Slashdot Mirror
European Libraries Counter Google Digitisation
headisdead writes "A week after Google substantially improved their UK site, Deutsche-Welle carry the story that the a whole host of large European libraries (with the British Library's tacit support) have joined an EU-based digitisation project as a counter to Google's own library scheme. The project is the brainchild of BNF director Jean-Noel Jeanneney, a sort of mild-mannered Jose Bove for the librarians out there. Divisive pride, or healthy competition?"
I thin kthe main thing is that all these works will be preserved digitally, open for people to read whenever they want to. Anybody saying that this is a bad thing is just a hopeless google fanboi.
Making the moon less necessary since 1998.
The libraries are making their content more accessible? Can it be bad?
It's simpler than that: if Google isn't digitizing European books somebody else has to do it and eventually somebody will create a unified search interface.
healthy competition = divisive pride
Hold on a minute... I think we're missing the point. If Goooooogle or anyone else happens to overtake the public libraries in popularity or usefulness, it is quite likely that the information available will suddenly become subject to what advertisers will pay for, and will turn in to a "top 40" of public information rather than a collected works of all public information.
If public libraries use their funds to assist each other in digitally making available all public information without regard to what is possible, then we have a GREAT thing, but when the sum total of that body of knowledge and history is governed by someone trying to make money, we, as a society, WILL lose in the end.
Its NOT about how you get the information or how it is stored... its about WHO is in charge of that information and what their motives are...
Sadly, capitalism is not good for everything...
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
I don't understand how this is considered "counter" or anti-google by opening up a similar service.
It seems that a lot of people around here want google to have a monopoly since it's good(tm) and microsoft is a bad(tm) monopoly. (Not that I'm a fan of MS).
All monopolies are bad, and there should be a free and open market. For all you know, this could be better than google's interface.
This turn of events is summed up well by the blurb: Google's service will be a good thing in that it is preserving works which could otherwise be destroyed or lost with time, and, most importantly, _searched_ for information as opposed to leafing through page after page; and the competition will be good in that Google will be forced to improve its service to stay on top. For the consumer: A win/win situation!
What - on earth. That was supposed to be AC, but it logged me in when I previewed the post. I don't think anybody I know knows my slashdot handle. Oh well.
The cool thing about Google is that if the european site ends up being really useful, they might cross link to their content (like with answers.com or mapquest or whatever). Google has proven that they will give users the option of their own product and other well known products.
Google and the libraries don't have to fight, and really, they're not. I don't know why the European libraries wouldn't want Google to digitize their content, but it doesn't really matter. If Google's content and these libraries' content is free to all, then it's good.
It's not even like there's anything to compete about really, it's being done for the good of humanity.
Thinkin' Lincoln - a web comic of presidential proportions
This is awesome, now not only are some of the grandest libraries in America being digitized, so too are some of the grandest in Europe. As great as Google is, I would very much prefer a world where all the eggs were not in one basket.
(It's never too late to join the Renaissance)
I'm have to say that the origins of this are in a nationalistic ferver. Europe is afraid of being overshadowed by America. This project was organized by the French to fend off American Cultural Imperialism(TM). This is also healthy competition. It doesn't have to be either/or.
"The leaders of the undersigned national libraries wish to support the initiative of Europe's leaders aimed at a large and organized digitization of the works belonging to our continent's heritage," a statement said. "Such a move needs a tight coordination of national ambitions at EU level to decide on the selection of works," it added.
later
But he added: "The real issue is elsewhere. And it is immense. It is confirmation of the risk of a crushing American domination in the definition of how future generations conceive the world."
This is good even if it did arise from nationalistic pride. (Yah I know, Europe's a continent, not a country.)
It is better to not have one exclusive source of important information like this. This way we (humanity) are not storing all of our eggs in one basket. Plus Europe gets to put in more books without worrying about copyright. (Damn you Bono.) What would be best is if Google just gave the Europeans a copy of its library archives and the Europeans did likewise.
Nice Marmot
from the library-wars dept.
hisheadisdead writes "Two days after Microsoft marginally improved their next Operating System, Deutsche-Welle carry the story that the a whole host of large community of European developpers (with Richard Stallman's tacit support) have joined an EU-based operating system project as a counter to Microsoft's own operating system project. The project is the brainchild of OSDL employee Linus Torvalds, a sort of mild-mannered Jose Bove for the developpers out there. Divisive pride, or healthy competition?"
I have discovered a truly marvelous proof of killer sig, which this margin is too narrow to contain.
Surely this is an attempt at balancing things, not countering things. A digitised library in Europe won't stop Google digitising things, so it's not "counter" anything.
I'm all for balance and diversity, personally.
They are lacking the vision to see the purpose of Google's efforts, and the purpose of libraries like themselves in general.
The purpose of a traditional library is to collect, catalog, and preserve the writings of humanity for the benefit of ourselves and our children to come.
The purpose of digitization projects like Google's is to bring this into a new era. The purpose is not to turn each individual library into an electronic form of its current self - the very idea of disparate libraries was merely a consequence of the times. The purpose is to build a single worldwide virtual digital library, covering more ground and providing more accessibility than any single library could hope to.
Google's project isn't there yet, but that's the direction they are pushing. And these libraries are being divisive and standing in the way of progress. They lack the vision of what they should be doing, and they're harming progress in the name of pride.
11*43+456^2
Divisive pride, or healthy competition?
Neither, you idiot. They are not competing! They are not dividing! They are doing something Google is not -- digitising European works. For Christ's sake, that's like saying by building a library in a small town, you are trying to take a jab at a library in a neighboring town!
Sometimes people's inability to put things into perspective and understand there is a world outside the good old US of A makes me despair.
Mother is the best bet and don't let Satan draw you too fast.
Mod me down if you wish, but I have to say that I found Google Print nice, but not too useful. Sure, it's a nice thing that you can search through paper books, but in most cases you can't actually read them; you have to buy them, and this even goes for classics such as "20,000 leagues under the sea" which are already digitized by Project Gutenberg or similar organizations: Google digitizes newer, copyrighted editions even when there are older, public domain editions available. Thus, in my eyes Google Print is little more than a marketing door for on-line bookstores.
On the other hand, French digitalization project Gallica, though sometimes mocked on Slashdot, not only digitizes books, but gives the scans away freely (as in speech), so everyone can read the books in entirety or use them as they please. Both Distributed Proofreaders and Distributed Proofreaders Europe already use Gallica scans to produce completely digitized and free e-books which you can search, read, datamine, or do with them anything that suits you. If Slashdot readers are supporters of free software, this too is something they should revere.
I hope that Europeans will not compete with Google. I hope that they will make bigger, better, and more diverse Gallica.
It depends on what "accessible" means. I think these guys misunderstood the motivation behind Google's effort. Google is here to organise information - not to provide it: Google Print is only there to allow you to find books that match your searches, not to read them.
Try just about any book search on Google, even about old ones. Try Austen's Sense and Sensibility. Try Hobbes' Leviathan. Whatever. Google Print will point you to a modern, copyrighted edition of the book. You will only be able to browse a few pages.
Contrast with the Gallica project at the Bibliotheque Nationale de France: thousands of digitised books, freely accessible from beginning to end, most in scanned image format, but many in full ASCII text. And Gallica is much older than Google Print (in Internet time it's about one or two generations older), though not as old as the Gutenberg project.
Judging from his language, the French dude seems to think that Google Print is a scaled-up, English-language Gallica. It isn't. But if European libraries get their act together and start a project to make literally millions of books freely accessible for all in all European languages, hey, I'm all for it !
Thomas-
So what's the big deal with language anyhow ? It is the main way of comunication, and this is about all.
Why do they keep complaining that French is ruined by English, you don't hear Chinese, Spanish, Russian or German speaking people complaining about this, and their languages are more popular than FrenchIt also used to be the vector of a culture. The simple point that in french a 'cadeau' (gift) does not come from the verb 'donner' (to give) means a lot. Every language is linked to a culture, and every culture expresses itself in a language better. So every couple culture+language should be saved.
Or we go straight to "plus plus good".
The point exactly. One defends himself when threatened, or when feeling so.
French people are sore losers.probably gave you "-1 flamebait", but at least, you said it.
And, by the way, Russian and ukrainian are two different languages.*squeak*
>realize that the French are slimy, greedy bastards, too
And your point is?
I want a backup, just in case the U.S. breaks down. France/EU/Congo/Whatever may not be that reliable either, but is good to know that we have fallback positions. The EU is rapidly positioning itself as U.S. backup on many fronts. And that's great news.
Mother is the best bet and don't let Satan draw you too fast.
The US is the longest running continuous government in the modern world.
Only if you define "longest running continuous government" is such a way as to exclude all the other governments that have been around for a longer time. This is a non-argument, and requires you to ignore changes to the USA government but rule any changes to other governments to be a change of government type.
Divisive pride, or healthy competition?
Who cares? If it means more literature is digitally preserved then its all good.
Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
Well i'm not French, i'm Belgian. I'm frenchspeaker. The sad thing about this project is that "once again" a French official found a way to put some "Anti-american" bashings in his speech. I'm fed up by their rethoric. It looks more and more like xenophoby to me. The French "elites" have a great problem with the US because nobody in France is listenning to them. Read their speeches and then go to Paris. Movie theatres make money with American action films not with their boring state funded nombrilistic social drama movies. Mc Donalds restaurants are everywhere. Young people wear NBA t-shirts and American brands on the street. Nobody feels threatenned by the American "culture" except the elites. People still speak French, still enjoy French food and still read French magazines, still wear French brrands etc. There is nothing wrong with some new ways of living coming from a foreign culture. Even the French language is the consequence of a much bigger cultural invasion (Rome) and France as a political entity from a Germanic invasion (Clovis, Charlesmagne). Anyway back to the real topic: The project is simply great. I would feel more confortable if this European heritage is under public organization supervision than under a private company one. Google is a private company. Its goal is about making money. Here we are talking about culture heritage. Knowledge must be free. It should be copied, duplicated, modified, distributed freely. Nobody can have any claim on patents, copyrights or any stuffs like that. Anyway As somebody pointed out. Sooner or later googlebot will browse their database and index it anyway. Maybe they could use it like they did with dmoz.org . And other search engines too... That's the real point. Sooner or later a better (privatly funded) search engine will come out and will get an access to this public database. Olivier
Don't know how your post was modded flamebait (oh! hang on, yes I do: kneejerk moderation).
I'm a Brit, and I think what you say is broadly correct.
However, the US also "Always Fail IT" as it tends to react against, or try to ignore, or reinvent as its own, Non-US innovations.
What you say about the British Library is correct however.
I have been constantly frustrated by the lack of access to works in the BL. Of course, many of these tomes are priceless, so you can't have every Tom, Dick and Harry thumbing them with grubby fingers, but a digital copy could have, and should have, been made that could be freely available.
Given the amount of money wasted on so many dubious public 'projects' here in the UK, any money spent on this would have been very worthwhile IMO.
Indeed, the last thousand years of British political history is defined by the rise in supremacy of Parliament. It's now a rather ironical situation where the monarch has absolute power, but can't (or won't) use it. Parliament taking away the monarch's ability to collect taxes being a key point in the process. The Magna Carter (1215) was is just one of the things that lead to the form of the US goverment. The British Bill of Rights (1689) is also presumably a seed for the ideas that led to the more encompassing American one.
Anyway, let's not be so serious. The OP clearly didn't write that intending to be taken serious. How could they?