Britannica

This weekened I was mostly without an Internet connection, and the question of the details of the Dred Scott v. Sandford case came up.

So I looked up Dred Scott in Encyclopædia Britannica, except it wasn't under 'Dred' or under 'Scott'.

Wikipedia, however, has it. Lots on it. And if you misspell it as 'Dread Scott' or 'Dred Scot', you get instantly redirected, and it's much faster than Britannica, especially since--did I mention this?--it's not even in Britannica.

If fools read this blog, they'd probably be thinking right now, 'Ah, but you didn't have access to Wikipedia because it's only online, whereas Britannica can be used anywhere!' But it's a lot easier to carry around a laptop with either the en cur articles only (~2.8GB compressed) or one of those cute 'use the mobile phone network' cards. Britannica was where I was, but if I had wanted this information elsewhere I'd be out of luck. Britannica is heavy. And bulky. Can't tote it around with me where ever I go.

(The online Britannica does have it, but the hard copy didn't, and the online version isn't free anyway.)