After 244 Years, Encyclopaedia Britannica Stops the Presses • Hacker News Board

Re: After 244 Years, Encyclopaedia Britannica Stops the Presses

#121

Post by rayhano » Wed, Mar 14, 2012, 10:41 AM UTC

rickmb wrote: post #110

Alex3917 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there is a great sadness here at the demise of something that represented an effort by western scholars to "capture the world's knowledge." Actually the original goal wasn't to capture the world's knowledge, it was to spread the enlightenment idea that man could learn about the world through reason. If anything deciding that they would be better off just generically capturing knowledge is what killed them.

I think you've just touched upon one the most fundamental of reasons why organisations fail to adapt to social and technological change: losing sight of the original mission. The same could be said about all those that are currently struggling with the changing times, from journalism, the music industry to democracy itself.

Spot on, but until the 'Facebook' classes engage with the established world (establishment), things will be built in a clumsy manner. Wikipedia is not a source of knowledge; it is collective wisdom, and we all know that you cannot make decisions by committee (hello Congress).

Re: After 244 Years, Encyclopaedia Britannica Stops the Presses

#122

Post by beza1e1 » Wed, Mar 14, 2012, 10:57 AM UTC

joering2 wrote: post #88

yarone wrote: post #48

I recall reading a story (couldn't find it just now) about how Bill Gates tried unsuccessfully to license the Britannica content to create his digital encyclopedia product. Instead, Microsoft cobbled together assets themselves and built Encarta (1993). Microsoft proceeded to trounce the print Encyclopedia business by creating a better product that severely undercut the traditional players. Here we are, 2012, finally…

I recall Encarta as the first CD that came with my CD-ROM back then it was 2x read speed. I was extremely amazed how entire encyclopedia full of content with pictures, sounds and charts that I could most likely never read from start to end can fit into one single disc of a palm size. History goes on... can you actually imagine in next 250 years what will replace Wikipedia? Imagine this: "After 250 years, Wikipedia sh…

What will replace Wikipedia? Something which generates that data automatically from the "citations". I imagine Wolfram Alpha, Freebase, DBpedia, Cyc, TrueKnowledge and more all channeled into a single interface.

Re: After 244 Years, Encyclopaedia Britannica Stops the Presses

#123

Post by davidcollantes » Wed, Mar 14, 2012, 11:26 AM UTC

rhplus wrote: post #95

grellas wrote: post #31

It is easy to disparage the Encyclopedia Britannica from a modern perspective - out-of-step, overpriced, outmaneuvered by competitors - but there is a great sadness here at the demise of something that represented an effort by western scholars to "capture the world's knowledge." Imagine assembling a "A" team of scholars and scientists, getting them to make substantial, substantive contributions in each of their respe…

I think the most notable aspect of the 1911 edition - and every edition before and since - is that each is still around, distinct and readable. I don't yet know whether people will be able to reference a '2011 edition' of Wikipedia in a hundred years time. I'm aware of various archival projects, but unless they receive continued support, we could very easily be at risk of losing vast checkpoints in the history of hum…

This I have thought of for a long time. By doing everything electronically we (or the future generations) are at risk of losing everything. Discounting the useful knowledge, we would be losing sentimental things.

I think it is sad the EB is stopping presses. I think they should continue, if only they could find a way to print it in a way the would reduce its cost considerably. Acquisitive cost, more than anything, is what is killing them.

Re: After 244 Years, Encyclopaedia Britannica Stops the Presses

#124

Post by colomon » Wed, Mar 14, 2012, 12:26 PM UTC

Domenic_S wrote: post #78

colomon wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"About half a million households pay a $70 annual fee that includes access to the full database of articles, videos, original documents and access to mobile applications." That's $35 million a year, which is not as good as the best year of the print version (which would have $150 million in sales if I'm figuring correctly), but is still not too shabby.

Books don't need a cadre of software engineers pushing out updates for iOS + every Android device, video transcoding licenses, account servicing, servers, an 800-number staffed with tech support... The book model was far better.

Do you have any actual stats to back that up?

Software doesn't need to be printed in 32 large, luxurious volumes and sold by a cadre of door-to-door salesmen.

Re: After 244 Years, Encyclopaedia Britannica Stops the Presses

#125

Post by dfan » Wed, Mar 14, 2012, 12:29 PM UTC

I still have my grandfather's 1911 set, which I am trying to still cherish after recently discovering that the whole thing is now on the internet.

My affection for physical objects like books and CDs (and I have acquired a LOT of them) has become increasingly anachronistic, even just over the last five years.

Re: After 244 Years, Encyclopaedia Britannica Stops the Presses

#126

Post by kamjam » Wed, Mar 14, 2012, 12:35 PM UTC

grellas wrote: post #31

It is easy to disparage the Encyclopedia Britannica from a modern perspective - out-of-step, overpriced, outmaneuvered by competitors - but there is a great sadness here at the demise of something that represented an effort by western scholars to "capture the world's knowledge." Imagine assembling a "A" team of scholars and scientists, getting them to make substantial, substantive contributions in each of their respe…

It is sad indeed, especially since it was proper factual information properly researched by people paid to do so. But in reality, I, like most people, rarely pick up an encyclopaedia. It's easier when having an argument at the pub to just pull out my phone and check on Wikipedia.

But, just as I was sad to hear that Kodak is filing for bankruptcy, this is more due to nostalgia. Businesses need to keep moving with the times and the way people consume products and services in these fast changing modern times.

Unfortunately for Encyclopedia Britannica they do not have enough income unlike the Hollywood lobbyists to pay the protection money.

Re: After 244 Years, Encyclopaedia Britannica Stops the Presses

#127

Post by Moschops » Wed, Mar 14, 2012, 1:09 PM UTC

Hopefully the electronic edition will keep going for the foreseeable future; replacing its effect ourselves would be a real pain. Wikipedia just does not replace it; Wikipedia aims to presents consensus of sources on the web (even when it is broadly acknowledged that consensus is wrong), EB aims to present correctness.

Re: After 244 Years, Encyclopaedia Britannica Stops the Presses

#128

Post by pbhjpbhj » Wed, Mar 14, 2012, 1:14 PM UTC

mojuba wrote: post #81

lukev wrote: post #77

Well damn. Now I feel I need to go out and buy a copy, so I don't get sent all the way back to the stone age in the event of a massive solar flare or nuclear war or zombie apocalypse.

I wonder what technologies and goods would a survivor be able to recreate based on Britannica alone.

That sounds like a gameshow pitch in the making.

Re: After 244 Years, Encyclopaedia Britannica Stops the Presses

#129

Post by bdg » Wed, Mar 14, 2012, 1:23 PM UTC

rayhano wrote: post #121

rickmb wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you've just touched upon one the most fundamental of reasons why organisations fail to adapt to social and technological change: losing sight of the original mission. The same could be said about all those that are currently struggling with the changing times, from journalism, the music industry to democracy itself.

Spot on, but until the 'Facebook' classes engage with the established world (establishment), things will be built in a clumsy manner. Wikipedia is not a source of knowledge; it is collective wisdom, and we all know that you cannot make decisions by committee (hello Congress).

If there's a decision I want to die: I send it to committee for a slow, painful death. Sometimes it will take years of doing nothing before anyone notices we solved the prob elm the way the opposition wanted.

Re: After 244 Years, Encyclopaedia Britannica Stops the Presses

#130

Post by agildehaus » Wed, Mar 14, 2012, 1:58 PM UTC

rickmb wrote: post #110

Alex3917 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there is a great sadness here at the demise of something that represented an effort by western scholars to "capture the world's knowledge." Actually the original goal wasn't to capture the world's knowledge, it was to spread the enlightenment idea that man could learn about the world through reason. If anything deciding that they would be better off just generically capturing knowledge is what killed them.

I think you've just touched upon one the most fundamental of reasons why organisations fail to adapt to social and technological change: losing sight of the original mission. The same could be said about all those that are currently struggling with the changing times, from journalism, the music industry to democracy itself.

Let's call it "The History Channel Effect".