Tuesday, December 12, 2006
News media
In a past post I wrote of the television news from CBS and there efforts to reach more demographics by broadening their digital horizons. This may not be the most important aspect of the course, but being a media and communications major it concerns me very much. It used to be, if you wanted to be in broadcasting, that one would have to be involved in newspapers and television. With the digital revolution has come new mediums for news broadcasting called webcasts. More and more newspapers and tv news channels are breaking into this because of the decreasing number of people actually watching or reading the news elsewhere in conventional ways.
Not only has the webcast and blogs been used by news corporations, but anyone has a chance to play their news on the web. A simple video camera and connection to the internet and one could become an investigative reporter. A small radio station, such as on a collegiate campus, can be broadcast to viewrs around the world which has leveled the playing field and broadened the possibilities of the individual. People also have the chance to discuss and comment on news with others around the world which has really made this world a small one.
This is important to realize if you are in my sort of major because getting involved in broadcating means more now than ever concerning possibilities.
Not only has the webcast and blogs been used by news corporations, but anyone has a chance to play their news on the web. A simple video camera and connection to the internet and one could become an investigative reporter. A small radio station, such as on a collegiate campus, can be broadcast to viewrs around the world which has leveled the playing field and broadened the possibilities of the individual. People also have the chance to discuss and comment on news with others around the world which has really made this world a small one.
This is important to realize if you are in my sort of major because getting involved in broadcating means more now than ever concerning possibilities.
Thursday, December 07, 2006
Individual Privacy and Modern Techonology of Surveillance
Modern technology could synthesize people’s lives in many ways. The creation of the Internet has been crucial in this new sophisticated era of computers. The network allows us to get information about a person’s health, public documents, financial status, driving record, credit card transactions, electronic banking, and even managing money via Internet browser. New technology has made more and more personal information available to anyone equipped to receive it. There is evidence that more and more personal information is provided to third parties. On the other hand, there is a conflict between individual privacy and the new digital technologies of surveillance. There is no doubt that nothing could be more disturbing that the observation of a person’s activities by the public. This surveillance tracking of somebody’s personal and business transactions may be just as disturbing as a physical search of a person’s home or the tapping of a person phone conversation. These types of surveillance with the help of new technology is easier and much more inexpensive to obtain. Additionally, this surveillance has little or no regulation.
On November 1, 2006, the state of New York passed a law that protects citizen against fraud. Now, the residents of New York State have the opportunity to freeze their credit card files against theft. The companies, TransUnion and Experian, give you the option to protect your personal credit files, by simply downloading a request form from the Internet. For the first time users, placing a security freeze is free. Once, the freeze is lifted or temporary removed, the companies can charge a fee, up to $5.00, to remove this service.
Two tears in a bucket for Kinderstart.com
If you asked most Americans to describe the checks and balances of a free market, how many would be able to give you an informed answer? How many would even know what you are talking about? The fact is that the popular view of modern economic freedom is largely one sided.
The pros of free market are piled so high that often the other face of the mountain is rarely tread upon. There are legitimate concerns and roadblocks in a free market. Many issues must be dealt with on a case by case basis and when shown to the light of the law must then be deemed just or unjust by those who interpret the law. The victim of these situations are not usually the mom and pop hardware store which went out of business months ago. he victims are the super duper warehouse style hardware Mecca’s which steamed rolled over mom and pop months ago. They will one day face the music in a growing tread of punishing the successful. The current focus is not somuch on hardware as it is software and companies like Google.
Of course there are two sides of the coin and the latter example would be more relevant to today’s information/technology companies like Microsoft, Yahoo and of course Google. The issue is simple when broken down. If a company becomes successful enough to eat the competition alive and allow no upstarts, it coaxes the possibility of facing anti trust litigation.
On one side of the coin a capitalist may say "you are punishing me for making a success of my company", a company once celebrated for it's part is accellerating the digital age and in essence raising the bar of the human condition. On the other side of the coin you have the critics who preach that if a company becomes to large, to successful, to rich they swallow any chance of one-upmanship and the possibility of another company raising the bar. The little man complains that the wake of another’s success may not only take the wind out of the competition's sails but also has a ripple effect that drowns the drive for any further strides for improvement in the industry.
It seems that the perfect situation would be like a well balanced horse race. So long as the top three competitors stay within a few lengths of each other the race will be exciting for everyone.
However if one horse pulls away, far ahead of the pack should a side line judge be waiting at the turn with a tranquilizer blow dart to make the race even once again for fear that the rest of the competition will fall so far behind that they will give up? Of course not. In my humble opinion Google is well within the rights of a profitable company in a free market. So what if they filter out the completion on there own site. Would you expect anything less? Have you ever seen a McDonalds coupon flyer at a Burger King restaurant? The answer is no buck-o. And on a side note who was the brain trust who publicly blasted Google for omitting content in countries where such content is illegal? (read sarcastic) I mean how dare Google abide to the laws of the countries they serve, how dare they. When you watch any news program you must be aware that the content is filtered to the specs of the station owners or shareholders. If you are a democrat you wouldn't expect any high fives from Bill O'reily would you? Well in the same light you must expect Google to edit it's content according to it's owner's or board's interest. If you fall in line with Google’s views and omitions then continue to use it, if not have a good cry about it and move on to yahoo or kinderstart.com you big baby.
This is not to say I don't have a warm place in my heart for an upstart with a good idea. I would also add that I do oppose real monopolies like the car insurance industry. But I am not in the habit of punishing the successful so long as they play by the rules.
The pros of free market are piled so high that often the other face of the mountain is rarely tread upon. There are legitimate concerns and roadblocks in a free market. Many issues must be dealt with on a case by case basis and when shown to the light of the law must then be deemed just or unjust by those who interpret the law. The victim of these situations are not usually the mom and pop hardware store which went out of business months ago. he victims are the super duper warehouse style hardware Mecca’s which steamed rolled over mom and pop months ago. They will one day face the music in a growing tread of punishing the successful. The current focus is not somuch on hardware as it is software and companies like Google.
Of course there are two sides of the coin and the latter example would be more relevant to today’s information/technology companies like Microsoft, Yahoo and of course Google. The issue is simple when broken down. If a company becomes successful enough to eat the competition alive and allow no upstarts, it coaxes the possibility of facing anti trust litigation.
On one side of the coin a capitalist may say "you are punishing me for making a success of my company", a company once celebrated for it's part is accellerating the digital age and in essence raising the bar of the human condition. On the other side of the coin you have the critics who preach that if a company becomes to large, to successful, to rich they swallow any chance of one-upmanship and the possibility of another company raising the bar. The little man complains that the wake of another’s success may not only take the wind out of the competition's sails but also has a ripple effect that drowns the drive for any further strides for improvement in the industry.
It seems that the perfect situation would be like a well balanced horse race. So long as the top three competitors stay within a few lengths of each other the race will be exciting for everyone.
However if one horse pulls away, far ahead of the pack should a side line judge be waiting at the turn with a tranquilizer blow dart to make the race even once again for fear that the rest of the competition will fall so far behind that they will give up? Of course not. In my humble opinion Google is well within the rights of a profitable company in a free market. So what if they filter out the completion on there own site. Would you expect anything less? Have you ever seen a McDonalds coupon flyer at a Burger King restaurant? The answer is no buck-o. And on a side note who was the brain trust who publicly blasted Google for omitting content in countries where such content is illegal? (read sarcastic) I mean how dare Google abide to the laws of the countries they serve, how dare they. When you watch any news program you must be aware that the content is filtered to the specs of the station owners or shareholders. If you are a democrat you wouldn't expect any high fives from Bill O'reily would you? Well in the same light you must expect Google to edit it's content according to it's owner's or board's interest. If you fall in line with Google’s views and omitions then continue to use it, if not have a good cry about it and move on to yahoo or kinderstart.com you big baby.
This is not to say I don't have a warm place in my heart for an upstart with a good idea. I would also add that I do oppose real monopolies like the car insurance industry. But I am not in the habit of punishing the successful so long as they play by the rules.
New Political Tool: Text Messaging
I believe technology surprises us everyday. It's funny how already existing technology can all of a sudden take new meaning. I never realized that something that we use everyday as a form of socializing could be used in serious situations like mobilizing protests, dodging authorities, and firing off political spam. Text messaging provides an underground channel for construction. Even though I think the SMS idea is positive, it can have its negative side. The same way good people can use this method terrorist can. I believe that is biggest negative to this method.
Tuesday, December 05, 2006
Who needs the library, When you've got Google!
"Tony Sanfilippo is of two minds when it comes to Google's ambitious program to scan millions of books and make their text fully searchable on the internet...The outcome could determine how easy it will be for people with internet access to benefit from knowledge that's now mostly locked up -- in books sitting on dusty library shelves, many of them out of print. "
Sanfilippo's overall idea is for google to make the thousands of books that sit on shelves available on google search. In other words, people will be able to sit at their computer and read or print entire books. I think this idea is great. Personally, i hate libraries because i hate searching for books through dozens and dozens of shelves sometimes to find that they don't even carry the book you are looking for anymore. Ok, sure there are librarians and with more modern technology there are the people that can look up what books are in stock or not but with google search its like you have that power from your home. Of course there is always a negative aspect; this idea that Sanfilippo has will definately make peole so much more "lazier" than they already are. And more importantly, eventually people will just stop going to libraries or even bookstores to purchase books; thats two businesses that will suffer greatly.
"To endorse Google's library initiative is to say "it's OK to break into my house because you're going to clean my kitchen," said Sally Morris, chief executive of the U.K.-based Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers. "Just because you do something that's not harmful or (is) beneficial doesn't make it legal." "
"I don't see how making a few snippets of a work available to a user could have any negative impact on the market," said Band, who has advised library groups and internet companies on copyright issues."
Because publishers are having such a hard time accepting this idea, they believe google will need to obtain copyright laws and go through the publishing companies to get the works that they want scanned. But the bigger problem is that many of those works do not exist any more or are out of print. So now google is trying to work with libraries to get a more sufficient amout of works scanned.
"From the point of view of the publishers, you can't blame them for playing their role, which is to maximize sales," he said. "But if fair use wasn't found, (Google) would never be able to do the mass importation of books required to make a database that is socially useful."
Sanfilippo's overall idea is for google to make the thousands of books that sit on shelves available on google search. In other words, people will be able to sit at their computer and read or print entire books. I think this idea is great. Personally, i hate libraries because i hate searching for books through dozens and dozens of shelves sometimes to find that they don't even carry the book you are looking for anymore. Ok, sure there are librarians and with more modern technology there are the people that can look up what books are in stock or not but with google search its like you have that power from your home. Of course there is always a negative aspect; this idea that Sanfilippo has will definately make peole so much more "lazier" than they already are. And more importantly, eventually people will just stop going to libraries or even bookstores to purchase books; thats two businesses that will suffer greatly.
"To endorse Google's library initiative is to say "it's OK to break into my house because you're going to clean my kitchen," said Sally Morris, chief executive of the U.K.-based Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers. "Just because you do something that's not harmful or (is) beneficial doesn't make it legal." "
"I don't see how making a few snippets of a work available to a user could have any negative impact on the market," said Band, who has advised library groups and internet companies on copyright issues."
Because publishers are having such a hard time accepting this idea, they believe google will need to obtain copyright laws and go through the publishing companies to get the works that they want scanned. But the bigger problem is that many of those works do not exist any more or are out of print. So now google is trying to work with libraries to get a more sufficient amout of works scanned.
"From the point of view of the publishers, you can't blame them for playing their role, which is to maximize sales," he said. "But if fair use wasn't found, (Google) would never be able to do the mass importation of books required to make a database that is socially useful."
Google and Yahoo are punks!!!
"Yahoo! has been censoring its Chinese-language search-engine for several years and rival firm Google, which recently took a share in Baidu, a Chinese search-engine that filters a userÂ’s findings, seems ready to go the same way. In their efforts to conquer the Chinese market, the two firms are "making compromises that directly threaten freedom of expression," Reporters Without Borders said."
From reading the article "Google-Yahoo market battle threatens freedom of expression", I have come to the conclusion that these two American tycoon companies are not as big and as bad as I thought. At one point in time, everything was done through Google or Yahoo without a care. It was free, unlimited access to any kind of information necessary or desired. However, lately both compaines have been conforming their American ways of keeping an "open door policy" to limiting its contents for certain areas in China. In my own personal opinion, the Chinese have always been undercover masterminds, and it seems that they are getting their way and tearing down the backbone of American structure in the process. This is supposed to be a free country, and an individuals access to information was included.
As said in the article, "Censorship of search engines is a core issue for freedom of expression". Although I do not agree with what the Google and Yahoo companies are doing, I must admit, I should have seen it coming. MONEY IS MONEY, and it runs America, so losing information to gain more $$$income$$$ doesn't surprise me at all. Maybe I was the naive one believing America had a heart full of feelings and compassion, not greed and domination. Chinese can get information about anything connected to America, but Americans will get " NO DATA FOUND".
MySpace China
MySpace faces many challenges in China - MarketWatch
Will MySpace be as popular in China as it is here? What will happen if Chinese MySpacers start acting like political dissidents? Will they follow Google's lead and cooperate with the Chinese Government?
Will MySpace be as popular in China as it is here? What will happen if Chinese MySpacers start acting like political dissidents? Will they follow Google's lead and cooperate with the Chinese Government?
Organized Chinese hackers hit official Japan sites
A group of Chinese hackers has launched organized cyber-attacks on dozens of official Web sites in Japan and Taiwan in response to a Japanese attack on a Chinese site last month.
"The newspaper Wen Wei Po said groups organized 1,900 hackers to launch a massive attack on more than 200 official Web sites in Japan and Taiwan on Monday. The attack was scheduled to continue for a week."
The daily said that the hackers were divided into 5 different groups who were each given a different responsibility in hacking the sites.
In the article it said that the daily paper stated that the reason for the hackers to attack all of these websites was due to the sabotage in retaliation for a Japan-based attack on the Web site of the China Federation of Defending Diaoyu Islands on July 25 in which a hacker wrote "the Uotsuri Island belongs to Japan" on the site, the report said. Uotsuri is the largest of the islands, known in Japan as the Senkaku Islands.
It took Japanese officials between a few minutes and a few days to get many of the websites up and revived and working again. They also stated in the article that it would be very hard for them to capture all the hackers.
"The newspaper Wen Wei Po said groups organized 1,900 hackers to launch a massive attack on more than 200 official Web sites in Japan and Taiwan on Monday. The attack was scheduled to continue for a week."
The daily said that the hackers were divided into 5 different groups who were each given a different responsibility in hacking the sites.
In the article it said that the daily paper stated that the reason for the hackers to attack all of these websites was due to the sabotage in retaliation for a Japan-based attack on the Web site of the China Federation of Defending Diaoyu Islands on July 25 in which a hacker wrote "the Uotsuri Island belongs to Japan" on the site, the report said. Uotsuri is the largest of the islands, known in Japan as the Senkaku Islands.
It took Japanese officials between a few minutes and a few days to get many of the websites up and revived and working again. They also stated in the article that it would be very hard for them to capture all the hackers.
The Great Digital Divide
What is the digital divide? The Digital Divide was a term first used in the early 1990s to help explain the ever developing gap between those few who have access and the know how to use Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and those who, for geographical reasons and or socio-economic, have restricted, limited or even no access. There was much concern that ICT would worsen existing disparity. Many areas of specific concern were recognized both abroad and here, specifically that individuals could be at a severe disadvantage from their age, gender, geographic location, culture and or economic status.
“The digital divide is not a clear single gap that divides a society into two groups. Researchers report that disadvantages can take such forms as lower-performance computers, lower-quality or high-priced connections, difficulty in obtaining of the Internet and technological advances in developing economies… Today the discussion is moving from the technologies themselves to skills and literacy. Training people in computer skills entails teaching them to read and write first and then how to search and use information effectively but regular practice and the access to practice will still be a limiting factor….Another key dimension of the Digital Divide is the global digital divide, reflecting existing economic divisions in the world. This global digital divide widens the gap in economic divisions around the world. Countries with a wide availability of internet access can advance the economics of that country on a local and global scale. In today's society, jobs and education are directly related to the internet. In countries where the internet and other technologies are not accessible, education is suffering, and uneducated people cannot compete in our global economy. This leads to poor countries suffering greater economic downfall and richer countries advancing their education and economy.”
Monday, December 04, 2006
Personal Online Identity Management Systems
PRESS RELEASE InfoSearch Media to Launch Personal Online Identity Management System
The need to manage and manipulate search results has spawned new products and a new business: search management. Here is an example of new service: personal brand management. A bid to control what pops up when some one inputs your name into the search engines of the world.
The need to manage and manipulate search results has spawned new products and a new business: search management. Here is an example of new service: personal brand management. A bid to control what pops up when some one inputs your name into the search engines of the world.
Using Networks to Fight Networks
Open-Source Spying - New York Times
The New York Times Magazine has published a lengthy article making a simple point: The digital War on Terror must be fought with the the same tools that the modern high-tech terror cell has at its disposal. The inability of our analysts and spy networks to use the same powerful tools of modern information and communications technology, software and networking that are available to the average individual, (not to mention al Queda) is simply frightening. Open source vs. walled gardens. Sharing vs. "need-to-know." Tapping into the swirls of information circling the globe is not possible with a crappy out-dated search engine. Wouldn't you think that the CIA would have the best search capabilities in the world? Wouldn't you think that they would have a secure way to share key information with other defense agencies and each other?
The New York Times Magazine has published a lengthy article making a simple point: The digital War on Terror must be fought with the the same tools that the modern high-tech terror cell has at its disposal. The inability of our analysts and spy networks to use the same powerful tools of modern information and communications technology, software and networking that are available to the average individual, (not to mention al Queda) is simply frightening. Open source vs. walled gardens. Sharing vs. "need-to-know." Tapping into the swirls of information circling the globe is not possible with a crappy out-dated search engine. Wouldn't you think that the CIA would have the best search capabilities in the world? Wouldn't you think that they would have a secure way to share key information with other defense agencies and each other?
Cybersecurity for the Jihad
PC World - Jihadists Publish Cybersecurity E-Zine
Tech sites and bloggers have noticed a new how-to manual. It seems that the digital jihadists have had enough of being attacked by western vigilantes and intelligence services. Here's an article about a cybersecurity manual for the online jihadist web sites feeling threatened by the onslaught of cyber-crusaders out to destroy their networks.
Tech sites and bloggers have noticed a new how-to manual. It seems that the digital jihadists have had enough of being attacked by western vigilantes and intelligence services. Here's an article about a cybersecurity manual for the online jihadist web sites feeling threatened by the onslaught of cyber-crusaders out to destroy their networks.
Sunday, December 03, 2006
Google Shares Top $500
In the article Google Shares Top $500 by Bloomberg news he states that "Shares of Google Inc., the world's most-used Internet search engine, passed $500 for the first time after profit almost doubled in the last quarter and analysts predicted the stock may gain another 20 percent". This company which started at $85 a share in 2004 is now with six other big companies with the same level shares. They jumped up to twenty two percent this year.
"The stock's advance values Google at 62 times earnings, more than double the average for the Standard & Poor's 500 Software & Services Index. Investors are betting Mountain View, Calif.-based Google will continue to increase sales and profit as it captures rising demand for advertising linked to search results".
What I found to be interesting is that Yahoo came in second for the search engine while Google was at number one for its internet search engine. While Google is at 155 Billion dollars making them third while Yahoo is at 37 Billion dollars.
"Google remains our top pick in the Internet space," Heath Terry, an analyst at Credit Suisse in Manhattan, wrote in a note last week".
I found this interesting becuase I wouldn't think that Google is so popular. I barely use Google I prefer to go onto Yahoo to do a search and rarely think about using Google.
Resource: The Link: Newday.com
http://www.newsday.com/business/ny-bzgoog4985936nov22,0,2950154.story
"The stock's advance values Google at 62 times earnings, more than double the average for the Standard & Poor's 500 Software & Services Index. Investors are betting Mountain View, Calif.-based Google will continue to increase sales and profit as it captures rising demand for advertising linked to search results".
What I found to be interesting is that Yahoo came in second for the search engine while Google was at number one for its internet search engine. While Google is at 155 Billion dollars making them third while Yahoo is at 37 Billion dollars.
"Google remains our top pick in the Internet space," Heath Terry, an analyst at Credit Suisse in Manhattan, wrote in a note last week".
I found this interesting becuase I wouldn't think that Google is so popular. I barely use Google I prefer to go onto Yahoo to do a search and rarely think about using Google.
Resource: The Link: Newday.com
http://www.newsday.com/business/ny-bzgoog4985936nov22,0,2950154.story
Google Suffers Setback in Copyright Case
In the article “Google Suffers Setback in Copyright Case” by the Associated Press talks about how Google wants to create digital copies of books while Yahoo rejects Google on this offer. This quote “Google believes it can defend its plans to provide online access to millions of library books by obtaining more details about similar projects involving some of its biggest rivals”. Consequently, Google got sued by the Publishers because they stated they didn’t get authorization to make copies of the book and be allowed to put them online and to let anyone use the book if they have the internet. This quote shows how two companies are working together to start up their own digital database of books. “Both Yahoo and Microsoft are part of a large alliance of businesses and libraries working together to create a digital database of books, amazon.com has scanned a large number of books so consumers can read excerpts from books that they may want to buy”. This was an interesting article on how Google is working by themselves because Yahoo does not want to work with them. On the other hand Yahoo and Microsoft are working with one another to create a digital database of digital books.
Resource: Link to Newday:
http://www.newsday.com/technology/wire/sns-ap-yahoo-google,0,2057254.story
Resource: Link to Newday:
http://www.newsday.com/technology/wire/sns-ap-yahoo-google,0,2057254.story
Google Plans to Cancel Paid Service for Answers
In the article “Google Plans to Cancel Paid Service for Answers” by Miguel Helft he talks about how Google is going to shut down its answers service. “A service that allows users to pose a question to a panel of researchers and pay for a helpful answer”. He states that they started this service about four years ago and when Yahoo decided to do this as well they didn’t charge a fee. It is also one of their best selling features of Google. While Yahoo advertised about the answers service they started to get a lot of business from people. “Yahoo Answers, which was introduced nearly a year ago, has quickly built up a large community of users. Yahoo said the number of answers in its database grew from 10 million in May to about 60 million now”. It is also one of their nest selling features now too especially since they have to compete against Google and Myspace. On the Google website they charge quite a bit of money for people to use their services. “The archive of questions on Google Answers shows that users paid as much as $150 in recent days for information on hedge funds, those asking questions on the site state how much they are willing to pay for a satisfactory answer from the researchers, who are independent contractors screened by Google employees”. If I were thinking about this answers service I would definitely go to Yahoo especially because it is free. Why pay a fee if another website is not charging. This was an interesting article about Google especially because I did not realize how these websites like to charge you for a service that they are providing online to you. Its pretty cool how one could charge while the other is giving their service for free.
Link: New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/30/technology/30google.html
Link: New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/30/technology/30google.html
Google Takes on Copyright Laws
Tony Sanfilippo is of two minds when it comes to Google's ambitious program to scan millions of books and make their text fully searchable on the internet.
On the one hand, Sanfilippo credits the program for boosting sales of obscure titles at Penn State University Press, where he works. On the other hand, he's worried that Google's plans to creat digital copies of books obtained directly from libraries could hurt his industry's long term revenues.
I have mixed reactions about this article..
I think that it would be a great idea for Google to scan millions of full text books to be available on the Internet so that it will convenience people more in the aspect that they wont have to waste their time having to go all the way to the library to take the book out and have to spend time searching around the library for it. But then where i dont agree with Google scanning millions of full text books on the internet for everybody to have access to is because then nobody will go to the library and nobody will go to the bookstores to purchase these books so then all the bookstores will lose money and maybe even have to go out of business.
In the article it states that "To prevent the wholesale file sharing that is plaguing the entertainment industry, Google has set some limits in its library project: Users wont be able to easily print materials or read more then small portions of copyright works online."
But many publishers remain wary. To endorse Google's library intiative is to say "it's OK to break into my houes because you're going to clean my kitchen," said Sally Morris, chief exectuive of the UK based Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers. "Just because you do something thats not harmful or is beneficial doesnt make it legal."
Morris and other publishers believe Google must get their permission first, as it has under the Print Publisher Program it launched in October 2004, two months before announcing the library initiative.
Under Google's structures, readers can see just five pages at a time of publisher submitted titles and no more then 20 percent of an entire book through multiple searches. For books int he public domain, they can read the entire book online.
On the one hand, Sanfilippo credits the program for boosting sales of obscure titles at Penn State University Press, where he works. On the other hand, he's worried that Google's plans to creat digital copies of books obtained directly from libraries could hurt his industry's long term revenues.
I have mixed reactions about this article..
I think that it would be a great idea for Google to scan millions of full text books to be available on the Internet so that it will convenience people more in the aspect that they wont have to waste their time having to go all the way to the library to take the book out and have to spend time searching around the library for it. But then where i dont agree with Google scanning millions of full text books on the internet for everybody to have access to is because then nobody will go to the library and nobody will go to the bookstores to purchase these books so then all the bookstores will lose money and maybe even have to go out of business.
In the article it states that "To prevent the wholesale file sharing that is plaguing the entertainment industry, Google has set some limits in its library project: Users wont be able to easily print materials or read more then small portions of copyright works online."
But many publishers remain wary. To endorse Google's library intiative is to say "it's OK to break into my houes because you're going to clean my kitchen," said Sally Morris, chief exectuive of the UK based Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers. "Just because you do something thats not harmful or is beneficial doesnt make it legal."
Morris and other publishers believe Google must get their permission first, as it has under the Print Publisher Program it launched in October 2004, two months before announcing the library initiative.
Under Google's structures, readers can see just five pages at a time of publisher submitted titles and no more then 20 percent of an entire book through multiple searches. For books int he public domain, they can read the entire book online.
Friday, December 01, 2006
Instead of buying the Book go to Google
"If Google is seen as being permitted to do this without any response, then probably others will do it, You would have a proliferation of databases of complete copies of these copyrighted works."
Google scanning books for online access seems to be a good idea but at the same time a bad idea. Being a college student accessibility to books online means more money in my pocket. At the same time that means publishers, authors, and copy writers will be losing money. While it states that publishers will have a say in what books can be published and how much of the books can be scanned, once Google starts other search engines will follow and at some point the whole book will be available.
