Popular Science Frees Its 137-Year Archives

DesScorp writes "Popular Science magazine has scanned every issue they've ever produced, and posted the archives at their website, at no charge. 'We've partnered with Google to offer our entire 137-year archive for free browsing. Each issue appears just as it did at its original time of publication, complete with period advertisements. It's an amazing resource that beautifully encapsulates our ongoing fascination with the future, and science and technology's incredible potential to improve our lives. We hope you enjoy it as much as we do.'" First search: the history of the flying car.

Comments

Kudos to them

[mangu]

This makes me seriously consider getting a subscription to their dead tree version again.

Re:Kudos to them

[JustOK]

I only buy books and music from authors who publish for free online.

Maybe I should extend the same policy towards zines?

How much do you pay for that free stuff?

Foresight

[TheMeuge]

This shows good sense on the part of the publications' editors and executives. There isn't much market for 130 past years of Popular Science. Bandwidth is cheap. Certainly making this move will get them brownie points. Brownie points mean good press. Brownie points mean more hits on their site... as does the actual archive. More hits on their website + good public image = guaranteed increase in subscriptions. Everyone wins.

Re:Foresight

[Opportunist]

Not much market? Hell, if you want to see what popular culture is like in certain times, magazines like this one is a treasure! Check out the magazines of the 30s (depression era), 40s (war era), 50s (cold war introduction)... you just have to read between the lines and you see a wealth of information. The ads alone are a rich source of the mindset of the time.

Re:Foresight

[icebraining]

Bandwidth is cheap.

Especially if Google provides it, as in this case.

Re:Sudden outbreak of common sense

[maxume]

It is popular media, not organized science.

LIFE Magazine Also?

[hduff]

I remember reading through all the bound volumes of Life Magazine in-between classes as an undergrad. That gave me a better sense of 20th century American history than anything I ever read in grade school. It would be wonderful for Time-Life to do the same as Popular Science.

Re:LIFE Magazine Also?

[spydabyte]

LIFE already did: http://books.google.com/books/serial/7FQEAAAAMBAJ?rview=1

Oh and here's the best view for all the Popular Science "Books": http://books.google.com/books/serial/CzwEAAAAMBAJ?rview=1

Re:Sudden outbreak of common sense

[delirium of disorder]

"The entire point of organized science is to let anyone read"

Ya, but Popular Science, is about the popularization of existing research, not the nitty gritty of the research itself. Real science--peer review journals--are even more closed off than commercial magazines. Given science's reputation for free inquiry and openness, it's ironic that scientific publications are the last vestige of closed media in an increasingly open society.

Re:Im trying to find a make your own submarine

[Tablizer]

Maybe it was Popular Mechanics in which you remember the roll-your-own sub. I've mixed up memories that I thought were ironclad from several decades ago.

Re:Sudden outbreak of common sense

[K. S. Kyosuke]

It should be labeled "Sudden outbreak of common scans"...

The period ads

[istartedi]

I bet the period advertisements alone will be priceless.

As much as we hate advertising on the web, there is definitely something to be said for ads as a window into history.

With so much content being dynamicly generated, we won't have period ads like we did with print.

Embedded advertising could solve this, and it wouldn't be a problem if it were done as still images and text analagous to a printed ad. Of course, online advertisers seem to have a habit of shooting themselves in the foot in this regard--the temptation to introduce obtrusive ads just ups the ante in the arms race.

Reading ads from pop sci might tell you that Ford has been in business for over 100 years. Reading web pages archived from today will tell you nothing of the sort. The ad will either be fetched and dynamicly generated (and thus be non-period) or it will be edited out by the archiver.

Re:A nice start

[houghi]

Seems there is a way and much better interface to use http://books.google.com/books?id=qR8DAAAAMBAJ which will point to the first issue. Great using the full-screen ability of your browser and see two pages next to each other.

Re:Flying cars are coming soon!

[AuMatar]

NOOOOOOOO!! My manager walked by when I was reading your comment. He's putting in a request for a dozen goats as we speak.

Breakthroughs

[MartinSchou]

Relativity: June, 1914, page 434
Quantum mechanics: February 1927, page 22
Atomic bomb: October 1945, page 80
Integrated circuits: September 1966, page 96

Re:Breakthroughs

[slashqwerty]

Atomic bomb: October 1945, page 80

"On August 5th 1945, an atomic explosion occurred within an annihilation bomb dropped on Hiroshima. Popular Science Monthly has looked forward to such a scientific triumph for many years..."

Anyone else appalled by the lack of humanity in this article?

That is a sign of the times. We had just ended the war with Germany and Italy. The atomic bombings were meant to end the war with Japan--the nation that launched the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor and brought the United States into the war. An estimated 60 million people died because of World War II. Two-thirds of those 60 million were civilians. Japan was responsible for the Nanking Massacre which did not endear them any sympathy.

Entire cities were firebombed during the war. The Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs were less destructive than many firebombings that had occurred in the preceding years. The effects of radiation were not yet well-known to the general public. More powerful nuclear weapons had not yet been developed and the ramifications of nuclear war had not yet set in.

I also doubt it was the weapon they looked forward to, so much as the ability to use nuclear energy.

You already have downloaded them.

[John Hasler]

> It'd be nice if you could download them.

If you are viewing them you already have downloaded them: they're right there on your computer. You just haven't figured out how to save them to disk.