Slashdot Mirror


Ray Bradbury Loves Libraries, Hates the Internet

Hugh Pickens was one of several readers to let us know that, according to a NY Times story, the 89-year-old Ray Bradbury hates the Internet. But he loves libraries, and is helping raise $280,000 to keep libraries in Ventura County open. "Among Mr. Bradbury's passions, none burn quite as hot as his lifelong enthusiasm for halls of books. ... 'Libraries raised me,' Mr. Bradbury said. 'I don't believe in colleges and universities. I believe in libraries because most students don't have any money. When I graduated from high school, it was during the Depression and we had no money. I couldn't go to college, so I went to the library three days a week for 10 years.' ... The Internet? Don't get him started. 'The Internet is a big distraction,' Mr. Bradbury barked... 'Yahoo called me eight weeks ago,' he said, voice rising. 'They wanted to put a book of mine on Yahoo! You know what I told them? "To hell with you. To hell with you and to hell with the Internet." It's distracting. It's meaningless; it's not real. It's in the air somewhere.'"

90 of 600 comments (clear)

  1. God Bless Him by tjstork · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There's a lot to be said for libraries. The other day, my wife came home with a new library card. Big internet a holic, but there's always something about halls of books.

    --
    This is my sig.
    1. Re:God Bless Him by XanC · · Score: 5, Funny

      Who are you? Who's talking? Are you in the air somewhere? I'm confused!!!

    2. Re:God Bless Him by spire3661 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Technically, the internet is the largest library of information ever known to man. To dismiss it only shows his inability to truly grasp it.

      --
      Good-bye
    3. Re:God Bless Him by Brian+Gordon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I agree; what an idiot. There's more useful, educational information instantly available on the internet than any library in the world will ever hold. Just because he's too old and blind to find anything other than Yahoo games doesn't mean that the internet is distracting and meaningless. I'm sure Wikipedia alone has orders of magnitude more educational reading material than you could read going to the library three times a week for generations.

    4. Re:God Bless Him by Adrian+Lopez · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There's more useful information on the Internet? I think not.

      While there is plenty useful information on the Internet, a lot of the useful stuff you find there comes from primary sources (printed or digital) not easily found on the public Internet.

      --
      "In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
    5. Re:God Bless Him by tyrione · · Score: 4, Informative

      Agreed, yet his anti-colleges and universities speaks from a liberal arts major espousing the virtues of being deeply knowledgeable by just reading books. Sorry, but the Hard Sciences need labs, mentoring, professorships, research and more.

    6. Re:God Bless Him by spoonboy42 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There's a lot to be said for libraries. Bradbury may not like it, but these days one of the most vital things libraries do is provide free Internet access to the poor, as well as the elderly and disabled who may require the assistance of a librarian.

      --
      Anonymous Luddite: "What do you think of the dehumanizing effects of the Internet?"
      Andy Grove: "Not Much."
    7. Re:God Bless Him by blahplusplus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Technically, the internet is the largest library of information ever known to man. To dismiss it only shows his inability to truly grasp it."

      While some of that sentiment is expressed in hist post he has an overarching point: On the internet it's hard to get stuff done because you're just a mouseclick away from distractions (youtube, email, music, videogames, etc, etc)

      When you go to a library there is much less potential for distraction and so you focus on what you originally intended to go there for.

      While I agree the internet is just as wonderful if not more so, the technology hasn't totally caught up yet. I love google books, and being able to search books (something you'd never be able to do in a library of non digitized books). But the downside is endless distraction for those who lack self restraint.

    8. Re:God Bless Him by Runaway1956 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Certainly not an idiot. Out of his element, yes, but absolutely NOT an idiot. I'm almost two decades younger than Bradbury, but I can sympathize with him. The internet can confuse even the young bright boys - just start a discussion on internet security, and see how many really smart young people get lost real fast.

      Books. I find myself reading more and more of my favorites on the LCD screen, but books have something that the computer will never have. Books are solid, and real - the pixels on my screen are fleeting. A solid book and a cup of hot chocolate on a cold winter's night, listening to the storm blow outside......

      Oh well, either you remember it and love it, or you don't.

      But, don't call the old dude an idiot. Bradbury may not rank with Asimov and Clarke, but he a bright enough star in the SciFi and fantasy firmament. Never an idiot.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    9. Re:God Bless Him by someone1234 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The reason for a book not found on the internet is people like Mr. Bradburry.
      Why his book isn't on the net?
      Because he didn't want it.
      What can i say about this?
      MEH. Your wish.

      Eventually books will vanish, just like stone tablets did.

      --
      Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
    10. Re:God Bless Him by rubycodez · · Score: 4, Interesting

      How do you know our civilization's ability to produce personal computers isn't going to vanish. At least a book is good for three centuries on proper paper, is our ability to produce hard drives so robust?

    11. Re:God Bless Him by rubycodez · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Just one example, there are many handbooks for the design, estimating, scheduling, and construction of buildings, roads and bridges that are not to be found on the internet. I have a shelf of those, and a good library will have them too. I have references for other fields for which internet resources are very scant except for popular general overview. Sure, CADD/CAE/CAM software can do some things, but not all. Most of man's knowledge is not on the internet, and it's tragic that young people think that because many popular things of the last ten years are there then most things are there.

    12. Re:God Bless Him by node+3 · · Score: 4, Funny

      How do you know our civilization's ability to produce personal computers isn't going to vanish. At least a book is good for three centuries on proper paper, is our ability to produce hard drives so robust?

      Well, as the number of computers dwindles from the billions to the millions and eventually the thousands, perhaps someone would be kind enough to hit 'Print' before things wind all the way down.

    13. Re:God Bless Him by RDW · · Score: 5, Informative

      'I agree; what an idiot.'

      The really idiotic thing would be to take one quote out of context and assume this represents the world view of a very thoughtful writer. It's pretty clear from what he's said elsewhere, as in 'Bradbury on the Internet':

      http://www.raybradbury.com/at_home_clips.html

      that he recognises the net's value as an information resource and commercial tool, and relishes the irony of using it to communicate his own criticism of the medium. His main concern is the danger of people 'playing their lives away with too many toys' by wasting enormous amounts of time on the trivial, a criticism that extends to the output of the other mass media, and which any reader of 'Fahrenheit 451' will understand.

    14. Re:God Bless Him by mellon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Laugh if you want, but keeping digital data is hard. Really hard. Once you've printed a book on acid-free paper with good quality ink, you can pretty much assume it'll still be readable in a hundred years. The lifetime of most computer media is measured in years, not decades. And most printouts fade quickly, because they're done on laser paper, which doesn't last very long.

      So I wouldn't accuse Mr. Bradbury of being senile just yet. I agree he's a curmudgeon, but we need curmudgeons to keep us honest.

      OBTW... Get off my lawn!

      Punk. :')

    15. Re:God Bless Him by westlake · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I agree; what an idiot. There's more useful, educational information instantly available on the internet than any library in the world will ever hold. Just because he's too old and blind to find anything other than Yahoo games doesn't mean that the internet is distracting and meaningless

      The library organizes information. It attempts to separate the meaningful from the meaningless. It is outward looking - not inward looking.

      In following the threads here on the Thomas case -
      some things become painfully obvious:

      The geek doesn't understand the most basic distinctions between civil and criminal law.

      He doesn't understand evidence, the burden of proof.

      He doesn't know how a jury is selected.
      He doesn't understand the roles played by the plaintiff and defendant, the judge, the jury, the court of appeals.

      It is easier for him to find refuge in talk of conspiracies, in talk of corruption.

      The geek has access to infinite information - or at least thinks he does.

      But mostly he listens to himself. He tunes out dissenting voices. He doesn't ask the right questions - and again and again he makes the same mistakes.

      I'm sure Wikipedia alone has orders of magnitude more educational reading material than you could read going to the library three times a week for generations.

      But why are you sure?

      The geek likes big numbers. The geek trusts big numbers. The number of apps in his distro's repository. The number of pages in his Wiki....

    16. Re:God Bless Him by rs79 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "I'm not convinced a bubblejet or toner laser printer onto paper will produce a product with the robustness of a good printing press, ink, and acid free paper "

      You'd be wrong then. Epson's pigment based inks are archival grade, are projected not to fade for over 100 years; I have a $99 printer that uses them (never mind it's $160 for new ink).

      Brian Reid did a test where he printed two indentical pages onto (forget name of fancy acid free archival grade paper) and put one through the dishwasher. After a full cycle it looked the same as the original. He tore down darkroom after seeing this.

      There are more books than you can imagine. The google books poeple say even if we ramp up increadably we won't even scratch the surface and there's zero chance all books will be digitized in our lifetime, or several lifetimes - there's that many.

      Having said that I still think, and always have, that Bradbury is a moron. But am glad he's supporting libraries. They are, very very important.

      --
      Need Mercedes parts ?
    17. Re:God Bless Him by elashish14 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Big internet a holic, but there's always something about halls of books.

      Have to agree on this. Yes, information is much easier to find on the internet, and there is a lot more information on the internet than you can ever find in a single library (I've looked through all the libraries in my area for a physics GRE prep book and came up dry, but found information easily through Google). Yet nevertheless, reading a book is just much easier - having something physical, tangible, can be taken anywhere somehow just makes reading much much easier. I suppose that this is only true in some respects (there's no easy Find function in a book), but as a whole, I find reading books far more pleasurable than reading off a screen.

      --
      I have left slashdot and am now on Soylent News. FUCK YOU DICE.
    18. Re:God Bless Him by Acer500 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I agree; what an idiot. There's more useful, educational information instantly available on the internet than any library in the world will ever hold.

      A simple question: I've seen basically everybody access Wikipedia, and a large fraction of the internet users I know have used Youtube... but I've never seen anyone use MITs Open Course Ware. Do you people have any success stories with that?

      I only tried once, and the material was not useful for what I wanted to learn (programming, it seems MITs courses are/were far different from the rest of the world. I will try to learn different paradigms someday...)

      BTW, I just visited it again, and I'm glad to see some courses are starting to be translated, and the site is far better than what it was when I first visited.

      --
      There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
    19. Re:God Bless Him by Workaphobia · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Open wikipedia in a tabbed browser. Go to a topic you're moderately interested in. Open every hyperlink you think you might like in a new tab. After about an hour, count up the tabs you have. If they're fewer than 10, something's very wrong with your sense of curiosity.

      Make a list of the topics, then go to the library and lookup appropriate physical books that describe the same subjects. See how much you can learn by reading those while allotting yourself only the same amount of time you give yourself to read wikipedia. Compare how much you learn.

      --
      Evidently, the key to understanding recursion is to begin by understanding recursion. The rest is easy.
    20. Re:God Bless Him by vic-traill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How do you know our civilization's ability to produce personal computers isn't going to vanish. At least a book is good for three centuries on proper paper, is our ability to produce hard drives so robust?

      I'll echo this sentiment w/ a reference to A Canticle for Leibowitz, by Walter Miller Jr., as well as noting that although I have documents stored on 720k, three and a half inch floppies within arm's reach, I've got no similarly handy way way to retrieve those docs.

      Obviously the fact that they're orphaned on a media for which I have no required hardware is my own fault, but it does serve as an example to illustrate the temporal nature of contemporary storage. I have a hardcover book from the 1920's in great shape, very readable and physically robust; yet even a printout of my fourth year honours thesis (one of the docs stored on the aforementioned disks) would be in rough shape by now had I printed it using the 9-pin dot matrix printer I had 20 years ago.

      I can guarantee that there will be *no* post-apocalyptic need for anything I cranked out in 1989. But I take Miller's central question to heart - how to preserve man's scientific knowledge so that we're not doomed to rediscover electricity (or whatever) again and again? Forever is a long, long time.

      --
      [17] Leary, T., White, C., Wood, P. R., Bhabha, W. D., and Wirth, N. Lambda calculus considered harmful. In Proceedings
    21. Re:God Bless Him by Ergasiophobia · · Score: 2

      Just because you can't find something on the internet, it doesn't mean it isn't there.

    22. Re:God Bless Him by ArundelCastle · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You'd be wrong then. Epson's pigment based inks are archival grade, are projected not to fade for over 100 years; I have a $99 printer that uses them (never mind it's $160 for new ink).

      Speaking as a film and digital photographer, with a sometimes-career in digitizing archival and library special collections, I do love Epson's archival inks. However your operative word there is "projected". We know for a fact that traditional paper and ink lasts over 500 years when cared for. In the next 500 years do you even think we'll be using ink or paper or optical discs for our day to day lives? But those books will still be there. Two-thousand years of human history will still be there, unless we choose to destroy them.

      Basically these media companies (meaning the manufacturers of injkets, and optical discs) are selling us inexpensive product with the assumption that we will be dead or apathetic by the time our 4,000 pet and baby photos have disintegrated. In my lines of work, I have to switch modes between the client that wants to pay reasonably for a nice portrait on the wall for maybe 15 years plus 50 in the attic, and the institution that exists to keep a piece of history for the next 300 years until the building falls down. They're not the same. Do you really think your great-great grandchildren want to see your lolcat material? Maybe in fifty years everything will be equal in quality and price, but it's 2009 and we're not there yet.

      On topic: The library information Ray Bradbury is extolling will still exist long after "Today's Internet" is an archaic memory. Though, I'm sure the Pokemon wiki pages will still be completely up to date. So there's that at least. ;)

    23. Re:God Bless Him by rubycodez · · Score: 3, Interesting

      most of the last five centuries of heavy western civilizations publishings ain't there, nor would it be short of a few decades of very intense labor. Don't like books, fine, show me the plans for a 800 ton double action stamping press from the mid 60s on the internet, or a six axis milling machine with 120 foot bed. That's USEFUL knowledge for keeping our civilization together. but it ain't on the web.

    24. Re:God Bless Him by Selanit · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Sure, it's entirely possible to retain digital data over long periods of time. It's not impossible. It's just substantially more difficult than retaining printed media, for many reasons. Let me count the ways:

      1) Hardware changes. This past spring I was involved in a project to archive source code and executable files for a late '90s "smart toy" game called Redbeard's Pirate Quest, in which the player controlled the game by moving figurines equipped with RFID tags around the deck of a plastic pirate ship. Hooking it up required a computer with a serial port, which are still easily found but increasingly eliminated in order to free up space on the motherboard for more modern, more useful hookups like extra USB ports, DVI output, etc. The game cannot be played without the pirate ship controller. In another few years -- 10? 15? 25? -- it will probably be unusable.

      Another group working in parallel to mine had to recover files from 1983 saved on 5.25" floppies using a Kaypro IV machine. It took them months just to get access to the data -- they had to find a working Kaypro IV, hook it up to a linux machine via a null modem cable, and copy the files over via kermit, then find emulators for the versions of early word processors that had been used to write the files. They were only partially successful; five of the eighteen disks they were given proved to be completely unrecoverable.

      2) Data formats change, even very basic ones like text encodings. Just look at NASA data -- some of the early stuff (like, say, the Viking mission data) has been stored in cryptic formats interpretable by computer programs for which we no longer have the source code, running on computers that don't exist any more. Recovering data can take months or years, as discussed in this article from the New York Times.

      3) A huge amount of data is stored in proprietary formats. In high school, I wrote a whole bunch of papers in a word processor called Sprint running on MS-DOS 5. I've still got a few of the files hanging around, but Sprint died the death years ago. Getting access to the data now would be a non-trivial undertaking, particularly if I wanted to preserve the original formatting.

      4) Computerized storage media tend to be particularly sensitive to environmental conditions. It's entirely possible to preserve them over the long term, but doing so requires a good bit of planning. Often, the easiest way to preserve the data is to regularly migrate it from one storage medium to a new one -- which means that you have to have someone doing that. You cannot just throw a disk/CD/thumb drive into a closet and expect it to work reliably 25 years later.

      Compared to all that, books are a piece of cake to preserve. Use pH neutral paper and ink, and keep them in a cool environment with low humidity. They can easily survive for centuries.

      I have personally handled and used books penned in Latin on parchment 700 years ago. But I don't think I've ever seen functioning computer files which are older than I am. I know that such things exist -- I'm only thirty -- but I've never seen one, and probably never will. All you old-timers out there, who worked on exciting hot new tech in the '60s and '70s? Your early work is, basically, gone. I'll never see it in action. At best, I'll read about it -- in a history book.

      P.S. Slashdot is being annoying and not putting paragraph breaks in properly when I preview. Apologies if there's no whitespace in the above.

    25. Re:God Bless Him by iron-kurton · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The point isn't how hard it is to store digital data, or how long a single instance of digital data can last. The point is how easy it is to copy it. Replicating print can be time-consuming and expensive. Replicating bits on a drive is fast and cheap.

      --
      Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine -- Robert C. Gallagher
    26. Re:God Bless Him by Dan541 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Given that many libraries use electronic sliding doors I would say Google has better redundancy in place for power failures.

      Which has higher availability/uptime?

      Which will survive trial by fire?

      Which has backups of all their data?

      Which doesn't have homeless bums sleeping on the steps?

      Which does not give you papercuts?

      Which does not require leaving the basement?

      Which does not carry the risk of human interaction?

      I think I made my point....

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    27. Re:God Bless Him by someone1234 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Give it a few decades, please?
      How long the stone tablets held out?
      How long handwritten codexes held out?
      Just because books won't disappear tomorrow, it is no reason not to do the format shift before it is too late.

      --
      Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
  2. Internet by jmpeax · · Score: 2, Insightful

    To hell with you and to hell with the Internet. It's distracting. It's meaningless; it's not real. It's in the air somewhere.

    It helps drive the economy forward. It helps people keep in touch. It allows people to access resources (such as Bradbury's works) they otherwise wouldn't be able to.

    It's a shame how foolish and ignorant his remarks are.

    1. Re:Internet by bsDaemon · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It makes changes too easy, makes hiding what was there before too easy, and it makes telling what's an actual, factual authority and what is lies and deception too easy. I mean, come on -- if the guy actually believes what he wrote in F. 451, then how does this NOT make sense for him to believe? But then again, the Internet's ability to edit information for forge reality has been a major boon for the population of African elephants...

    2. Re:Internet by shma · · Score: 5, Insightful

      To make an obvious point: You can ban books, you can burn books, but try to remove a literary work from the Internet and see how far you get.

      --
      I came here for a good argument
    3. Re:Internet by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "It's a shame how foolish and ignorant his remarks are."

      On the other hand it's wonderful how wise and insightful his remarks are. Face it, the vast majority of time people spend on the internet is wasted in stupid, distracting ways. All that interaction and people in contact with one another? For what? Mostly so people can write abusive and idiotic things in forums? (Go ahead and include this one in there if you like).

      Ray may be a bit over the top, but in an age where attention spans are roughly half that of a gnat he has a great point about simply wandering through stacks of real books that you pull of the shelf and leaf through. It's a different experience than Googling for something and is equally serendipitous. Not only that but books are way easier to read than a computer screen, and they're portable. Without batteries.

      --
      http://www.rootstrikers.org/
    4. Re:Internet by jedidiah · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The Gutenberg printing press and the Xerox machine makes changes easy.

      OTOH, being able to instantaneously copy something to every outpost
      of human existence (including a server that may be sitting on Mars)
      makes it a lot harder to completely destroy something.

      HELL, there's controversy over which version of Metropolis is the real one and that was a movie made 100 years ago.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    5. Re:Internet by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      To make an obvious point: You can ban books, you can burn books, but try to remove a literary work from the Internet and see how far you get.

      Do it surreptitiously so as to avoid the Streisand effect and you may actually succeed, depending on the specific literary work in question.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    6. Re:Internet by hessian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I mean, come on -- if the guy actually believes what he wrote in F. 451, then how does this NOT make sense for him to believe?

      The point of Fahrenheit 451, like the point of Brave New World before it, is that people choose an easy lie over complicated truth. They prefer their entertainment and their illusions.

      When I look at the internet, I see a lot of illusions, but very little that approaches the factual power of a good book. And I am a content publisher who has made the choice to put future writings into books, because I see how the internet has been progressively turning into television since 1996.

      I will still love those resources, including Slashdot, which are useful. But I'll pick a real encyclopedia over Wikipedia, ignore those forums and blogs, and pick up a quality textbook for factual information.

  3. Location, location, location! by eyepeepackets · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's in the air, somewhere;
    In some tubes, with rubes.
    It's not in the back of a truck,
    It's not in the flack of some shmuck,
    It's in the air, somewhere.

    Thanks Dr. Seuss!

    --
    Everything in the Universe sucks: It's the law!
  4. And in other news, old man shouts at cloud by jollyreaper · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Old Man Ray is also a flaming Republican. Sad to think of it since his work is so enjoyable but that's the long and the short of it. He went apeshit over Fahrenheit 9-11.

    "No. 1, he didn't ask (permission), and, No. 2, he took it - period," Bradbury tells PEOPLE. "Even if he did ask, what he has done is a crime."

    Speaking from his Los Angeles home Wednesday, the 83-year-old author says he never would have allowed Moore to use the name, "because it doesn't belong to him. It belongs to me. I have several new editions of the book coming out this summer. I have a new film version of Fahrenheit 451 with Mel Gibson starring, and it is going into production sometime in the next six months."

    Bradbury says that Moore, 50, contacted him only last Saturday - months after the controversial movie started making headlines.

    "He was embarrassed because he didn't want to call me," says Bradbury, adding that he felt Moore was "forced into" making the call and that the filmmaker hasn't offered to screen the film for him.

    "He didn't want to face me," says Bradbury. "He is supposedly a big fan of mine and read my work years ago. Now suddenly he has to call someone he has been reading for most of his life and apologize for what he did."

    --
    Kwisatz Haderach
    Sell the spice to CHOAM
    This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    1. Re:And in other news, old man shouts at cloud by pankkake · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You don't have to be a Republican to think that Michael Moore is a bullshit machine.

      --
      Kill all hipsters.
    2. Re:And in other news, old man shouts at cloud by fyoder · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Republicans weren't so bad way back when they believed in small gov't and fiscal responsibility. Even if one believed that gov't had a role to play in society beyond simply maintaining the courts and providing for defense, one could still get along with, and even appreciate the perspective of, the old Republicans. A lot of old folk who call themselves Republicans may not be whatever the fuck today's Republicans are.

      --
      Loose lips lose spit.
  5. Re:Why does he like libraries? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    He is right, its just a distraction. When my internet access goes down, I actually get something accomplished. All of our toys mean nothing. That said, I need to log onto warcraft and forget how sucky real life is.

  6. To hell with Ray Bradbury. by kinabrew · · Score: 3, Funny

    We don't need libraries anymore. Let's just burn them all down.

  7. The truth by zazenation · · Score: 5, Funny

    Ray loves libraries but hates the internet...
    I love libraries and the internet...
    All we need now are someone who loves the internet and hates libraries and another who hates both libraries and the internet and we can have ourselves a fully populated 2x2 truth table.

    1. Re:The truth by Arainach · · Score: 5, Funny

      Loves the Internet, Hates Libraries: Most Ignorant Teenagers
      Hates the Internet, Hates Librarites: MPAA

  8. Re:Why does he like libraries? by ushering05401 · · Score: 2, Informative

    So instead of an intelligent point of view you are projecting a frightened and ignorant POV onto this man. Why? Because he is old.

  9. Books are not real! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I don't believe in libraries. I believe in cave paintings because most students don't have any animal hides to cover their genitals. When I graduated from climbing in trees, it was during the first great ice age and we had no fire or language. I couldn't go to the library, so I went to the cave three days a week for 10 seasons. The library? Don't get him started. The library is a big distraction, Gieco Cavemen growled... The library called me eight moons ago, he said, voice rising. They wanted to put a calfskin of mine in the Library! You know what I told them? To hell with you. To hell with you and to hell with the library. It's distracting. It's meaningless; it's not real. It's in the dead trees somewhere with that soulless invention called language.

    - Gieco Cavemen

  10. A series of tubes in the air? by Nakor+BlueRider · · Score: 5, Funny

    So the Internet is a series of tubes in the air somewhere...?

    OMG... the Internet is in the Mushroom Kingdom!

  11. Bradbury is out of touch with reality by ring-eldest · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It is truly a shame that he feels that way and that he believes in such a false dichotomy. If he was a little less antagonistic about the subject he'd see the massive influx of new people into the libraries that the internet has helped spur. The poor especially benefit from free access to computers and their children are put in touch with a wealth of learning (books AND electronic information) that is truly unprecedented. Library usage is up across the board, from what I can see.

    The man is almost 90 years old, but he's younger than my grandmother who regularly uses email and praises it as a wonderful way of keeping in touch with her mobility-impaired friends. Age and stubbornness are not excuses for a man of his intelligence to hold such a myopic view of the world which HE HELPED CREATE. It makes me wonder if he has been to a library recently during business hours to see the throngs of people using the internet there to find jobs and better themselves.

  12. Sort of related by Rorschach1 · · Score: 3, Funny

    My girlfriend's mother is a school librarian, has been for decades. One day she was sorting through a stack of old books and came across a Bradbury book in which someone had scribbled across the title page in pen. I think it was actually as she was in the process of slamming her DISCARD stamp down on the book that she belatedly recognized the scribble as the author's signature.

    She's normally got a good sense of humor, but she does NOT like it when you remind her about that dang Bradbury kid scribbling in her books.

  13. So like... by denzacar · · Score: 3, Funny

    How do you like L. Ron Hubbard's work then?

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  14. Re:Why does he like libraries? by MrHanky · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Ray Bradbury, while one of the greatest living SF writers, is actually something of a technophobe. Not a luddite, as far as I know, just someone who doesn't care for technology outside the scope of fiction. He doesn't know how to drive a car (while living in LA!), and he was ... oh, I don't remember, but old when he first travelled by airplane. So most likely, he doesn't understand the internet much. Or he understands it differently.

  15. I wouldn't be so quick to that. by tjstork · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Technically, the internet is the largest library of information ever known to man. To dismiss it only shows his inability to truly grasp it.

    Hmmm, no, I would not be so quick to dispute that statement at all.

    There is so much crap on the internet that it undermines all the information that is out there. Conversely, if you go to the 500 and 600 sections of the library, you can be somewhat assured that you are getting at least -something- that is accurate.

    Also, there's really not anything that approaches the value of a good textbook available on line. Seriously, how much will you google around before you spend a few bucks and go out and buy Steven's books before doing some sockets works. Would you monkey around with Perl and a bunch of fanboi sites with terrible examples, or why not just go out and buy the Camel book. Or, if you were doing Windows SDK work, would you wade through MSDN and all the Microsoft fanboi sites, or would you just go and get the Petzold bible.

    If there's any problem with libraries, its more a lack of funding and a lack of societies attention to pay librarians seriously and to respect the field. A good librarian is a skilled position, somebody who can reach into all the various fields and find what's good, and gather it up into one spot.

    --
    This is my sig.
    1. Re:I wouldn't be so quick to that. by jedidiah · · Score: 3, Insightful

      > Also, there's really not anything that approaches the value of a good textbook available on line.

      ????

      All it takes is a single suitable PDF on some guys laptop plugged into his mother's cable modem to make that claim bogus.

      Just because you can't seem to find your way out of the trashy romance novels, it doesn't mean that a particular "library" is complete trash.

      The net just makes it cheaper and easier for ANYONE to publish.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    2. Re:I wouldn't be so quick to that. by Quackers_McDuck · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And yet more and more books (especially computer science related textbooks) are becoming easily and freely available online (sometimes legally, sometimes via rapidshare or torrents) for anyone who knows where to look -- far more easily than taking a trip to a library and picking up a dead-tree book. Right now, of course, there are some books that you can't find online and should head to the library for instead (or order off amazon...), but the percentage in this category is dropping constantly, and it'd happen even faster if people like Bradbury wouldn't be illogically resistant to change. What people seem to forget is that the internet isn't just a collection of websites with short articles or videos, it can be a source for sharing actual books (many of which your local library would probably not have). So it's got a quickly-growing library in it, and then other stuff too (the other stuff just tends to get focused on more).

    3. Re:I wouldn't be so quick to that. by tjstork · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Just because you can't seem to find your way out of the trashy romance novels, it doesn't mean that a particular "library" is complete trash.

      That's rather the point of a library, is it not. The internet is not a library, because it does not have a librarian. The idea of a library is to have good material in it for a community to share in. The choices that the library makes are as much of a statement of humanity as anything else. When you use the internet, and filter noise yourself, you aren't getting the same level of service.

      --
      This is my sig.
    4. Re:I wouldn't be so quick to that. by tjstork · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Just because you can't seem to find your way out of the trashy romance novels, it doesn't mean that a particular "library" is complete trash.

      The whole point of the library is that the noise tends to be filtered for you. Thus, the internet is a dump, not a library.

      --
      This is my sig.
    5. Re:I wouldn't be so quick to that. by spire3661 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Just wanted to add that while the signal to noise ratio my be high, the signal is so incredibly strong that the noise is easy to filter out.

      I could break down your arguments by saying things like, "Why rely solely on a book? If so inclined I could probably contact a few reputable PERL devs online and get real feedback and samples."

      Books are great and have their place, but they pale very quickly when compared to the possibilities the internet offers.

      --
      Good-bye
    6. Re:I wouldn't be so quick to that. by bertoelcon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So it's got a quickly-growing library in it, and then other stuff too (the other stuff just tends to get focused on more).

      I would say the reason the other stuff gets focused on more is that there is more of it outright, if you could find any number of good websites that have factual checked data on whatever, there is at least 10 times that with incorrect data on the same subject. The problem happens is the majority is wrong, but is alot easier to find since it is the majority.

      With the internet being mob filtered it almost always makes the info into what the mob wants to hear, or is what they are told they want to hear, regardless of the true facts.

      --
      Anything can be found funny, from a certain point of view.
    7. Re:I wouldn't be so quick to that. by clarkkent09 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Also, there's really not anything that approaches the value of a good textbook available on line. Seriously, how much will you google around before you spend a few bucks and go out and buy Steven's books before doing some sockets works. Would you monkey around with Perl and a bunch of fanboi sites with terrible examples, or why not just go out and buy the Camel book. Or, if you were doing Windows SDK work, would you wade through MSDN and all the Microsoft fanboi sites, or would you just go and get the Petzold bible.

      That's just a case of saying you'll get better information if you pay for it. There is no reason why those same books couldn't be available in a digital format on the internet (except lack of reliable DRM), but you'd still have to pay for them. Even libraries don't generally have enough material to cover any particular narrow subject area in enough detail, so in the end you will have to go to a book store and pay for a book (paper or digital). Not to mention the fact that unlike the Internet, the more popular libraries become, the less useful they are because the book you really need will more likely be checked out.

      --
      Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
    8. Re:I wouldn't be so quick to that. by fyrewulff · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I worked at the library.

      They had a bunch of romance novels. Yeah, they're smut, but they're also donated in droves and worth about 50 cents. We didn't even bother to catalog them - they just got the 'romance' sticker. If I remember correctly they didn't even get security tags put on them.

      When people checked them out, we just tallied the amount on a piece of paper, they didn't even go onto that person's record in any way, shape, or form. Ultimately, we didn't even care if the books came back, although we didn't tell patrons this. If they got damaged beyond 'taping the cover back together' they just got thrown out.

      However having them there DID get people into the library, which increased the gate count, which increased money to the library. They only took up a small area of less than 5'x5' (They were on those spinning book holders). And a lot of times people coming to get them would see a new book and check that out.

      --
      "We need to get over this notion, that, for Apple to win... Microsoft must lose." - Steve Jobs, 1997
    9. Re:I wouldn't be so quick to that. by jedidiah · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Libraries were never about pretense of the Librarian or even
      of the local community. They were about having a large
      collection of published works when acquiring suck works was a
      highly expensive prospect.

      Whining about the web or the internet is much like whining about
      TV. It's very popular among the pretensious but all it really
      demonstrates is that the whiners never really bothered.

      Modern technology makes searching and filtering rediculously easy.

      Beyond access to more information than you would have the money
      to acquire on your own, that's all that a library provides.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  16. Hmmm.. by tjstork · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I agree; what an idiot. T

    Until you write Fahrenheit 451, I wouldn't be so quick to call Ray Bradbury an idiot, no matter what he says about the internet. Or, are you starting out with the Martian Chronicle instead?

    If anything, given the level of thought that the man has historically produced, you might find it instructive to understand what his criticisms are. If anything, it would only serve to improve the internet.

    --
    This is my sig.
    1. Re:Hmmm.. by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Farenheit 451 required a visionary. But I think that Bradbury simply lost his vision. It's not about the books. It's about the minds BEHIND the books.

      What to say about sites like fictionpress.net? What about webcomics with a deep story? What about Anime music videos?

      The internet is a primordial soup for art and culture. It doesn't matter if it's in the air, or the tubes, or whatever. People communicate with the internet. If the internet is a waste of time, that's because WE have turned it into a waste of time (mostly because media cartels are enforcing so many copyright policies that the internet is being stripped away from creativity world wide).

      Oh, and by the way... by the way... I wonder what Bradbury would think of his books being available on thepiratebay.

      http://thepiratebay.org/search/ray+bradbury/0/99/0

      Not real anymore? Ray, I used to admire you, but you're losing touch with reality.

    2. Re:Hmmm.. by spire3661 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Anyone so quick to dismiss the greatest communication tool man has yet devised as nothing but 'air' deserves harsh criticism, regardless of past accomplishments.

      --
      Good-bye
    3. Re:Hmmm.. by Dr.+Impossible · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not to mention how sad it is for a science fiction writer to not understand the importance of the Internet.

    4. Re:Hmmm.. by tjstork · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not to mention how sad it is for a science fiction writer to not understand the importance of the Internet

      He didn't say it wasn't important. He said it sucked and he preferred libraries. For him, perhaps, the whole human face to face side of libraries, the visible comradery in a culture of learning and self improvement, outweighs the utility of search.

      --
      This is my sig.
    5. Re:Hmmm.. by risk+one · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'd really like to make some lofty comment on the grandiosity of the internet, and what a great driving force of intellectual progress it is, but I would be doing so on slashdot. I'm not sure the universe could take the irony.

    6. Re:Hmmm.. by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      To truly appreciate the writings of Bradbury and others, one must remember that his education preceded World War 2. No man had yet "walked" in space. No man had yet exceeded the speed of sound. No atomic weapons. No lasers, except in a few fantasy stories. Fairies and elves were as likely to be proven real, as a man walking on the moon.

      Some of the greatest stories written as late as 1960 were based on hypothesis and premises that have since been proven wrong.

      And, of course, Bradbury isn't strictly a "sci-fi" author, either. He weaves a story more like Stephen King, than Asimov or Clarke. I don't think (though I could be wrong) that Bradbury really based his stories on real scientific research, theories, and hypothesis.

      Whatever - Bradbury will remain one of my near-favorites. Those who don't appreciate him need not read him.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    7. Re:Hmmm.. by MichaelSmith · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not to mention how sad it is for a science fiction writer to not understand the importance of the Internet.

      Bradbury isn't an SF writer the way Clarke, Heinlein and Asimov were. His work always had the thinnest possible skin of technology surrounding a story about people. We was one of the more humanist writers of the day and the technology in his stories often made little sense.

      I remember him ranting after the 2001 movie came out that it was 90% due to Clarke and 10% to Kubrick. His friend Clarke politely told him to shut up.

      I think this is just Ray being Ray. His contemparories wouldn't have acted the same way. In fact, Clarke was a strong advocate of communications technology to the end.

    8. Re:Hmmm.. by TheoMurpse · · Score: 2, Informative

      To be fair, the guy was so dense that he wrote a book about how awesome books are compared to television. The fact is, he will be remembered for something he did by accident. He didn't intend to write a book about censorship, and he denies that the book is about censorship.

      That book? Fahrenheit 451.

      And I quote:

      Bradbury: "Fahrenheit 451 is not, he says firmly, a story about government censorship."

      Bradbury still has a lot to say, especially about how people do not understand his most famous literary work, Fahrenheit 451, published in 1953. ... Bradbury . . . says it is . . . a story about how television destroys interest in reading literature.

    9. Re:Hmmm.. by Paxic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How sad it is that fans of science fiction, most of whom claim to be critical, forward thinkers can so quickly turn on one of their heroes. One or two quotes out of context measured against a life spent thinking about and imagining scientific possibilities. If someone you respect makes a statement you disagree with may I humbly submit that you think about that statement rather than seeking immediate gratification by posting a condemnation.

      I enjoy the services and instantaneous delivery of the internet. When I look up from my keyboard I still see unhappy people, a daily grind, inequality, poverty and war. Science fiction is about dreams and possibilities, the internet is just the current iteration of communication tools, it will pass into obscurity like any other technology.

      Odds are Bradbury's books will be remembered long after the internet has faded to obscurity.

    10. Re:Hmmm.. by An+dochasac · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Exactly. Two of the ideas behind Fahrenheit 451 is that books should be preserved, and one way to preserve them is in the minds of people (literally, word-for-word memorization). So, how is putting books on the Internet, where they can be copied virtually infinitely, a bad thing? And furthermore, putting a book on the Internet is like the ultimate preservation technique. Would that there had been some sort of Internet where books could be stored when the library of Alexandria burned!

      F451 was misunderstood. I think Ray is more concerned with the balkanization of society where narrow-minded groups decide which book is valuable and which isn't. The Internet provides a perfect venue for t self-indulgent 'mind feedback'. A moon conspiracy enthusiast can spend all day on the web digging up research demonstrating the moon conspiracy, chatting only with other believers. A communist can carefully and efficiently filter the web to demonstrate that communism works. A library is too heavy, slow and solid for this to easily happen. Try to remove all books of a particular political flavor from a library, and you'll have to read nearly every book at multiple levels. Is "The Grapes of Wrath" pro socialist? Pro-communist? Is "Moby Dick" an environmentalist novel? Are modern biology or astronomy textbooks anti-Christian? You quickly run into the case where the whole library must be burned. The internet has enough noise that no one would notice 'the Firemen' pulling out content with depth beyond the shrill political zeitgeist. Right wingers can spend all day on foxnews.com, left wingers can happy choose from hundreds of news sources which feed them what they believe.

      Ray has a point here. I've been working on a book which explains the problem with putting all our eggs in 'the Net' more clearly than I can explain here. Think of it this way, 30 years ago you could talk to your neighbor about what was on last night and chances are, you would've seen the same "All in the Family" or whatever. Now we have hundreds of channels on TV and on the internet, at least one 'channel' per individual. We can create our own reality and then find somewhere on the internet that will back it up. It is very fortunate that a library can't do that. Another thing a library can't do is make content disappear without anyone noticing.

    11. Re:Hmmm.. by mellon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The internet is indeed a great gestational pool for new work. It's also a huge distraction, and a difficult place to concentrate. And once the new work is done, it's a dangerous place for it to live, both because it might be vandalized, and because the place where it is stored might go away. Sure, if everybody makes a copy it might work out, but people only copy what's popular and what's known. A system that depends on repeated copying over millennia to preserve a work for millennia is very vulnerable. Can you imagine getting something like the dead sea scrolls off of a two-thousand-year-old hard drive?

    12. Re:Hmmm.. by beh · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think I would agree with his point, though:

      * a library is a place where you find books 'by chance', standing near the book you are looking for, but it may still catch your eye. A google search only gives you whatever your search terms give you, anything 'like' the stuff you're looking for will not be there, if it doesn't match the keywords you're looking for.

      * thanks to SEO guys, looking up '-insertrandomarticle- specs' finds *loads* of pages saying 'reviews, specs, infos about -insertrandomarticle-', the page you're actually looking for is not even on the first page, because guys peddling the product made sure their 'search-ratings' make them appear higher up. (Yes, to me, google's search results are beginning to fail me -- but not to fret, if another search engine should ever 'upstage' them, it will only be a matter of time before SEO will make it *less* usable, too... (Note, before the flames come back - I'm saying it's becoming more difficult to find relevant pages for everyday items because of excessive SEO optimised pages -- I'm not saying it would be 'unusable').

      * In a library, the librarians build the index and order the books accordingly, so you will find information grouped, and noone interferes with this index on a regular basis (excepting the occasional idiot putting a book back in the wrong place).

      * In a library, you're not constantly staring at your email inbox or other distractions. Your phone is turned off / silent, and if you need to talk to someone go out so you're not distracting anyone else -- a library is a place where distractions are being minimised, and people violating the 'quiet'/'undistracted' nature of a library are generally 'frowned upon', to say the least.

      * On the internet, distractions are ever present - being that emails, twitter messages, IM, or constant links from one document to the next and to the next and to the next, each ever less to do with what you started off with, but still entertaining enough to make you click them anyway. In a library, there are 'links' between books - usually the 'bibliography' part of a book, but sometimes mentioned in footnotes -- but since it requires you to put down your book and go and find the 'linked' book yourself, you think twice about whether the look up that reference, or try without it first. On the internet, more often than not, the easy temptation to click on a link and looking at the resulting page interrupts your workflow.

      Personally, I'm quite fond of the internet, was never much of a library-person, but I can see where Bradbury is coming from. And, personally, I'm cutting down on some of the stuff I did follow up on 'too much' for my own good - e.g. rss2email, which is nice if you want to stay on top of the current news, but in most cases, I can wait for the evening news on the telly; or look at some newspage when I'm on a break -- I no longer want my work interrupted with those constant news updates...

      Of course, I can turn them off - but it also feels wrong doing it, as my own curiousity is now constantly hunting for whatever else is new, whatever else happened, ...

      While 12-13 years ago, I totally loved finding a job where we had internet access on our workstations, now I'd rather like one where I wouldn't have it, I'm sure it would boost my overall productivity.

    13. Re:Hmmm.. by McSnarf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I would expect a science fiction writer to have a decent enough understanding that the information is the important thing, not the medium in which it is stored.

      Nope... Not all SF writers write technical SF.

      Books are heavy, clumsy things. They say the Library of Congress is about ten terabytes of information. That could be stored in a briefcase, instead of taking up over 500 miles of shelf space, in three separate buildings.

      Great. If people like you ever have anything to say regarding the LoC, I'll turn up with 100TB of hard disk space and trade it for as many books and manuscripts as I can carry. Let's see. A Gutenberg Bible in reasonable condition. A rought draft of something called the Declaration of Independence. And some other nice stuff worth having. Of course, I will provide high quality scans of everything I take with me - because, according to you, the medium is irrelevant. :)

    14. Re:Hmmm.. by HiThere · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But the thing is, the internet is censorable from a central location. (Well, several central locations, actually, but the point stands.)

      Remember what W. Smith's job was in 1984? Now it's not necessarily. The information can be altered in situ without anyone having any awareness of it. Web pages are a re-writable medium, so you can't tell what's been censored, and what's just been updated. The fact that it isn't the same today as yesterday doesn't prove anything. And the wayback machine is no protection. They'll remove things on request.

      That's a part of the message that *I* took away from Fahrenheit 451.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    15. Re:Hmmm.. by Dr.+Impossible · · Score: 2, Informative

      How sad it is that fans of science fiction, most of whom claim to be critical, forward thinkers can so quickly turn on one of their heroes. One or two quotes out of context measured against a life spent thinking about and imagining scientific possibilities.

      How was it out of context? Is he not railing against the Internet?

      Odds are Bradbury's books will be remembered long after the internet has faded to obscurity.

      How do you propose that this will happen? Why would everyone willingly go back to a pre-Internet era?

    16. Re:Hmmm.. by arb+phd+slp · · Score: 4, Funny

      When 900 years old you reach, sound as smart you will not. Hm?

      --
      There's a perfect xkcd for my sig but I'm too lazy to look it up. sudo someone go find it.
    17. Re:Hmmm.. by node+3 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      F451 was misunderstood. I think Ray is more concerned with the balkanization of society where narrow-minded groups decide which book is valuable and which isn't.

      No, it's pretty clear it's about removing books altogether.

      Wall screens replace books, people pick their political candidates on their looks. There's really not a hint allusion of balkanization in the book at all.

    18. Re:Hmmm.. by smoker2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You are an idiot then. Just last week there was a story on the web site of my local newspaper. It was a follow up to an earlier story but they provided no link to the earlier story for reference. I spent an hour trying to find that earlier story using their site search, google site search, google cache, wayback machine, everything available. That story is gone from the net, completely and forever. And that wasn't even deliberately done, AFAIK. So it is perfectly possible for an Orwellian future to develop where history is dictated by those with the power to write and rewrite it at their whim.

      If I had bought the hard copy of the newspaper, I would at least have proof that there was in fact an earlier version of the story, but relying on the net is foolish.

  17. LEARN WITH B.O.O.K. by Solitonic · · Score: 5, Funny

    LEARN WITH B.O.O.K.
              - R. J. Heathorn

              A new aid to rapid - almost magical - learning has made its appearance.
    Indications are that if it catches on all the electronic gadgets will be
    so much junk.
              The new device is known as Built-in Orderly Organized Knowledge. The
    makers generally call it by its initials, BOOK.
              Many advantages are claimed over the old-style learning and teaching
    aids on which most people are brought up nowadays. It has no wires, no
    electric circuit to break down, No connection is needed to an
    electricity power point. It is made entirely without mechanical parts to
    go wrong or need replacement.
              Anyone can use BOOK, even children, and it fits comfortably into the
    hands. It can be conveniently used sitting in an armchair by the fire.
              How does this revolutionary, unbelievably easy invention work? Basically
    BOOK consists only of a large number of paper sheets. These may run to
    hundreds where BOOK covers a lengthy programme of information. Each
    sheet bears a number in sequence so that the sheets cannot be used in
    the wrong order.
              To make it even easier for the user to keep the sheets in the proper
    order they are held firmly in place by a special locking device called a
    'binding'.
              Each sheet of paper presents the user with an information sequence in
    the form of symbols, which he absorbs optically for automatic
    registration on the brain. When one sheet has been assimilated a flick
    of the finger turns it over and further information is found on the
    other side.
              By using both sides of each sheet in this way a great economy is
    effected, thus reducing both the size and cost of BOOK. No buttons need
    to be pressed to move from one sheet to another, to open or close BOOK,
    or to start it working.
              BOOK may be taken up at any time and used by merely opening it.
    Instantly it it ready for use. Nothing has to be connected or switched
    on. The user may turn at will to any sheet, going backwards or forwards
    as he pleases. A sheet is provided near the beginning as a location
    finder for any required information sequence.
              A small accessory, available at trifling extra cost, is the BOOKmark.
    This enables the user to pick up his programme where he left off on the
    previous learning session. BOOKmark is versatile and may be used in any
    BOOK.
              The initial cost varies with the size and subject matter. Already a vast
    range of BOOKs is available, covering every conceivable subject and
    adjusted to different levels of aptitude. One BOOK, small enough to be
    held in the hands, may contain an entire learning schedule.
              Once purchased, BOOK requires no further upkeep cost; no batteries or
    wires are needed, since the motive power, thanks to an ingenious device
    patented by the makers, is supplied by the brain of the user.
              BOOKs may be stored on handy shelves and for ease of reference the
    programme schedule is normally indicated on the back of the binding.
              Altogether the Built-in Orderly Organized Knowledge seems to have great
    advantages with no drawbacks. We predict a big future for it.

  18. Re:Libraries by girlintraining · · Score: 3, Funny

    Sorry for the typo in the second sentence. My girlfriend sat down in her bra and panties in front of the air conditioner as I was writing that. Yes, that's just as distracting for us as for you, guys. -_-

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
  19. Re:"In the air?" Come on! by Quantos · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I can curl up in my easy chair with my dog(thank god he's a small dog) and a good book. It's incredibly awkward to do the same with a laptop. I do realize that smaller and probably far less awkward technology exists for reading e-books, but why would I purchase some piece of tech to do what the books I already own do. True, I could always just use it for new books, but I wouldn't. To be honest I prefer the way that an actual book feels in my hands.

    People talk about reading books online or on a computer and I just don't get it, probably a lot like Mr. Bradbury. I'm not slamming the alternatives and most people would know that just from reading what I have taken the time to write here, but on Slashdot there are some really dim people, so I'm stating this for them :)

    I am curious as to why Mr. Bradbury is being ridiculed for his opinion though. Some of the opinions that I see on /. are far more ridiculous....

    --
    Some people are only alive because it's against the law for me to hunt them down and kill them.
  20. Give him a Kindle! by yanguang · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Give the man a Kindle preloaded with more books than his library. All that, in the palm of your hand.

  21. Re:Why does he like libraries? by SigNuZX728 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I am. A lot of people are scared by things they don't understand. Why should he be any different?

  22. How real is the knowledge in your head? by Weedhopper · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Or is that in the air as well?

    Ray Bradbury wrote some good books. One book in particular was truly great, providing a social commentary on the value of information and what it means to have open and free access. This makes him a man who was forward thinking for his time and perhaps means future societies will remember him.

    Unfortunately, he's become a bit of a cranky old man. That's okay. I suppose he's earned the right to be one.

    The value of his works shouldn't be diminished but certainly, time has passed him by.

    Particularly ironic considering the events of the past week in Iran and the internet's enabling role in that continuing saga.

  23. Need a termometer by gmuslera · · Score: 4, Funny

    At how much Farenheit degrees a Kindle burns?

  24. Mr. Bradbury then spoke feelingly about... by Chris+Tucker · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... young people today, with their loud hair and long music, and their propensity for lounging in a most insouciant manner upon his lawn.

    At this point in the diatribe, well known sci-fi writer and self-proclaimed "Master Storyteller" Mr. Harlan "I don't take a piss without getting paid" Ellison mounted his soapbox, two milk crates and a folding chair, thus barely getting his eyes above the seated audience. "You tell 'em, Ray! Fuck the Internet!" Mr. Ellison sputtered in a cracked and whiney voice.

    Mr. Bradbury inquired after the publishing date of "The Last Dangerous Visions", whereupon Mr. Ellison threw his false teeth at Mr. Bradbury, whereupon the two aged scifi writers began to box each other about the head and shoulders. The assembled crowd wagered upon who would be the first to fling the contents of their Depends at the other, while several witnesses used their iPhones to upload video of the struggle to YouTube. Others in the crowd were content to chant, "Codger Fight! Codger Fight!" at the geriatric combatants.

    --
    Guaranteed! This comment 100% Anthrax free!
  25. The Veldt by westlake · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Until you write Fahrenheit 451, I wouldn't be so quick to call Ray Bradbury an idiot, no matter what he says about the internet.

    Bradbury also wrote The Veldt. The first significant story about the hazards of deep immersion in interactive entertainment: particularly for children.

    Writers of Bradbury's generation have some very interesting and perceptive things to say about "cocooning -" social isolation and a pathologically extended adolescence reinforced by the new technologies of instant communication.

  26. Re:Is there ONLY one thing to be said about books? by AdamHaun · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There are some important tradeoffs between paper and digital media. I'm assuming we're talking about original works here and that e.g. transcribing a newpaper article doesn't count.

    * Books aren't just rugged, they're also non-ephemeral in a way that web sites aren't. Much of the efficiency of the internet comes from cheap communication with centralized storage. But this means that whoever controls the storage has the power to change history. You can't change a million books in people's houses but old web pages can be lost or altered much more easily. When I go through my old del.icio.us bookmarks I often find 404s, which never happens on my bookshelf.

    * The time and money needed for paper publishing creates an incentive for basic quality control. There are precious few copy-editors working on the net. Spelling, grammar, and basic comprehensibility all suffer as a result.

    * Many popular formats on the internet (such as blogs) are inherently chronological. The focus is always on the latest information, and there's little incentive to improve or correct old content. Longer content is released a chapter (or section!) at a time. This is most visible (although less important) in webcomics, where the early art and storytelling can be orders of magnitude worse than the latest material.

    * Books have total control over layout and formatting. Web content, which has to be viewed on everything from PCs to cell phones, doesn't. Formats such as PDF are much clumsier to use than HTML. Read Edward Tufte to find out why this is important.

    * There is very little long-format content on the internet. A page or two of text is considered "long" for most purposes (in the context of Slashdot, how long is this comment? how long would it be on a printed page?). Several pages is huge, and a couple dozen pages is gargantuan. Meanwhile, even small books for children and short works of nonfiction are usually at least a couple hundred pages long. Short content is convenient (and thus popular), but there are ideas and levels of detail you simply can't reach in a few pages.

    There are some exceptions to all of this, but the general trends still drive the way we communicate. And in general, books are longer, more expensive, better edited, and more thought out in advance, while web content is shorter, faster, cheaper, more accessible, more diverse, and lower quality. The net's advantages work better in shorter formats -- it's telling that the first (and most successful) things to be digitized were the letter/memo and the casual conversation, followed later by the want ad and article.

    Will web content ever equal books? I don't know. Collections of related blog essays have been pulled from blogs, cleaned up, and published as books (Joel Spolsky's, for instance), which is a start. The Wiki might be a viable format, although I suspect open-content sites will never quite make it. Taking an idea from Fred Brooks, it may be that conceptual integrity is the most important factor in the quality of a written document, and it's hard to achieve that when you have a thousand editors. Good luck talking about it, though, since the net has a giant persecution complex vis-a-vis top-down control of publishing.

    Here's an example of where I'm coming from: Recently I decided I don't know enough about biology. I took a class in high school when I was 15 and that's it (I'm 27 now). So I bought what appears to be the standard intro level college textbook (Campbell and Reece) and was blown away. Despite being full of detail, the explanations are clear, and nearly every page has one or more full-color pictures or diagrams. There are many asides that link the topics to everyday life. Each subsection has about as much content as an average blog post. The book is 1,400 pages long. It cost $140 and I consider it worth every penny.

    There is nothing like this on the internet. But

    --
    Visit the
  27. yes, but by manaway · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Your way would win easily, until you consider how many of those wikipedia articles are what, 5-20 paragraphs? And how disjoint are your interesting tabs after an hour of browsing? It's mind-boggling how disparate the topics are after an evening of browsing. Then consider a single book, good luck finding one under 200 pages, and even a moderately focused book will bind your mind to a depth of thinking quite unlike most (though certainly not all) web pages.

    There is much to be said for your way of reading, just as there's much to Mr. Bradbury's. There's also room for people whom do both, and I prefer a world where such variety runs rampant.