I think the answer is "there are fewer barriers" even though of course we still have gatekeepers and of course it is extremely difficult for almost all books to be well known. These are just basic applications of the pigeon-hole principle and are not worthy of any outrage or even any further commentary.
• deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]