this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2025
560 points (92.8% liked)

Comic Strips

18089 readers
2599 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] gerowen@lemmy.world 11 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Libraries and encyclopedias. We had a set of encyclopedias, New World I think, and much later got Brittanica on CD-ROM.

[–] elucubra@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 hour ago

I lived in Pittsburgh during my formative years. Pittsburgh has an awesome library system, with world class libraries like the Carnegie library, and each universitie's libraries, plus all the local libraries. I spent quite a bit of time in these. The net adds convenience, and some niche things, but it's not the information, it's having it in your pocket.

Also, you have to sift through a lot of bullshit.

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 6 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

What did you think we had encyclopedias for?!

[–] cm0002@lemmy.world 3 points 2 hours ago
[–] WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

I had my own head to reach wrong, and life-destroying conclussions with. No AI to break me out at the time.

[–] bampop@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 54 minutes ago)

conclussion

/kən-klŭsh′ən/

noun

When the [probably wrong] answer, or its immediate consequence, hits you like a brick

[–] HugeNerd@lemmy.ca 15 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

That's dumb. Houses I recall from childhood in the '80s were filled with books. Encyclopedias for kids, books about animals, history, etc. Libraries were a walk away. Schools had libraries (and in my case, the librarian looked just like Janet from Three's Company and built the same. I was at the library a lot.). TV had plenty of educational stuff.

And how's the newfangled Google knowledge world panning out so far? Lots of people getting informed?

[–] Wolf@lemmy.today 4 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

I grew up poor and we couldn't afford a set of encyclopedias. We lived in the country so libraries were not a walk away. I never even thought to ask my friends if they had encyclopedias when visiting their houses and having this happen.

Encyclopedias were also somewhat limited. It could be useful if you were wondering what the main export of the Democratic Republic of the Congo was, but if you were wondering what strategy to use to beat the final boss in Ninja Gaiden you were likely out of luck (I know, I know, these are terrible examples It's 3:30am, cut me some slack).

TV had plenty of educational stuff

Sure, but it's not like you could be sitting there with your friend and be like "I wonder what the most common name in the world is?" and turn on the TV to the answer to your question.

Plus you weren't always at somebodies house, you could be on a hike or at the lake and think of a question.

There were a lot of times back in the day where I would think of an interesting question and then by the time I got to a place where I could research it, I had forgotten all about it. I guess I could have and probably should have carried around a little notebook and wrote those questions down. Hindsight is 20/20

And how’s the newfangled Google knowledge world panning out so far? Lots of people getting informed?

Pretty great honestly. I can't speak for other people but now when I have one of those "I wonder about X topic" moments I actually just look up the answer.

It even took me a while to catch up to the fact that it was now an option. I remember several times when I first got a smart phone and I would have the "I just thought of something I would like to know more about" experience and then forget that I had the ability to find out an embarrassing amount of times before it finally got to the point where it's second nature to look it up now.

[–] _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

you mean houses you go to now aren't filled with books? I don't know anyone who doesn't have at least a small book shelf.

[–] HugeNerd@lemmy.ca 0 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Nope. Far fewer. Houses are built to be showcases for expensive appliances these days.

[–] _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 5 hours ago

ah, well, I'm also of a demographic that doesn't know anybody with a new house either.

[–] BackgrndNoize@lemmy.world 3 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

This comic is stupid, and likely a made to farm comments and up votes, if there weren't enough curious people willing to put in effort to learn we wouldn't have advanced as much as we have today and no doubt Google makes looking things up easier, but look around you, how many people actually bother to even do that, plus it also makes it easier to find results that people can feed into their own misinformation, that they've predecided is the right answer

[–] ballgoat@lemmy.zip 3 points 5 hours ago

I thought the comic was supposed to be funny. I found it amusing. Maybe I’m just dumb lol. But I mean, I used to read the dictionary and especially the encyclopedia, go to the library, all sorts of stuff before the internet. It was fun.

[–] AgentOrangesicle@lemmy.world 2 points 4 hours ago

For context, this comic was made before Google changed their company motto away from, "Don't be evil". There was a sense that they might not turn evil back then and they were still giving reasonable search results based on your query.

[–] hperrin@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

The library is how people learned things before a search engine came and ruined people’s ability to find things on their own. Dewey Decimal, bitch.

[–] sheogorath@lemmy.world 2 points 4 hours ago

And now LLMs came and ruined people ability to think. Idiocracy was a prophecy CMV.

[–] Dreaming_Novaling@lemmy.zip 1 points 4 hours ago

As someone who was definitely born with internet being a standard in my house and school as a child, this is sad. I loved going to the library every week with my dad and older sister, and we both loved encyclopedias and non-fiction books about animals and stuff. Recently I had to use my college library for a practice exercise for my Eng class and once we learned the system they use (it's not Dewey Decimal), my partner and I had a blast looking for books for our papers. It was fun, honestly. It really made me realize that sometimes the internet is less efficient for finding quality and trusted information rather than perusing the library catalogue (which I can do online too obvs).

[–] hopesdead@startrek.website 3 points 6 hours ago

When I was introduced to Google, my relatives were using it to look up video game cheat codes. I think we even looked up walk through for Driver. That tutorial was absurdly fucking difficult. A group of like 10 people couldn’t complete it for hours.

[–] Gsus4@mander.xyz 1 points 5 hours ago

Libraries, man, don't let the concept die.

[–] utopiah@lemmy.world 11 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

You had... a dictionary at home, maybe an encyclopedia, but if you didn't you could call a librarian and ask them if they had any reference on any topic. It took minutes when they were opened rather than seconds any time but... no ads, no tracking, serendipity yet no distraction, was it actually worst then?

[–] wowleak@sh.itjust.works 2 points 6 hours ago

Call for minutes!? That was expensive and in my small town everyone would know what i was searching for in no time.

Assuming you lived in a place with access to a library like you mentioned, that is. For me, libraries were a once a month thing growing up.

[–] DiskCrasher@lemmy.world 13 points 16 hours ago

Encyclopedia Britannica was the answer.

[–] mfed1122@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 15 hours ago

I really wish this just said life before the internet.

[–] Bluewing@lemmy.world 21 points 22 hours ago (3 children)

All you needed to do was get up off your arse, travel to a library, (business hours only), and dig through a card catalog for outdated information on the subject you were interested in. Bonus difficulty: Needing to wait a week for your library to get the outdated book you needed because it was in a different town.

Today all information is available at any time-- 24/7365. Bonus difficulty: Sorting through all the AI bullshit to glean the correct information on a subject you know very little about.

[–] Capybara_mdp@reddthat.com 6 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

Y’all heard of librarians right? They do a little more than stack books. Most are accredited professional researchers who can find what you’re looking for, or try to get it for you.

Talk to more humans and kindly please support your local libraries.

[–] ballgoat@lemmy.zip 1 points 4 hours ago

It blows my mind that people don’t know you need a master of library science to be a librarian. I still remember some reddit chucklefuck talking shit about librarians and literally stating that it’s not like they even need college degrees.

[–] Redex68@lemmy.world 4 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

I mean I'm not gonna go ask a librarian how big of a laser I'd need to destroy the moon or why "1"+" 1" is "11" but "1"-" 1" is 0 in JavaScript

[–] meliaesc@lemmy.world 4 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

I'd appreciate those questions as a librarian. Problem is finding a publisher who was willing to print that information.

[–] leadore@lemmy.world 4 points 15 hours ago

And you still have to go to a university library if you want any scientific papers and research knowledge, because most of it is behind a paywall and only universities can afford to subscribe to the journals.

[–] chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world 15 points 21 hours ago

Don’t you know the Dewey decimal system?

[–] fodor@lemmy.zip 25 points 1 day ago (2 children)

How to say you're young without saying you're young, lol. Some people, boomers even, remember a time before Google existed and people used other search engines.

[–] Dozzi92@lemmy.world 7 points 17 hours ago

I'd askjeeves all sorts of things. Or hotbot. Or yahoo. I think MSN even had one. I think the term Google is the same as Bandaid at this point, and synonymous with Internet search.

I appreciate the sentiment though. Did many research papers in school where it was go to library, get books, quote them, place citation in bibliography. I enter high school in 2001 and Wikipedia is a thing, and that was that. We had been "allowed" to cite websites at that point, and while Wikipedia was off limits, some of us would just jump down the wiki article to it's citations and use those.

But yeah, I remember the days of writing papers in a library, that or using Encarta. Encyclopedia Brittanica or Encarta.

[–] jrs100000@lemmy.world 17 points 1 day ago (1 children)

And before that we had tiny wikipedia's written on paper.

[–] MBM@lemmings.world 5 points 21 hours ago

Or you could ask that one friend

[–] ragingHungryPanda@lemmy.zip 109 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (16 children)
[–] tal@lemmy.today 34 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (4 children)

I mean, the bar to go get a reference book to look something up is significantly higher than "pull my smartphone out of my pocket and tap a few things in".

Here's an article from 1945 on what the future of information access might look like.

https://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/unbound/flashbks/computer/bushf.htm

The Atlantic Monthly | July 1945

"As We May Think"

by Vannevar Bush

Eighty years ago, the stuff that was science fiction to the people working on the cutting edge of technology looks pretty unremarkable, even absurdly conservative, to us in 2025:

Like dry photography, microphotography still has a long way to go. The basic scheme of reducing the size of the record, and examining it by projection rather than directly, has possibilities too great to be ignored. The combination of optical projection and photographic reduction is already producing some results in microfilm for scholarly purposes, and the potentialities are highly suggestive. Today, with microfilm, reductions by a linear factor of 20 can be employed and still produce full clarity when the material is re-enlarged for examination. The limits are set by the graininess of the film, the excellence of the optical system, and the efficiency of the light sources employed. All of these are rapidly improving.

Assume a linear ratio of 100 for future use. Consider film of the same thickness as paper, although thinner film will certainly be usable. Even under these conditions there would be a total factor of 10,000 between the bulk of the ordinary record on books, and its microfilm replica. The Encyclopoedia Britannica could be reduced to the volume of a matchbox. A library of a million volumes could be compressed into one end of a desk. If the human race has produced since the invention of movable type a total record, in the form of magazines, newspapers, books, tracts, advertising blurbs, correspondence, having a volume corresponding to a billion books, the whole affair, assembled and compressed, could be lugged off in a moving van. Mere compression, of course, is not enough; one needs not only to make and store a record but also be able to consult it, and this aspect of the matter comes later. Even the modern great library is not generally consulted; it is nibbled at by a few.

Compression is important, however, when it comes to costs. The material for the microfilm Britannica would cost a nickel, and it could be mailed anywhere for a cent. What would it cost to print a million copies? To print a sheet of newspaper, in a large edition, costs a small fraction of a cent. The entire material of the Britannica in reduced microfilm form would go on a sheet eight and one-half by eleven inches. Once it is available, with the photographic reproduction methods of the future, duplicates in large quantities could probably be turned out for a cent apiece beyond the cost of materials.

If the user wishes to consult a certain book, he taps its code on the keyboard, and the title page of the book promptly appears before him, projected onto one of his viewing positions. Frequently-used codes are mnemonic, so that he seldom consults his code book; but when he does, a single tap of a key projects it for his use. Moreover, he has supplemental levers. On deflecting one of these levers to the right he runs through the book before him, each page in turn being projected at a speed which just allows a recognizing glance at each. If he deflects it further to the right, he steps through the book 10 pages at a time; still further at 100 pages at a time. Deflection to the left gives him the same control backwards.

A special button transfers him immediately to the first page of the index. Any given book of his library can thus be called up and consulted with far greater facility than if it were taken from a shelf. As he has several projection positions, he can leave one item in position while he calls up another. He can add marginal notes and comments, taking advantage of one possible type of dry photography, and it could even be arranged so that he can do this by a stylus scheme, such as is now employed in the telautograph seen in railroad waiting rooms, just as though he had the physical page before him.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)
[–] leadore@lemmy.world 43 points 1 day ago (8 children)

Thinking that people couldn't find things out before google is naive and just sets you up to believe whatever shit google tells you.

Getting misinformation from the internet is worse than not being able to find the information, and far worse than getting valid information you have to look up in a book/publication.

[–] dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works 3 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

How about the misinformation from Uncle Mike who overheard your question and confidently spews you some bullshit? If it's not in the encyclopedia upstairs, most of the questions that cross your mind went unanswered or you took everyone at their word.

Sure, you write down important questions and topics, but this post doesn't seem to be about that.

[–] Dozzi92@lemmy.world 4 points 17 hours ago

Yeah this post is a joke and you're supposed to chuckle at it, but in Lemmy fashion, here we are dissecting the shit out of it. But hey, it's about discussion, I guess, and I'm certainly a part of it.

[–] leadore@lemmy.world 1 points 15 hours ago

Or you didn't take everyone at their word.

[–] Damage@feddit.it 1 points 14 hours ago

Yeah! I mean, we had Alta Vista!

[–] Sprucie@feddit.uk 2 points 17 hours ago

I think there used to be a kind of mystery about things though, you could debate in a pub for hours on a subject where now there's a definitive answer available within seconds. That delay in accessing information was fun and led to all sorts of debates and wonder. I remember when the original Pokémon games came out on Gameboy and there were all sorts of rumours flying around about how to get certain Pokémon, missingno etc. you never knew what was real or not until you saw it with your own eyes. Now you go on Google/YouTube and someone's already done an hour long deep dive to prove/debunk everything. I think having all of this information at our fingertips has actually stunted our curiosity and drive to explore and experiment

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] bacon_pdp@lemmy.world 41 points 1 day ago (5 children)

Have you not ever been to a library?

Librarians are the best people to talk to about finding information about where and what is available for you to learn more.

Seriously get to a library and talk to them, they are wonderful.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] A_Union_of_Kobolds@lemmy.world 24 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Motion to change it to "before Wikipedia", since that's not evil

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 22 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Wikipedia is way better for learning shit than google anyway.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›