Slashdot Mirror
Internet Archive Challenges Google
richards1052 writes "The Internet Archive, whose main claim to fame is the Wayback Machine, designed to archive the internet's web history, has created a new project: the Open Content Alliance. It's purpose is to open the nation's library collections to universal web search.
A number of major library systems, including the Boston Public Library and Smithsonian, have refused to sign up with competing ventures by Microsoft and Google because they do not provide for universal access to digitized books. These commercial ventures prohibit books being accessed by competing search engines.
So far, 80 libraries and research institutions have signed on with Open Content Alliance. They must pay for the scanning of their books while Google and Microsoft offset that cost for their participating institutions."
I believe I've commented on something like this before. Might be a good idea to archive the books lest somewhere in the future we re-live something like the Spanish Inquisition where important literature was lost. Its also making this society a bunch of couch potatoes. What ever happened to walking into a quiet library, the smell of stale books, looking around at people. Its slowly being replaced by reading books online and hitting ctrl-w to close annoying popups while you read. Currently I have about 30+ Cisco (CCIE/NP/IP/etc) books and each come with their PDF's. At first I thought, neat I can read them on my laptop... Nowadays I find its easy to just open the book, nothing like butchering my books up with highlighters... This world is coming to one where companies will be fighting to keep us locked in our houses. Call me a troll, just speculation
Infiltrated dot Net
... but on a much larger scale?
Have EVDO, will travel.
How many of these libraries think of Open Source and software platform choice? How many of them make sure their web sites are platform agnostic, equally accessible from all browsers? These people are willing to stand up and are willing to pay more to preserve their liberty. Hats off to them. But does this stand also extends to not having their documents locked down in a proprietary format encumbered with licenses and restrictions? I would very much like such ideas, being independent of vendors, would extend to Corporate America too.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
I agree that a nice, hard bound book is, at the moment, more pleasant to read. However, technologies such as e-Ink and others that allow you to read something digitally without the eye-strain of using a back lit monitor are catching on. I think a few factors make digital copies more advantageous - cost of duplication, storage, protection from damage, searchability.
Storage: I just moved, and I moved three bookcases full of books. That sucked. If those were all digital, I'd have hauled my computer from A to B and brought all of my books with me. In addition, I moved to a smaller house. Trying to find a place for my three bookcases of books has been impossible.
Cost of duplication: With digital copies, books can be distributed without the overhead costs of printing and shipping.
Protection from damage: Many of the books housed in libraries, particularly places like the Smithsonian, are no longer in print. If it's destroyed, regardless of whether it's an accident or a malicious act, it's gone. The library may be able to get another copy from a benevolent individual or the last copy may have just been destroyed. With a digital copy, you can make back-ups of your back-ups... safeguarding the content of that book.
Searchability: This is my favorite... Who hasn't spent 30 minutes skimming a book trying to find THAT ONE PAGE!? It drives me nuts. Searching would make books sooo much more convenient.
You are using English. Please learn the difference between loose and lose; they're, there, and their; your and you're.