I bought the only physical encyclopedia still in print • Hacker News Board

Re: I bought the only physical encyclopedia still in print

#131

Post by bryanlarsen » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 6:05 PM UTC

JKCalhoun wrote: post #30

bryanlarsen wrote: post #3

In the 80's the encyclopedia filled the same niche that a smartphone does for me now. Whenever I had a small number of minutes to kill I grabbed a random volume and flipped open to a random page.

Except I don't flip to a random page on the internet. Like you, I am remembering the serendipity of the encyclopedia (and libraries for that matter).

Both HN & encyclopia's are curated sets of articles that work similarly when in a "filling time" mode -- they present you with a set of articles and you read the interesting ones.

Re: I bought the only physical encyclopedia still in print

#132

Post by nemo44x » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 6:07 PM UTC

jandrese wrote: post #46

jasode wrote: post #25

>Later, I introduced the encyclopedia to my kids. They had never used a print encyclopedia, and they looked at me like I was an alien, almost as if I were speaking a different language (such a trite expression, but man, is it accurate). I had hoped they could use the encyclopedia as an old-fashioned reference, but so far, they have completely and utterly rejected it, not even expressing interest or opening it once. T…

The limitations of the old style encyclopedia are immediately obvious when you go to actually use it. Thousands of articles that only barely scratch the surface on the topic. Even then if you're interested in something even mildly obscure it won't be in there at all. Of course you couldn't use it as a source when writing a paper, and worst of all they didn't even provide the sourcing information for the articles that…

I think the idea behind them was you'd read them and when coming across a topic of interest you'd hit up the card catalogue at the library to find books that go deeper into the topic.

Re: I bought the only physical encyclopedia still in print

#133

Post by jjtheblunt » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 6:26 PM UTC

jasode wrote: post #25

>Later, I introduced the encyclopedia to my kids. They had never used a print encyclopedia, and they looked at me like I was an alien, almost as if I were speaking a different language (such a trite expression, but man, is it accurate). I had hoped they could use the encyclopedia as an old-fashioned reference, but so far, they have completely and utterly rejected it, not even expressing interest or opening it once. T…

Funk & Wagnalls also had an English dictionary in the early 1970s with excellent etymologies, which seem absent from dictionaries when i've looked in a Barnes and Noble store.

Re: I bought the only physical encyclopedia still in print

#134

Post by madcaptenor » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 6:27 PM UTC

function_seven wrote: post #107

jasode wrote: post #25

>Later, I introduced the encyclopedia to my kids. They had never used a print encyclopedia, and they looked at me like I was an alien, almost as if I were speaking a different language (such a trite expression, but man, is it accurate). I had hoped they could use the encyclopedia as an old-fashioned reference, but so far, they have completely and utterly rejected it, not even expressing interest or opening it once. T…

I remember this vividly. The end-cap on one of the aisles was where the encyclopedias were stocked. The "A" volume was sold for $0.01. One penny! I remember being incredulous at the low price. My dad: "Wait until you see what they charge for 'B', kiddo."

They should charge $0.01 for the first volume and twice as much for each successive volume.

Re: I bought the only physical encyclopedia still in print

#135

Post by madcaptenor » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 6:28 PM UTC

mindslight wrote: post #48

jasode wrote: post #25

>Later, I introduced the encyclopedia to my kids. They had never used a print encyclopedia, and they looked at me like I was an alien, almost as if I were speaking a different language (such a trite expression, but man, is it accurate). I had hoped they could use the encyclopedia as an old-fashioned reference, but so far, they have completely and utterly rejected it, not even expressing interest or opening it once. T…

I've got fond memories of my Funk & Wagnalls Science encyclopedia. It was "my" encyclopedia - it wasn't useful for all school projects, but it was great to just read. As opposed to the school library's encyclopedia that was better for more direct queries, but filled with topics I didn't care enough about to read through linearly. I never associated it with being the budget option, but I don't think my set was compris…

I had that one too!

Re: I bought the only physical encyclopedia still in print

#136

Post by wizzwizz4 » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 6:29 PM UTC

cubefox wrote: post #103

ravenstine wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know what modern encyclopedias are like (assuming you're referring to physical ones), but I really do think I learned more from encyclopedias and textbooks than from class when I was in school. Some teachers were brilliant and could teach effectively, but in most cases I really was better off just reading through the books, which I actually enjoyed. If modern encyclopedias are like Wikipedia, then I can see h…

> If modern encyclopedias are like Wikipedia, then I can see how you wouldn't find them interesting. Although Wikipedia does have interesting information within it, it's now written so verbosely that my eyes glaze over most of the time. Yeah, there's simple.wikipedia.org, but it's not nearly complete enough. The problem with the writing in Wikipedia articles is that they are often extremely detailed in certain aspect…

> One problem is that sometimes articles are slightly biased because the author has certain views,

I just assumed that I hadn't done enough philosophising, and had come to the Wrong conclusion. Glad to see it's not just me!

Re: I bought the only physical encyclopedia still in print

#137

Post by dspillett » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 6:34 PM UTC

jandrese wrote: post #46

jasode wrote: post #25

>Later, I introduced the encyclopedia to my kids. They had never used a print encyclopedia, and they looked at me like I was an alien, almost as if I were speaking a different language (such a trite expression, but man, is it accurate). I had hoped they could use the encyclopedia as an old-fashioned reference, but so far, they have completely and utterly rejected it, not even expressing interest or opening it once. T…

The limitations of the old style encyclopedia are immediately obvious when you go to actually use it. Thousands of articles that only barely scratch the surface on the topic. Even then if you're interested in something even mildly obscure it won't be in there at all. Of course you couldn't use it as a source when writing a paper, and worst of all they didn't even provide the sourcing information for the articles that…

> Of course you couldn't use it as a source when writing a paper

Much the same as wikipedia and similar.

But, like wikipedia, they were sometimes useful starting points with those short articles hopefully giving you a keyword or two, or a reference to other articles in the encyclopedia itself, so you had something useful to search the rest of the library (by hand or by asking the original intelligent search algorithm: a friendly librarian!) for fuller texts about.

Also as a child I remember just randomly skipping to a page and finding some interesting fact, then following the references to elsewhere. I could spend hours learning random things I'd never actually need to know that way!

Re: I bought the only physical encyclopedia still in print

#138

Post by thanatos519 » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 6:43 PM UTC

jjtheblunt wrote: post #133

jasode wrote: post #25

>Later, I introduced the encyclopedia to my kids. They had never used a print encyclopedia, and they looked at me like I was an alien, almost as if I were speaking a different language (such a trite expression, but man, is it accurate). I had hoped they could use the encyclopedia as an old-fashioned reference, but so far, they have completely and utterly rejected it, not even expressing interest or opening it once. T…

Funk & Wagnalls also had an English dictionary in the early 1970s with excellent etymologies, which seem absent from dictionaries when i've looked in a Barnes and Noble store.

I had that dictionary. So thorough that I did an entire research project just by reading definitions!

Re: I bought the only physical encyclopedia still in print

#139

Post by alaxsxaq » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 6:51 PM UTC

I still have great memories laying on the living room floor reading volume after volume of the Encyclopedia Britannica during family TV evenings. The set came with a language dictionary covering 5-10 languages; I spent endless hours "learning" Russian and Arabic from that book. I still have those books and the cabinet they were sold with.

Re: I bought the only physical encyclopedia still in print

#140

Post by dabluecaboose » Fri, Jun 09, 2023, 7:07 PM UTC

stereolambda wrote: post #108

dabluecaboose wrote: post #10

>When she saw the large photo of a shark spread across the spines of the 22 volumes, she frowned and said, "I don't want to see a big-ass shark every day when I walk in the room." I've got to be honest, reading this I went through a similar range of emotions as the author: Surprise that a print encyclopedia still exists, curiosity about it, and a nibbling desire to buy one. But I gotta agree with his wife: I don't wa…

I for one find it sympathetic that they are trying to appeal to schoolchildren (who are supposed to use it) instead of adult tastes. I wonder how much is it based on market motivation? If you want a set of serious looking tomes as a visual thing, there are plenty of options on the market. If you are really serious, you can even re-bind them custom. Which I'd find kind of ridiculous for this set, but I think this is w…

That's fair, and I think everyone is right on the money that the pictures make it more appealing to children and easier to put back in order.

I suppose were I to entertain this idea for myself, since it's mostly a vanity/interest project rather than a functional one, it's not like it would be out of the question to have them re-bound. I wonder what the cost would be.