Bit disappointed with TDPL build quality

[strtr]

== Quote from BCS (none at anon.com)'s article
> Hello Strtr,
> > I just got my (44E) copy of the TDPL and I love the stuff I've read so
> > far.
> >
> > But, the book as an object kind of disappoints me.. I know it isn't a
> > hard-cover, but still:
> >
> > I don't own any book with this kind of translucent pages. It makes all
> > the pages look smudgy and you can actually read the bibliography
> > through page 431. Also, maybe I don't own any books which use the same
> > cutting process, but it looks really sloppy cut.
> >
> > Maybe it's just my book, but just thought I should mention this.
> >
> Ditto on 431 but only where the isn't text covering it up. Also keep in mind
> that more opaque paper would be thicker and the book is not exactly thin
> to begin with.

Well, that's the thing, the paper in my MIT press book is quite a bit thinner, but
far less translucent. But I also found a Chinese press book which was more
translucent (although it was also 3/4 the thickness)
Maybe it was mostly the cut which made it look cheap.