Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I bought the only physical encyclopedia still in print

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 199 posts

Re: I bought the only physical encyclopedia still in print

#151

Post by JohnFen »

wiredfool wrote: post #102
jandrese wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

That's not how you use them. (at least not in my family). It was a read the whole thing deal. So much random knowledge. We had the WorldBooks, but ran across Encyclopedia Britannica in the school libraries. The Macropaedia was _far_ more in depth than the Micropeadia, or WorldBook at its best.

> It was a read the whole thing deal. So much random knowledge.

Me too. And it taught me a skill that I think was the key to my professional success: learning how apparently unrelated things can give you the key to solving problems or understanding things that are important to you.

Re: I bought the only physical encyclopedia still in print

#153

Post by gen220 »

Born in the late 90s, I spent an absurd amount of time on wikipedia in my teens. It's lack of depth on common topics at the time led me to libraries and the world of books.

As an adult, it's amazing to see how far Wikipedia has come. In spite of its perennial and well-documented issues, it has to be one of humanity's biggest accomplishments.

I think teaching "the youth" how to efficiently investigate and retrieve information is probably one of the best skills we can pass on. In 2023, I'm not sure if there's much utility for a "generic" encyclopedia in that skill tree. Although encyclopedias with an intentionally-constrained focus are still pretty valuable, IME.

Re: I bought the only physical encyclopedia still in print

#156

Post by deepspace »

gumby wrote: post #81
jandrese wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> 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. This is a feature not a bug: encyclopedia articles are breadth-first introductions to topics. If you are just mildly curious about something you'll probably get what you need. If you want to know more you'll have a view of the "landscape" and…

I agree. We had a similar non-mainstream encyclopedia set (not F&W) when I was growing up. I was a voracious reader and, at some point, read them all back to back.

That did not provide me with in-depth knowledge about anything, but even today I have a wide general knowledge, and I am interested in many subjects, some very obscure, which I credit to that encyclopedia.

More importantly, the encyclopedia gave me an overview of human knowledge and helped me to figure out what I was most interested in. The articles about radio, radar, computers and such always fascinated me and, I think, steered me into a career in engineering.

Re: I bought the only physical encyclopedia still in print

#157

Post by novaRom »

I don't speak Danish but I remember how amazing is their encyclopedia "Lille Salmonsen", one I "read" every evening in my hotel room in Kopenhagen. It was 1940 edition. Somehow with my German and English, and a bit of common knowledge, I could "read" it and it's really interesting, illustrated encyclopedia, reflecting Danish history, language, character, and probably their "thinking". This is one of those physical books I would like to have at least in our local public library.

Re: I bought the only physical encyclopedia still in print

#158

Post by manicennui »

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 don't understand the problem. Of course I don't understand the modern trend of trying to make one's decor as sterile and lifeless as possible.

Re: I bought the only physical encyclopedia still in print

#160

Post by detourdog »

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…

Macaulay taught Illustration at my college when that book was published. Before that book he made one’s on single topic buildings like cathedral and castle.
Post reply on HN