I think this is disingenuous comparison. When we read a book we can estimate the amount of data we're taking in based on the character count (each character being represented by some fixed amount of bits).
What you're suggesting on the other hand is something akin to counting the number of pixels on each page we look at. That's absurd overestimate of the amount of data a person reading is actually taking in.
What you're suggesting on the other hand is something akin to counting the number of pixels on each page we look at. That's absurd overestimate of the amount of data a person reading is actually taking in.