Introduction
Introduction Statistics Contact Development Disclaimer Help
_______ __ _______
| | |.---.-..----.| |--..-----..----. | | |.-----..--.--.--..-----.
| || _ || __|| < | -__|| _| | || -__|| | | ||__ --|
|___|___||___._||____||__|__||_____||__| |__|____||_____||________||_____|
on Gopher (inofficial)
Visit Hacker News on the Web
COMMENT PAGE FOR:
Tool to identify poisonous books developed by University of St Andrews
drpixie wrote 4 hours 23 min ago:
My first thought was that they referred to metaphorically poisonous
books, something that scans the catalogue looking nasty books about
diversity or gender ... "oh no, more book banning".
amy214 wrote 3 hours 50 min ago:
LOL exactly. If I had a choice between a book burning of these
arsenic books, or a book burning of stunning and brave books such as
Middlesex, I would absolutely sniff those arsenic fumes, as that
would smell better than to silence the speech of the oppressed
classes by the oppressors
ngcc_hk wrote 6 hours 8 min ago:
I just read the first and last part and immediately alert my relative
studying in St. Andrew about the danger of the books there ;-).
It is “developed by” not “in”. No Harry Potter corner n…
allowing students to visit. Actually they do. But every library has
green cover does.
At least he can go to the exhibition I guess.
jeffwass wrote 6 hours 12 min ago:
Clarification of the ambiguous title :
The tool was developed by University of St Andrews, not the poisonous
books.
timbaboon wrote 5 hours 49 min ago:
Haha that’s exactly why I clicked on the story :)
gmuslera wrote 6 hours 35 min ago:
This is from a sequel or a remake of The Name of the Rose?
nickdothutton wrote 7 hours 3 min ago:
Great, first I had to buy a geiger counter for my old watch collection,
now I need to worry about my old books too.
jwagenet wrote 8 hours 2 min ago:
I thought the final note “which can irritate modern day readers” in
the heading was a funny comment. Were historic readers immune to the
effects? Has a binder deteriorated such that the irritants come off
more readily? Likely neither and it’s always been a problem, but
it’s an unanswered question.
bananalychee wrote 4 hours 45 min ago:
I assume one would develop tolerance to those acute symptoms from
repeated exposure.
userbinator wrote 6 hours 57 min ago:
Probably has always been a largely occupational hazard and otherwise
of little concern to the general public, even those who read books
regularly. Of course in this era where fear sells and everything has
to be harmless regardless of real risk, it's become a more prominent
issue.
iterance wrote 5 hours 8 min ago:
I don't think this is a "fear sells" issue. Arsenic green is
remarkably toxic. In the 19th century, the toxicity just wasn't
known or recognized as serious. Now, we know better. Medical
diagrams from the time period show hand injuries on people who
worked with arsenic compounds regularly (deep sores that won't
heal, e.g.)
ednite wrote 8 hours 15 min ago:
Killer books — literally. (Sorry, couldn’t resist.)
I knew about toxic wallpaper, but hadn’t turned the page on poisonous
books. (Apologies for the pun. I’ll see myself out.)
But in all seriousness, I’m glad to see efforts like this helping to
identify and prevent potential harm.
<- back to front page
You are viewing proxied material from codevoid.de. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.