MennoNet.com

I use outdated information from encyclopedias since I don't trust most information online. I only trust the information if it's from a well-known company or ends with ".gov" or ".edu." [except search engines]. If certain information isn't in those encyclopedias, I would ask the person talking about it what it is. But if he tells me to surf the Internet for the information, I will just ignore it.

forsoothsayer wrote: ↑Sun Jan 21, 2024 5:32 pm I use outdated information from encyclopedias since I don't trust most information online. I only trust the information if it's from a well-known company or ends with ".gov" or ".edu." [except search engines]. If certain information isn't in those encyclopedias, I would ask the person talking about it what it is. But if he tells me to surf the Internet for the information, I will just ignore it.

Generally I agree with you and that is why I so stringently source my knowledge that others would call “conspiracy”

Do you have a particular bone your objecting to right now?

forsoothsayer wrote: ↑Sun Jan 21, 2024 5:32 pm I use outdated information from encyclopedias since I don't trust most information online.

I only trust the information if it's from a well-known company or ends with ".gov" or ".edu." [except search engines]. If certain information isn't in those encyclopedias, I would ask the person talking about it what it is. But if he tells me to surf the Internet for the information, I will just ignore it.

you’re wise to stick with old publications (if this is what you meant) ‘cause publishers have been taken over by those with goals to rewrite history, science, and everything else .. no corner too small to be overlooked.

folks should keep their old books, libraries are disposing of them. (if you have a library you’re comfortable with.)
“.gov” or “.edu” .. ditto. if you have children, review EVERYTHING they have or is presented to them. don’t rely on titles, covers.

i’m heartbroken to say.

2019 Public libraries ..
viewtopic.php?t=2123
^^i was so innocent then.

Publishing big printed reference books had many of the same weaknesses of the online system. The editorial staff were often limited and not well balanced, and inaccessible. There was a lot of cut and paste type of material, there were bound copies of corrections and updates. It wasn't nearly as golden and desirable as it may seem from this era.

temporal1 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 21, 2024 5:55 pm

forsoothsayer wrote: ↑Sun Jan 21, 2024 5:32 pm

you’re wise to stick with old publications

Thank you, temporal. I stick with old encyclopedias since they're usually sold cheaper than the latest ones.
This might be off topic, but I think students should stick with bringing dictionaries to school. [if they're not allowed to use the computer during class.] The teachers are more likely to be okay with it than using the computer to surf an online definition.

forsoothsayer wrote: ↑Sun Jan 21, 2024 7:26 pm

temporal1 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 21, 2024 5:55 pm

forsoothsayer wrote: ↑Sun Jan 21, 2024 5:32 pm

you’re wise to stick with old publications

Thank you, temporal. I stick with old encyclopedias since they're usually sold cheaper than the latest ones.
This might be off topic, but I think students should stick with bringing dictionaries to school. [if they're not allowed to use the computer during class.] The teachers are more likely to be okay with it than using the computer to surf an online definition.

I agree with this choice of books for informational resources. Likewise, even today I prefer to go to the stacks and read the articles from the professional journals. I have noticed errors in articles that were simply scanned into a data base when compared to the hard copy.

Our families do not allow our children to use a computer at all until the age of 17 or 18 and always under supervision. The programs that help to block questionable websites are also handy. I believe Josh has listed some of them here though I cannot recall the names of those products.

I am currently of the opinion there isn’t really any usable filtering software that (a) works well enough to make practical use of the Internet and (b) is effective at filtering stuff I don’t want my kids to see (or even myself to see).

barnhart wrote: ↑Sun Jan 21, 2024 6:44 pm Publishing big printed reference books had many of the same weaknesses of the online system. The editorial staff were often limited and not well balanced, and inaccessible. There was a lot of cut and paste type of material, there were bound copies of corrections and updates. It wasn't nearly as golden and desirable as it may seem from this era.

They provide a foundation of information with which to begin.
i’m not sure where you’re getting the idea original texts are viewed as “golden.” They are likely not replaceable.

forsoothsayer wrote: ↑Sun Jan 21, 2024 7:26 pm

temporal1 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 21, 2024 5:55 pm

forsoothsayer wrote: ↑Sun Jan 21, 2024 5:32 pm

you’re wise to stick with old publications

Thank you, temporal. I stick with old encyclopedias since they're usually sold cheaper than the latest ones.
This might be off topic, but I think students should stick with bringing dictionaries to school. [if they're not allowed to use the computer during class.] The teachers are more likely to be okay with it than using the computer to surf an online definition.

i recently gave my brother a parallel New Testament, with 8 versions, line by line, side by side. The publication was used, it included Greek. i originally studied my version in the 80’s-90’s, a lot has changed since then.

i just checked that same book, the new printing dropped Greek, and added .. The Message, and switched other translations.
To me, this is not the same book .. the covers APPEAR the same.

This is now just SOP. Count on it. Children’s literature, et al. “The Great Switcheroo.”
The deceit involved is staggering.

1995
https://www.thriftbooks.com/w/holy-bibl ... n/1749735/
1998
https://www.christianbook.com/contempor ... 61/pd/1365

A parallel publication like this demonstrates how language makes profound differences. Line by line.
Today, the internet offers a number of parallel Bible sources. i enjoyed my hard cover book years ago.

I am just as distrustful (if not more so) of a .gov or .edu.They both have been leading us in wrong directions of late.

WHen I find a trustworthy source, I generally take their information as credible. They can be wrong, so I wait to hear supporting validation.

Just using old sources does not always work because so many new things are not available in the older sources. Current issues have to be sourced from current sources. The older sources do not always have the needed information. Older sources will have little on robotics, electric grid/green energy, current population densities and food sources for those densities.