Instructions: Paper vs. Digital

[suffocation]

15 minutes ago, Toastie said:

[...] and now this: HEWGE. [...]

It's silly-spell for "huge" - imagine it uttered with ludicrous emphasis

14 minutes ago, Erik Leppen said:

I'd prefer to get rid of all that paper. (And while we're at it, all the plastic bags as well.) Yes, I get it, Lego is literally plastic pieces, but these can be used for years so the cost : use ratio is very different.

But, as mentioned elsewhere, the amount of paper used for instructions - which are typically kept for years and are more likely to be sold than to be thrown away - is probably risible, even insignificant, compared to the amount of paper used, e.g., for a newspaper with average circulation in an average-sized country - and the newspaper typically gets binned on the day of purchase or shortly thereafter.

Maybe someone knows where to source data on how much paper TLG gets through in a year compared to, e.g., a dirt sheet such as The Sun or a more dignified Guardian.

[Toastie]

1 hour ago, suffocation said:

Maybe someone knows where to source data on how much paper TLG gets through in a year compared to, e.g., a dirt sheet such as The Sun or a more dignified Guardian.

Maybe someone somewhere near the atmosphere breathed by high-up TLG representatives should ask that question - fact is, they are desperately looking for less invasive brick material (the point here is: Yes, we keep all the bricks - but so many billions of them are accumulating each year - where do they go? Into our shelves. BTW that is a good, almost permanent, save environmental sink). So they also know about paper.

One approach would be: X billion bricks divided by the average brick count of sets = average number of sets/average brick count per set. Then we need to find the average page count per average set. Then we calculate the average area of paper per year. And compare that to e.g. the area per year used by the Sun. Or the Guardian. Or "the" Times, the Los Angeles Times, the Dhaka Tribune, the ... Or the area of Amazon card board packages you can track on the second, worldwide.

I truly believe they'll give us the numbers, because they are so small (the numbers that is) ... anyone volunteering? I'd do it ...

Best
Thorsten

   

[Bartybum]

1 hour ago, suffocation said:

compared to the amount of paper used, e.g., for a newspaper with average circulation in an average-sized country - and the newspaper typically gets binned on the day of purchase or shortly thereafter.

Two wrongs don’t make a right though. I’m also miffed by newspapers

[suffocation]

Just now, Bartybum said:

Two wrongs don’t make a right though. I’m also miffed by newspapers

Since when is paper inherently wrong?

[Bartybum]

4 hours ago, suffocation said:

Since when is paper inherently wrong?

When it isn't done sustainably

[sirslayer]

At my employment, some folks tried to push the (paperless office environment) and I liked the idea.. but some customers preferred a paper signature instead of a digital signature.. With solar power and recycle of materials in California and there is a new state law to ban plastics straws!! , I'm hoping they would push a law to have a paperless office required in all digital or tech related business ..  its not required to go paperless ..yet!!! 

Edited October 16, 2019 by sirslayer

[Bartybum]

It's impressive (and kinda scary) at how much paper is used. Buildings that have heavy paperwork, like medical facilities, have to have paper weight accounted for in the design loads of the building because there's so much. Of course, it doesn't really matter if it's renewably sourced and carbon neutral, but I'd imagine a lot still might not be. That's true of a lot of stuff in modern society, but again, conserve where you can.

[agrof]

@nerdsforprez Can You please set a poll for this thread? I made previously a suggestion for this...

At everyone: is it about the user experience, or about sustainability? For user experience, I am 100% for paper and off-line activity.

For environment, You Sirs, just scratching the surface with the building instructions... I just drop some other aspects, and these must be considered in a system, not separately.

• Plastic bags inside - immediate waste, why to use those? Even in first world the public waste management is questionable. BTW, there is still big debates about composting or burning or recycling. 
• Due to marketing purposes, LEGO boxes are way over-sized. What does it cause? Shipping air - less products in transport - more transport needed - more vehicles involved - more emission. We do emission analysis here (I am working in packaging industry), in the life cycle of a packaging, always the transport and logistics (so called Use Phase) takes the biggest impact. Without any marketing intention, if You are interested what is the background of such calculation, please click here. In share, the impact looks like this (approx figures):
  • Raw material production - 20%
  • Converting raw material - 5%
  • Transport and Logistics (Use Phase) - 70%
  • End of life (Waste Management) - 5%
• Paper based instructions are not waste, but long-term products, which have much longer lifetime than any (!!) smart device. Just try compare the production impact as example (estimated):
  • paper based BI,
    • lifetime expectancy: 5-20 years 
    • energy used for usage: 0
    • production impact: 1-10 imaginary unit (lets take base the price in EUR)
  • smart device,
    • lifetime expectancy:1-2 years
    • energy used for usage: more than 0
    • production impact: 100-1000 imaginary unit (lets take base the price in EUR)

Okay, you can say, that smart devices are not bought only for reading LEGO BIs, but you get the idea. The big picture, what really matters.

Edited October 16, 2019 by agrof

[doug72]

The plastic bags can be re-cycled, as indicated by the logo on the bag.
Likewise the carboard box & instruction books can be re-cycled unless you wish to keep them. 

 

[agrof]

Unfortunately, the printed RESY symbol doesn't replace education, laziness, negligence - so it is recyclable, but might never reach the recycling factory.  Don't forget, that LEGO goes worldwide to individual households, and each country has their level of awareness, knowledge, and technology for sustainability. 

In general: Industrial waste management works quite well, but the public one is still very spreaded and dependent on individuals, which is hard to control. Of course we can and must do our best in our micro-environment to develop this processes.

Edited October 16, 2019 by agrof

[nerdsforprez]

18 hours ago, Lasse D said:

That's odd. Let's take it from the top: Permo said paper does not "radiate" and does not "attack the eyes like a monitor does". I found this statement odd, looked it up and found only CRT's "radiate", while LCD and LED screens did not. This is where my source comes into the picture, and my response was the rather blunt: "Paper actually does "attack" eyes in the same way as a digital screen since it reflects light...". I made the assumption that when Permo said "attack the eyes", they meant in the sense that the eye would take damage due to this attack and I based my searching on this. All the results I could find regarding damage on eyes from screens were as I described in my previous post. This is also where we seem to be at odds and you seem to hinge on the "attack" angle rather than the "damage" angle which is what I am referring to. In hindsight I should not have used the word "attack" given how you have locked onto it, but I wanted to use the word from Permo.

Now you have given me a reference that finds how blue light can cause damage. I thank you for this and find it interesting. Clearly LED screens shine blue light directly given how they are constructed, but what about LCD and paper? How much blue light do they emit that has a negative impact on eyes? From your first response to my initial comment my guess is that reflective light from LCD screens is worse than from paper, so if you have a source on that as well, then this would be interesting to read up on.

Yeah - I think we are getting too far into the weeds with this.  And sorry man, but you lost me .   I don't know what you  are researching but the article you cited again did not say anything about CRT's radiating/refreshing but not LCD or LEDs.  If you found something stating that great - but I can only go off of what you provided as your reference and there was nothing like that.  

 

But fair enough - communication via forums can be difficult.  Sometimes I feel I completely suck at it. Suffice it to say, I should correct what I said as well.  "Attacks" indeed is a loaded term.  Whether or not screen viewing versus paper viewing damages the eyes - I don't know.   But I do know they are not the perceived the same and there are differences how they present information.  @Toastie cogently laid out some of these differences.  In summary, one is a light/energy source (with refreshing rates or something akin to that) and the other one simply a reflection of light.  In the world of how this is perceived (my field) there are huge differences how the eyes and brain respond to this.  They are not the same at all.   This is why screen time can be associated with headaches, seizures, etc. where paper viewing (unless sufferers are using poor lighting, etc.) really is not.  

 

IMO, further discussion about how computer screens/etc. versus paper may or may not affect one's eyes is a moot point in application to this topic. It is a moot point because what we are really talking about is the perception of vision, not vision itself.  Vision is the domain of the eyes (retina, photoreceptors, etc. and all that) whereas its perception is the domain of the brain.  Eyes don't see at all actually. Brain does all that.  And if we define vision in this way (why wouldn't we - if there is no one around to "perceive" it why are we even talking about it?) then paper and electronic viewing are indeed different.  But.... and here is the salient point; a point I have made several times now.  The benefit of paper over electronic viewing is not so much because paper is better per se, it is because in today's high paced, techy society it is novel.  Novel information always takes precedence over familiar information in terms of visual processing.  Novel information also gets tied with more attention and awareness which enhances visual processing.  

 

Vision is not everything here.  Ever had the experience when you were rocking along in building a set only to notice, several steps/pages back that you missed a piece or step?  Completely didn't "see" or "notice" it.  Or rocking down the highway - blazing home from work to finish your MOC - only to buzz on by a policeman?  Does that mean something was temporarily wrong with your eyes?  Did you get something stuck there, or a sudden bout of blindness?  No.  Attention and awareness are huge players in the processing of visual information such as what would be found on the pages of a Lego build.  And even these are different.  For interested readers, look up hemispatial neglect.  Attention and awareness are just as important as the eyes when it comes to the processing of visual information.  Two players that view paper and screens very differently.  

 

Introducing novelty for the purposes of information processing helps avoid inattention or unawareness.  Although I still continue to argue reading has the edge over screen presentation for visual information processing (literature showed this effect long before our burst into the "screen" era) I believe that most the benefit I see in patients, students, etc. from periodically using paper-based reading/chart-viewing, etc. over digital reading is simply because it is a novel presentation.  Mind is more alert and aware when it is presented in this fashion..... 

3 hours ago, agrof said:

@nerdsforprez Can You please set a poll for this thread? I made previously a suggestion for this...

 

I went ahead and made it a poll.  You asked so nicely

Honestly, though - I don't see much need for it. I have not gone back and tallied responses, but pulling from memory so far the responses have been overwhelmingly for paper.  I think there have only been a few preferences for digital.

ALso, though I like your suggestions of categories you laid out before, I don't think they would be useful.  Reason being they were not all equal.  Of course folks are going to prefer booklet to be paper for A and B models plus digital access over just paper for A model because it offers so much more. 

So, I made it a simple paper or digital dichotomy. 

 

 

[ShaydDeGrai]

My Lego hobby is my way of escaping from computers and screens (which I spend far too much time in front of to begin with) so give me a paper instruction book any day.  

As much as I love some of the designs, I can honestly say that I've never built a 'B' model simply because forcing me to look at a screen (even just to print off a PDF version of the instructions) rubbed me the wrong way.  Maybe I'm just getting old and cranky but I want as much separation between my building experience and my job (computers) as I can get.  I don't do digital design, I don't like online instructions and, now, I'm actually holding off on buying sets that use the new Powered UP Control + App and Hidden Side kits because I absolutely do not want to Apps to be part of my Lego experience.

As for the environmental impact, a printed book that's going to live for years on a shelf or in a filing cabinet actually has far less of a carbon footprint than you might think.  Considering that the BTU content of a stack of instruction books doesn't produce enough energy to fully charge a single laptop or that, by weight, the environmental impact of recycling a smart phone battery vastly exceeds that of recycling clean paper, it's hard to say that having thousands of consumers spending several hours each draining, recharging and ultimately replacing batteries when they could have been reading a book by natural daylight and not burning any electricity at all is a slam dunk win for environmentalism.  Ideally the books would be printed on recycled paper using soy (or other non-toxic, biodegradable) inks, but even if they are not, Lego instruction books are not like the Sunday Times that uses two pounds of paper per copy (most of which is to print ads) and most people look at all of five pages before tossing the rest in the trash.  People can spend hours with an instruction book open in front of them, they read it cover to cover and when they are done, most of of the books get saved, sold or traded to others who will spend hours with them.

I hope TLG never abandons paper instructions (and I wish they'd drop their fascination with Kit-App tie-ins)

[agrof]

Thanks @nerdsforprez, I think a poll can invite even more members, as it is easier to give opinion this way, instead of writing comment. Might be the idea outdated though, as the topic is not so fresh, and most members might have already lost interest on it. :)

Edited October 16, 2019 by agrof

[Toastie]

7 minutes ago, ShaydDeGrai said:

Maybe I'm just getting old and cranky

Yes. Maybe. Sure. Or maybe you are getting more experienced, have seen things from many diverse perspectives, have seen a lot of things come and go. Who knows what it is.

I may be age. You know what? There is one (among others) good thing about getting old: Being able to recall. And then - provided you want to at all - project.

I am all with you - in every regard. But then - I am old as well. It may very well be just that.

(But I doubt it)

Best
Thorsten

[suffocation]

32 minutes ago, ShaydDeGrai said:

[gems of wisdom and common sense]

100% with you.

As for old age, I was already rocking false teeth when the Dead Sea was still ailing.

[Toastie]

12 hours ago, agrof said:

For environment, You Sirs, just scratching the surface with the building instructions... I just drop some other aspects, and these must be considered in a system, not separately

This.

Entirely true. This is the only approach leading somewhat into the direction of conclusive analyses. One such model used currently in e.g. the automobile industry with regard to energy consumption (and only that!) is 1) raw material acquisition, 2) parts manufacturing, 3) assembly, 4) use stage, 5) maintenance, 6) recycling, 7) re-delivery ... and there may be many more. Circular economy (some will shake their heads) is one buzz word in this regard.

For one: You simply need to find companies/industries willing to take down their pants (and TLG is >not< one of these, as far as I am concerned) to get reliable data, for two: I believe in this case it is not necessary: @nerdsforprez was much more interested in the perception/recognition aspects rather than the environmental impact of paper vs (sorry) digital, and: Paper is simply not the environmental problem of concern. And may I add (stole that range comparison from a colleague at UCI): On a(n environmental impact) logarithmic scale of 1 to 10, paper does not even show up. Wait: - well sort of.

Best
Thorsten   

18 minutes ago, Toastie said:

Yes. Maybe. Sure. Or maybe you are getting more experienced, have seen things from many diverse perspectives, have seen a lot of things come and go. Who knows what it is.

It may be age. You know what? There is one (among others) good thing about getting old: Being able to recall. And then - provided you want to at all - project.

I am all with you - in every regard. But then - I am old as well. It may very well be just that.

(But I doubt it)

Best
Thorsten

 

P.S.: I just noted: Is the "reason for edit" button gone? Come on Mods - that was fun! It could be that I am too old to find it. In any case:

Reason for edit: Stupid Dell laptop keyboard. You really need to hit hard

 

[nerdsforprez]

2 hours ago, agrof said:

Thanks @nerdsforprez, I think a poll can invite even more members, as it is easier to give opinion this way, instead of writing comment. Might be the idea outdated though, as the topic is not so fresh, and most members might have already lost interest on it. :)

Not to mention i dont even think it worked.  Or people just arent voting. Nothing is showing up.  

[dr_spock]

Is toilet paper sustainable?  It is not recyced.

 

15 hours ago, Doug72 said:

The plastic bags can be re-cycled, as indicated by the logo on the bag.
Likewise the carboard box & instruction books can be re-cycled unless you wish to keep them. 

 

Some Bricklink sellers reuse the LEGO® plastic bags.  My BL orders sometimes come in numbered bags tape closed.

 

[Shdwfalcon]

Paper. For the simple reason that  lego can and are played without technology. That means children don't have to keep staring into a screen all day long whenever they are building lego, and also those areas where electronic devices and internet is not exactly a basic need can still enjoy with lego.

On a personal selfish note, I will still expect paper for A models minimum.

1) My workdesk is not where I play my lego (I play 'em anywhere where space constrains are not a concern), and the smartphone is too tiny to view instructions for long.

2) With paper instructions, I can take in the whole page in one glance. WIth the tiny smartphone screen, I need to swipe around all the time and can't take in the whole picture in a single glance.

3) Another point is I can also leave the page there, then come back later exactly where I left off. You can't do it on your smartphone. No worries about low on battery juice, or dangling USB charging cables.

4) Sometimes I tend to "fastforward" or "backtrack" around the instructions. For reasons like figuring out what it is suppose to look like, or fixing errors, or doing "live modifications", etc. It is faster and more efficient on a paper booklet.

And no, please don't ask me to buy a tablet. I have no use of tablets, lesser the reason on getting a tablet JUST to enjoy my lego.

[agrof]

It is the poll, what doesn't work. I voted for sure. At least we discovered a bug. :) 

[Toastie]

7 hours ago, nerdsforprez said:

Not to mention i dont even think it worked.  Or people just arent voting. Nothing is showing up.  

Merde. I voted about 150 times - democracy lives off from voting - that the system allowed me to do that made me suspicious though. OK it was twice as nothing showed up when pressing the results button.

Best
Thorsten

[coinoperator]

3 hours ago, agrof said:

It is the poll, what doesn't work. I voted for sure. At least we discovered a bug. :) 

Same here
10 I voted (for paper) and the vote disappears.
20 Reload the topic and the vote shows up again and I can vote again
30 Goto 10

[dr_spock]

Polls don't work in the Technic Forum.  They seem to be ok in the other forums if I recall. 

 

[MAB]

On 10/13/2019 at 4:18 PM, Lasse D said:

I would prefer to have the choice of purchasing paper instructions as add-ons to sets.

This could well lead to more (unused) waste, not less. They would also need to double their catalogues, product databases, etc as for every one product, there are now two so this has an impact on time, storage, processing. They would still need to produce many sets of printed instructions as if the instructions sold out before the sets, then the sets might well end up unsold as they have no instructions. Thus they would probably print more than is needed on average to ensure no instruction shortage. Many of these extras would end up as unused waste.

Splitting the instructions from the sets would also be very bad PR. Imagine buying a set and then having to pay more for the instructions - I don't think parents would think so highly of LEGO. It would also likely lead to higher return rates for sets, as people thought that instructions were included but they weren't, and so would lead to returned but opened stock.

 

[Toastie]

3 hours ago, dr_spock said:

Polls don't work in the Technic Forum

What? Isn't that a black = white type of thing? Or did you guys behave badly on polls?

10 hours ago, coinoperator said:

Same here
10 I voted (for paper) and the vote disappears.
20 Reload the topic and the vote shows up again and I can vote again
30 Goto 10

Oh my goodness. BASIC. Or FORTAN? ... so beautifully nice. Very structured, very efficient. I love it! Reminds me of the times when looking at three linked PDP-10's through a glass window. And believe me, the CRTs of the DEC terminals were radiating X-rays like crazy, I am pretty sure - whole room was emerged in green light ... wait, before that goes down the wrong way ...

It looked exactly like this:

 

All the best
Thorsten