...the idea that the ancients had amazing scientific
knowledge that was lost when the Library of Alexandria
was destroyed that we still haven't recovered today is
a pure fantasy.
Dated duples (left vs. right, democrat vs. republican, liberal vs. conservative, communism vs. capitalism, blah-blah-blah) are
obsolete.
On Wed, 29 Jul 2026 16:52:13 -0000 (UTC), Don wrote:
...the idea that the ancients had amazing scientific
knowledge that was lost when the Library of Alexandria
was destroyed that we still haven't recovered today is
a pure fantasy.
Antikythera Mechanism, anybody?
On Wed, 29 Jul 2026 16:51:38 -0000 (UTC), Don wrote:I would say something about your use of "good", but a system where you
Dated duples (left vs. right, democrat vs. republican, liberal vs.
conservative, communism vs. capitalism, blah-blah-blah) are
obsolete.
We donAt see a lot of that in multi-party democracies.
In other words, the good kind of democracies.
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.comnospam> wrote:<snippo the ugly truth about AI>
IIRC, in most cases where I have seen the destruction of the"A modern-day version of the destruction of Alexandria?s library."
That's a very foolish statement on the part of whoever made it. The
problem with burning books in the old days was that there were so few
copies that the book might be genuinely lost. That's just not an issue
today. Except in the rare case of a rare book, destroying one book-as-
object has no effect on the book-as-text.
On Wed, 29 Jul 2026 16:52:13 -0000 (UTC), "Don" <g@crcomp.net> wrote:
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.comnospam> wrote:
<snippo the ugly truth about AI>
<back in the 50s, I had English teachers who would fainted at the very
/idea/ of destroying a book>
"A modern-day version of the destruction of Alexandria?s library."
That's a very foolish statement on the part of whoever made it. The
problem with burning books in the old days was that there were so few
copies that the book might be genuinely lost. That's just not an issue
today. Except in the rare case of a rare book, destroying one book-as-
object has no effect on the book-as-text.
But that isn't the case here; it is being referenced in regards to a
true (and modern) atrocity.
<back in the 50s, I had English teachers who would fainted at the very
/idea/ of destroying a book>
There is no modern atrocity related to scanning modernt printed material.
Paul S Person wrote in article
<58sj7lp8ph9aqtu9e3jrf9houh7a6b3rld@4ax.com>:
<back in the 50s, I had English teachers who would fainted at the very
/idea/ of destroying a book>
Sounds like an easy way to get out of a test.
That's the part that slays me about this "scandal." Everyone's
acting like some horror is occuring, but all that really happened
is that some companies bought some books. Nothing was removed
from the sphere of ideas, any more than it is if you or I buy
some books.
On Wed, 29 Jul 2026 16:52:13 -0000 (UTC), "Don" <g@crcomp.net> wrote:
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.comnospam> wrote:
<snippo the ugly truth about AI>
<back in the 50s, I had English teachers who would fainted at the very
/idea/ of destroying a book>
"A modern-day version of the destruction of Alexandria?s library."
That's a very foolish statement on the part of whoever made it. The
problem with burning books in the old days was that there were so few
copies that the book might be genuinely lost. That's just not an issue
today. Except in the rare case of a rare book, destroying one book-as-
object has no effect on the book-as-text.
IIRC, in most cases where I have seen the destruction of the
Alexandria library brought up, it was as Just Another Christian
Atrocity.
IOW, it was part of anti-religious fanaticism.
But that isn't the case here; it is being referenced in regards to a
true (and modern) atrocity.
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.comNOSPAM> wrote:
That's the part that slays me about this "scandal."
Everyone's acting like some horror is occuring, but all that
really happened is that some companies bought some books.
Nothing was removed from the sphere of ideas, any more than
it is if you or I buy some books.
Depends what the books are. If they are Harlequin paperbacks,
then there are plenty of other copies out there and destroying
one or two isn't going to hurt anything.
Depends what the books are. If they are Harlequin paperbacks, then there
are plenty of other copies out there and destroying one or two isn't going
to hurt anything.
If they are out of print textbooks that are primary sources, and there
aren't very many copies left in circulation, it's a bad thing.
Scott Dorsey wrote:
Depends what the books are. If they are Harlequin paperbacks,
then there are plenty of other copies out there and destroying
one or two isn't going to hurt anything.
Imagine a future where AI chat bots have being trained on the
contents of Harlequin novels...
[Man seeking financial advice]
"Your credit score is bad but I have found a solution: a
contractual marriage with this heiress. Her family disapproves
of you, your past is scandalous, but the chemistry is
undeniable. Go here ... for some love, and tax benefits."
Scott Dorsey wrote in article <115dp5h$nu0$1@panix2.panix.com>:
Depends what the books are. If they are Harlequin paperbacks, then there
are plenty of other copies out there and destroying one or two isn't going >> to hurt anything.
If they are out of print textbooks that are primary sources, and there
aren't very many copies left in circulation, it's a bad thing.
The latter books aren't sitting in warehouses. They're generally
in archives.
On 11/08/2026 01:45, Paul S Person wrote:Whichever one they can blame on Christians, of course.
On Wed, 29 Jul 2026 16:52:13 -0000 (UTC), "Don" <g@crcomp.net> wrote:
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.comnospam> wrote:
<snippo the ugly truth about AI>
<back in the 50s, I had English teachers who would fainted at the very
/idea/ of destroying a book>
"A modern-day version of the destruction of Alexandria?s library."
That's a very foolish statement on the part of whoever made it. The
problem with burning books in the old days was that there were so few
copies that the book might be genuinely lost. That's just not an issue >>>> today. Except in the rare case of a rare book, destroying one book-as- >>>> object has no effect on the book-as-text.
IIRC, in most cases where I have seen the destruction of the
Alexandria library brought up, it was as Just Another Christian
Atrocity.
IOW, it was part of anti-religious fanaticism.
But that isn't the case here; it is being referenced in regards to a
true (and modern) atrocity.
Yes, but *which* burning of the Library at Alexandra is being referred to?
IIRC there were at least four.
On Tue, 11 Aug 2026 17:39:53 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
<grschmidt@acm.org> wrote:
On 11/08/2026 01:45, Paul S Person wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jul 2026 16:52:13 -0000 (UTC), "Don" <g@crcomp.net> wrote:
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.comnospam> wrote:
<snippo the ugly truth about AI>
<back in the 50s, I had English teachers who would fainted at the very
/idea/ of destroying a book>
"A modern-day version of the destruction of Alexandria?s library."
That's a very foolish statement on the part of whoever made it. The
problem with burning books in the old days was that there were so few >>>>> copies that the book might be genuinely lost. That's just not an issue >>>>> today. Except in the rare case of a rare book, destroying one book-as- >>>>> object has no effect on the book-as-text.
IIRC, in most cases where I have seen the destruction of the
Alexandria library brought up, it was as Just Another Christian
Atrocity.
IOW, it was part of anti-religious fanaticism.
But that isn't the case here; it is being referenced in regards to a
true (and modern) atrocity.
Yes, but *which* burning of the Library at Alexandra is being referred to? >>
IIRC there were at least four.
Whichever one they can blame on Christians, of course.
If more than one qualifies, then whichever one they think of first, I suppose.
I'm attempting /here/ to provide one answer to the question "why is
the burning of the Alexandria library such a big deal?".
I am always amazed at the ability of people to come with excuses for
clearly barbaric behavior. Or even behavior which is, as we said at
one point, "rude, crude, and socially unacceptible".
I am always amazed at the ability of people
to come with excuses for clearly barbaric
behavior. Or even behavior which is, as we
said at one point, "rude, crude, and socially
unacceptible".
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.comNOSPAM> wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote in article <115dp5h$nu0$1@panix2.panix.com>:
Depends what the books are. If they are Harlequin paperbacks, then there >>> are plenty of other copies out there and destroying one or two isn't going >>> to hurt anything.
If they are out of print textbooks that are primary sources, and there
aren't very many copies left in circulation, it's a bad thing.
The latter books aren't sitting in warehouses. They're generally
in archives.
I hope so, but we have a generation of scientists and engineers who are
dying off and their books are going up for sale (and often into trash bins, sadly) rather than being archived.
Some books that used to be common standard references like Tremaine's Audio Cyclopedia have become rare and valuable. Others like the RCA Radiotron Handbook have been made available online in such convenient forms that the originals are no longer worth much. There's a lot of change going on in the technical books world right now.
On 8/11/26 09:03, Paul S Person wrote:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2026 17:39:53 +1000, "Gary R. Schmidt"
<grschmidt@acm.org> wrote:
On 11/08/2026 01:45, Paul S Person wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jul 2026 16:52:13 -0000 (UTC), "Don" <g@crcomp.net> wrote:
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.comnospam> wrote:
<snippo the ugly truth about AI>
<back in the 50s, I had English teachers who would fainted at the very >>>> /idea/ of destroying a book>
"A modern-day version of the destruction of Alexandria?s library." >>>>>>That's a very foolish statement on the part of whoever made it. The >>>>>> problem with burning books in the old days was that there were so few >>>>>> copies that the book might be genuinely lost. That's just not an
issue
today. Except in the rare case of a rare book, destroying one
book-as-
object has no effect on the book-as-text.
IIRC, in most cases where I have seen the destruction of the
Alexandria library brought up, it was as Just Another Christian
Atrocity.
IOW, it was part of anti-religious fanaticism.
But that isn't the case here; it is being referenced in regards to a
true (and modern) atrocity.
Yes, but *which* burning of the Library at Alexandra is being
referred to?
IIRC there were at least four.
Whichever one they can blame on Christians, of course.
If more than one qualifies, then whichever one they think of first, I
suppose.
I'm attempting /here/ to provide one answer to the question "why is
the burning of the Alexandria library such a big deal?".
I am always amazed at the ability of people to come with excuses for
clearly barbaric behavior. Or even behavior which is, as we said at
one point, "rude, crude, and socially unacceptible".
-a-a-a-aYes the monotheistic barbarians who skinned Hypatia with
the edges of sea shells were only doing what their priests them
to do with the heretical woman.
Scott Dorsey wrote:IIRC, technology has marched on to the point that some of those older
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.comNOSPAM> wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote in article <115dp5h$nu0$1@panix2.panix.com>:
Depends what the books are. If they are Harlequin paperbacks, then there >>>> are plenty of other copies out there and destroying one or two isn't going >>>> to hurt anything.
If they are out of print textbooks that are primary sources, and there >>>> aren't very many copies left in circulation, it's a bad thing.
The latter books aren't sitting in warehouses. They're generally
in archives.
I hope so, but we have a generation of scientists and engineers who are
dying off and their books are going up for sale (and often into trash bins, >> sadly) rather than being archived.
Some books that used to be common standard references like Tremaine's Audio >> Cyclopedia have become rare and valuable. Others like the RCA Radiotron
Handbook have been made available online in such convenient forms that the >> originals are no longer worth much. There's a lot of change going on in the >> technical books world right now.
I bought Divinsky's "Rings and Radicals" for 98 cents. Twenty years ago
I was offered $75 for it. When I mentioned this I was offered $100 by >someone else.
Well, that was U of Toronto press, probably a small run. But my second
year statistical physics text was part of the Berkley physics series. a >large print run, and it's been trading for several hundred dollars (and
cost me $7).
In the late Roman empire the learned complained that they could no
longer find copies of important texts. The scribes were all Christian
now and were spending all their time copying Christian texts which were >naturally in great demand. Better another copy of "The Shepherd" than >Aristotle's "On Justice". Middle ages coming up, we don't need no
steenking justice.
(I first mistyped "Statistical physics" and the spell checker gave me >"Fantastical physics". I regret correcting that).--
(I first mistyped "Statistical physics" and the spell checker gave me "Fantastical physics". I regret correcting that).
On Tue, 11 Aug 2026 16:49:02 -0400, William Hyde
IIRC, technology has marched on to the point that some of those older
works can now be read.
begin fnord
William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> writes:
(I first mistyped "Statistical physics" and the spell checker gave me
"Fantastical physics". I regret correcting that).
"Ludwig Boltzmann, who spent much of his life studying statistical
mechanics, died in 1906, by his own hand. Paul Ehrenfest, carrying on
his work, died similarly in 1933. Now it is our turn to study
statistical mechanics."
- _States of Matter_, David L. Goodstein
Paul S Person wrote:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2026 16:49:02 -0400, William Hyde
IIRC, technology has marched on to the point that some of those older
works can now be read.
I may have mentioned it before, but I am hoping-a that we will find a
copy of Claudius' works on the Etruscans (a history and a grammar, I believe) before long.
Vesuvius erupted only a generation after he was emperor, and I suspect
that the status-seeking rich of Herculaneum would have works by the
later emperor (and now God) on their shelves, even if they had no
intention of ever reading them.
I've been waiting about thirty years for this technique to work. Results
are coming out, but painfully slowly.
William HydeI can only agree that Claudius on the Etruscans would be of
begin fnord
William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> writes:
(I first mistyped "Statistical physics" and the spell checker gave me
"Fantastical physics". I regret correcting that).
"Ludwig Boltzmann, who spent much of his life studying statistical
mechanics, died in 1906, by his own hand. Paul Ehrenfest, carrying on
his work, died similarly in 1933. Now it is our turn to study
statistical mechanics."
- _States of Matter_, David L. Goodstein
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 74 |
| Nodes: | 6 (1 / 5) |
| Uptime: | 51:13:21 |
| Calls: | 1,101 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 1,339 |
| Messages: | 276,016 |