4 ms·
What ever happened to Scientific American? My dad was subscribed since before I was born, and paid for each 6 numbers to be bound in a high-quality encyclopedi
by enriquto 5y ago
What ever happened to Scientific American? My dad was subscribed since before I was born, and paid for each 6 numbers to be bound in a high-quality encyclopedia-like hardcover binding. I remember devouring these venerable volumes as a kid, looking especially for the Martin Gardner, and later Douglas Hofstadter, mathematical games. But also for all the extremely cool news about space exploration, chemistry research, biology, plans for future nuclear fusion. Now it seems to be nothing of the sort (I don't talk about this stupid article, but about the overall content).
- yucky 5y ago>What ever happened to Scientific American? They are becoming more and more progressive.
- enriquto 5y agoAlright, I don't care too much about that. This is not what makes the magazine bad. There was also some cold war anti-soviet bullshit at the time. I remember a communist friend of my dad that sometimes came home and reprimanded him for making me read such an obvious capitalist mouthpiece that doesn't even have formulas in its "physics" articles (the guy was an italian phyisicist working on a tokamak). But the articles were longer, more interesting, and much more in-depth. Right now most articles have barely two or three paragraphs, with many of them being content-free or short news snippets.
- yucky 5y agoThe article in question is fairly long. It's absurd, but that is due to the nature of their bias at the magazine now. But the length is there.