Live data from Hacker News

After 244 Years, Encyclopaedia Britannica Stops the Presses

mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com

141–142 of 142 posts

Re: After 244 Years, Encyclopaedia Britannica Stops the Presses

#141
post #139
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure more carbon is being used in cutting down the trees to turn into paper, and then shipping all of that paper to customers.

Actually chainsaws are pretty efficient. I say there is no way more "carbon" is used shipping a few thousand books than powering the entire internet.

you think it's more efficient to ship everyone an entire set of encyclopedias than to keep wikipedia's servers running?

Re: After 244 Years, Encyclopaedia Britannica Stops the Presses

#142
post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The scenario where paper seems to have a serious advantage over digital is when people disappear or lose interest in maintaining digital copies for a few decades. Paper just sits, relatively inert, in libraries or boxes in peoples attics. Meanwhile, finding a reader for the Jazz disk with your thesis has become impossible.

This is an argument for large-scale backups. If you're already maintaining around 100 TB of assorted backup data, the extra effort of preserving another megabyte of data is negligible, even if you don't consciously care about that particular megabyte. My thesis is in Dropbox, and I emailed it to my GMail address. Both companies seem likely to faithfully back up my thesis for the indefinite future, because it would li…

I did GMail-myself backups before Dropbox was around, and now have stuff on a Time Machine backup as well. But the networked backups are dependent on Google and Dropbox actively maintaining their servers for me, which it makes sense for them to do, but it's hard to depend on. If Google lost all traces of me today, that would be fine because I have a local backup, but it would be no big deal to them because I'm not a paying customer. As far as I know, they don't even have a legal obligation to maintain my data. If I have a photo or text I want to be available in 30 years, I think that printing it out and sticking on a bookshelf is much more reliable than depending on a nebulous third party or trusting that I won't inadvertently lose a set of backups.
Post reply on HN