Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc has announced that after 250 years, it’s throwing in the towel on print editions and moving to all-digital delivery of alphabetised facts and figures. Encyclopaedia Britannica was a touchstone of my youth. You couldn’t go to a state fair or school event without seeing someone seated at a table next …
at least it can be updated more easily
Still will they charge the same as for the books and then put vat on it?
Your scam is not included in this Wikipedia entry. The good news is that you can include it by editing it. You know it's the right thing to do.
Given the amount of plagiarism on WP and the way Jimmy Wales uses WP to pump his stock value, shouldn't that page go into an infinite loop?
Your idea is too late
> My plan? I’m going to print off parts of Wikipedia, put them in binders, and sell them at state fairs and school events.
Already being done on a grand scale - just search for "Betascript" (publisher) on Amazon. First hit is for a £66 reprint of a few Wikipedia articles, and there are thousands of such titles available.
A serious ripoff, but unfortunately not illegal and neither against Wikipedia's T&Cs.
"After being pounded again and again by Britannica’s sales jackals, my mom [...]"
It's the endgame.
Even if it's inaccurate and sometimes dangerous how do you compete with Free?
Where is Encarta?
It is a shame really as not everyone has a tablet or PC and even less people have Internet. Fewer still have Broadband.
Mine's the one with smart phone in the pocket running "Don't Panic" as the screen saver.
dumbass, we have the internet
It isn't free. You need a special machine a bit like a televion crossed with a typwriter and a telephone and we can sell you one for 1000 dollars and 99 cents.
If Bill Gates could do it and put IBM in the toilet, a multi-million pound, highly esteemed international company should have had no problem.
Computers cost, in those far off days, the same price as a complete set of encyclopaedias.
It should have been a no-brainer.
Once again proof is provided that money and experience multiplied by all the knowledge in the world aren't worth a good original idea and a pocket full of wisdom.
Re: dumbass, we have the internet
Er...full set of E.B less than $1400, my first computer in '96 $3000.
I like the way...
the complete encyclopedia looks on my bookshelves - certainly a lot more impressive than a single (or two) DVD cases.
Re: I like the way...
Maybe the vacuum to fill is a wireless DVD drive that sits in a large enclosure that looks like 20 leather bound books on a shelf? Impressive to look at, easy to update AND cheaper and more eco friendly that actual books.
Excuse me whilst I go out to the patent office
All because of the pre-Internet spammers!
"If you think Steamboat can beat me, Mean Gene, then you oughta go back to selling encyclopedia's my man!"
"I never sold an encyclopedia Jake Roberts!"
"So, you couldn't even do that either huh?"
That little snippet of a /very/ old 'Saturday Night's Main Event' says it all IMO :-)
It is, in a way, quite sad...
We once got hounded by one of their high-pressure door-to-door salesmen - a job he later told me he absolutely loathed.
The encyclopaedia is definitely worth owning, and I'm seriously considering shovelling £1200 to get the last version. (Thank God, even unemployment lets me keep a credit card or three...).
Encyclopaedia Britannica is one of the Icons of American Literature (don't let the name fool you).
It's a bit like translating Canterbury Tales to modern English, or releasing Samuel Pepys' diaries on CD.
She'll kill me, but Greek holiday - Britannica - Greek holiday - Britannica....Hmmmm....
So you want to sell the tykes' parents a pig in a poke? Thing is, Wikiblablablah is rubbish except for the most simple of facts. Anything complex is stained with socialist dogma, lies and bias.
"Most simple of facts"? "Socialist dogma"?
I guess it depends on what you're researching, but usually for the things I research, it's right on the money... and even when it is a bit light on content, there's the references down the bottom where you can go for more in-depth information.
Exactly where were Britannica's references again?
and that's why you're an avid reader of the unbiased Conservapedia.
Re: True dat,
Conservapedia might well be crap (in fact it is crap) but that does not change the fact that wikipedia has a distinct bias on any subject with even a hint of controversy.
When ever I look anything controversial up on wikipedia I always go to the talk pages. It is there that you find out what is being kept in or out of the article and what is being over or understated in the text.
"Socialist dogma, lies and bias"?
So, exactly like the Encyclopaedia Britannica, then. After all, ultraconservatives are hardly part of the target demographic for Britannica or any other mainstream educational materials.
Anything complex is stained with socialist dogma, lies and bias.
Re: Anything complex is stained with socialist dogma, lies and bias.
Huh? Guess you are talking about the entire world. Well, Universe really.
Re: True dat,
Another poster had it right on the money though when said you can go to the links on the bottom. The wikipedia is pretty wild and wolly, but it is a great place to start as long as you are aware of the pitfalls inherent in this type of setup. One thing I have found that I dearly love is that when looking up 'classical' music (at least) there are often links to performances of the pieces and (Joy!) links to the sheet music!!!!
No it isn't.
I'm seriously considering it
that is, getting Granddaughter a copy of the last print. She doesn't even speak yet, let alone English (we expect that to be her third language after German and Portuguese) but it's a once-only chance. But the £1,200 is rather putting me off... still, as Andus M points out, I've still got a credit card.
End of an era, maybe....
Still have a copy of the Childrens Encyclopedia at my mums house (Arthur Mee)
I used to love the way it describes airships , biplanes, the "great war" (no mention of WW2) and the importance of the league of nations.
Encyclopedia Britannica may be right (wrt their business plan) in how they're proceeding....but just note a minute... who did I reference in this comment?
- Twitter: La la la, we have not heard of any NUDE JLaw, Upton SELFIES
- China: You, Microsoft. Office-Windows 'compatibility'. You have 20 days to explain
- Apple to devs: NO slurping users' HEALTH for sale to Dark Powers
- Is that a 64-bit ARM Warrior in your pocket? No, it's MIPS64
- Apple 'fesses up: Rejected from the App Store, dev? THIS is why