this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2025
811 points (99.3% liked)
Science Memes
16231 readers
2305 users here now
Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!
A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.
Rules
- Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
- Keep it rooted (on topic).
- No spam.
- Infographics welcome, get schooled.
This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.
Research Committee
Other Mander Communities
Science and Research
Biology and Life Sciences
- !abiogenesis@mander.xyz
- !animal-behavior@mander.xyz
- !anthropology@mander.xyz
- !arachnology@mander.xyz
- !balconygardening@slrpnk.net
- !biodiversity@mander.xyz
- !biology@mander.xyz
- !biophysics@mander.xyz
- !botany@mander.xyz
- !ecology@mander.xyz
- !entomology@mander.xyz
- !fermentation@mander.xyz
- !herpetology@mander.xyz
- !houseplants@mander.xyz
- !medicine@mander.xyz
- !microscopy@mander.xyz
- !mycology@mander.xyz
- !nudibranchs@mander.xyz
- !nutrition@mander.xyz
- !palaeoecology@mander.xyz
- !palaeontology@mander.xyz
- !photosynthesis@mander.xyz
- !plantid@mander.xyz
- !plants@mander.xyz
- !reptiles and amphibians@mander.xyz
Physical Sciences
- !astronomy@mander.xyz
- !chemistry@mander.xyz
- !earthscience@mander.xyz
- !geography@mander.xyz
- !geospatial@mander.xyz
- !nuclear@mander.xyz
- !physics@mander.xyz
- !quantum-computing@mander.xyz
- !spectroscopy@mander.xyz
Humanities and Social Sciences
Practical and Applied Sciences
- !exercise-and sports-science@mander.xyz
- !gardening@mander.xyz
- !self sufficiency@mander.xyz
- !soilscience@slrpnk.net
- !terrariums@mander.xyz
- !timelapse@mander.xyz
Memes
Miscellaneous
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Physical media is coming back because owning is better than licensing.
I'll believe it when I see it.
Walk into any music store. Or bookstore. Or a Half Price Books, which sells both. People are sick of paying for the capricious hands of streaming to tell them what they're allowed to watch or read or listen to on any given day.
Walk into a specialised sex-store for a very specific fetish, and you'll see lots of people with that very specific fetish.
I don't think that would mean that the fetish is taking over society.
Yes, I know that some people value physical media. But most don't. Most people value convenience. That's what enables enshittification. If everyone was actually as sensitive to corporate bullshit as the people who you're talking about, corporate bullshit wouldn't survive.
Most people are idiots. What can you do?
I'm not talking about "everyone in the world," I'm talking about "more people than ten years ago."
I recognize that the internet is allergic to context and nuance, but seriously.
Yes, I understand what you mean. I still don't think you could find numbers to support that. While some of the people who are interested or even aware of the ideas that we're talking about, sort of media erasure and who actually even owns the thing you're watching, I'd argue those people are a tiny minority. I'd argue that for instance, my grandma and dad passing away in the last few but I've gained a niece and nephew, the population of my family has stayed essentially the same, but now there's two people less who have ever even listened to physical media, let alone still owning it.
So I'm just... politely disagreeing with you. I understand I might be mistaken, but I'm pretty confident I'm not. I think the niche is smaller than the change in attitudes towards technology. Hell, 10 years ago quite a lot of people my age still had DVD's, but that's way less common in the general population now. Movie buffs, maybe, but I don't know any anymore who actually collect movies. Or well, I suspect I do, but like people I use to be friends 10-15 years ago. Or like technically probably still am, depending on your definition.
Anyway, that's the way I see it and unless we get facts on the table from somewhere, I don't see how we could agree in this.
Honestly...this is the first time in a decade or more that I've actually believed anyone online who said something like that. Hey, you're cool. I like this sort of disagreement.
"We face each other as God intended. Sportsmanlike. No bad faith arguments, no logical fallacies...fact against fact alone."
"You mean...you'll put down your anecdotal data and I'll put down my cherry-picked personal experiences and we'll try and convince each other of our points like civilized people?"
Nice reply, thanks.
But yeah, I don't really mind if I'm right or wrong in this, this is just what I know I believe at this point.
I could be assuaded to believe that the use of physical media has increased, given proper figures from something relevant.
But I'm unsure what numbers those would be. Sales? Sales of new works, used works? Production of new physical media?
I don't know.
I'm not too bothered by this, I just like to discuss things.
Same. I think sales figures for new works could provide a partial picture, but not anything definitive. The only thing I found in my short research (I like doing big research binges, but don't have time for it today) was this article, which is far from a mic-drop but it sure is interesting.
Same. Sorry for jumping down your throat earlier. I assumed a tone of you that you weren't using.
Hmm.. I wonder where they're taking they're projections from, since there could be a little bit of bias involved. If it's from a relatively short period which coincides with say, a lot of inflation, it'd only make sense that the second hand book market would increase, because books are a commodity that even the poorest people may have hanging about, some of which might actually sell rather well.
I know that around covid and a bit later I certainly took a lot of my books down to the second hand shop to see whether I could score some money for food and booze. I did too. Turns out Discworld novels have an extremely high turnover. Especially the English versions. He didn't care for GRRM or Douglas Adams that much, but Pratchett sells like hotcakes I gather. (I do live in a university city.)
No wörries. Having been on the internet a while I'm rather used to people taking me as being "mad" when I write long comments in a very neutral tone. It's a feature of humanity. We can't help but to imagine a tone of voice to something we read (unless you're reading like a manual, and even then, you're gonna like read it just in a neutral tone in your head), and usually when it's anything that remotely disagrees with us, we assume a negative tone.
I do it all the time as well. It can be helped though. By, I assume, decades of meditation and dedication to a way of thinking and managing yourself. Or optionally, a midrange recreational dose of MDMA/LSD/psilocybin or other serotonergic substances. (The former is more permanent, the latter only lasting for like a few months or up to a year.)
Absolutely. Even putting aside the possibilities for regional and temporal bias, they're a literary society; they're quite likely to strongly play up some minor noise in both directions--either to paint themselves as a dying breed in need of saving, or as an ascendant force worth watching. They're very unlikely to have no opinion one way or the other.
Interesting that Pratchett sold well but Adams didn't. I can kind of see Martin, since that was right after the TV show shambled to a halt ignobly, but Pratchett and Adams feel like they're cut from the same cloth, particularly as far as people who would enjoy their work go. Maybe there was a bump associated with the Good Omens show?
Anyway. I appreciate your gracefulness. I try intentionally to not be that kind of guy online, so it stung particularly because I felt like I was betraying myself. Don't get on social media on a bad day, kids.