Is there any reason to have this list post mime html attachments?
Hi.
What are all those strange characters starting with =?
They seem to clutter up posts with mime attached html.
~r tma
From [log in to unmask] Tue Jan 23 09:44:20 2007
Return-Path: <[log in to unmask]>
Received: from pagent2.arc.nasa.gov (pagent2.arc.nasa.gov [128.102.31.162])
by arc.nasa.gov (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l0NHiF9L020354
for <[log in to unmask]>; Tue, 23 Jan 2007 09:44:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lychee.ease.lsoft.com (lychee.ease.lsoft.com [209.119.0.145])
by pagent2.arc.nasa.gov (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l0NHea6w014346
for <[log in to unmask]>; Tue, 23 Jan 2007 09:40:36 -0800
Received: from ORANGE ([209.119.0.68]) by lychee.ease.lsoft.com (StrongMail Enterprise 1.0-6(2.00.238)); Tue, 23 Jan 2007 12:40:35 -0500
X-Mailer: StrongMail Enterprise 1.0-6(2.00.238)
X-SMHeaderMap: mid="X-MailingID"
X-MailingID: 00000::00000::00000::00000::<mailto:[log in to unmask]>::107718
X-Destination-ID: <[log in to unmask]>
X-VirtualServerGroup: UNDEF
Received: by LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 14.5) with spool id
13731000 for [log in to unmask]; Tue, 23 Jan 2007 12:40:32
-0500
Received: from 69.179.208.43 by ORANGE.HOSTING.LSOFT.COM (SMTPL release 1.0r)
with TCP; Tue, 23 Jan 2007 12:40:32 -0500
Received: from Peter (72-161-201-19.dyn.centurytel.net [72.161.201.19]) by
msa3-mx.centurytel.net (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l0NHeSof013126;
Tue, 23 Jan 2007 11:40:29 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0028_01C73EEB.B5F35BD0"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510
Thread-Index: Acc/FZydSXLN1l/MQ1SPhl9fM/TDbg==
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028
Message-ID: <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 12:40:45 -0500
Reply-To: Peter Altschul <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: "Visually Impaired Computer Users' Group List" <[log in to unmask]>
From: Peter Altschul <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: [VICUG-L] Could this be the final chapter in the life of the book?
X-cc: Ernest Solit <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Precedence: list
List-Help: <http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?LIST=VICUG-L>,
<mailto:[log in to unmask] VICUG-L>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
List-Owner: <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
List-Archive: <http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?LIST=VICUG-L>
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlx=0 adultscore=0 adjust=0 reason=mlx engine=3.0.0-0701160000 definitions=main-0701230021
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.58 on 128.102.119.101
Status: RO
Content-Length: 28382
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0028_01C73EEB.B5F35BD0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Could this be the final chapter in the life of the book?
=20
Bryan Appleyard
=20
The Sunday Times January 21, 2007
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2092-2557653,00.html
=20
The world's libraries are heading for the internet, says Bryan =
Appleyard. If
this means we lose touch with real books and treat their content as
"information', civilisation is the loser
=20
"The majority of information," said Jens Redmer, director of Google Book
Search in Europe, "lies outside the internet."
=20
Redmer was speaking last week at Unbound, an invitation-only conference =
at
the New York Public Library (NYPL). It was a groovy, =
bleeding-edge-of-the-
internet kind of affair. There was Chris Anderson, editor of Wired =
magazine
and author of The Long Tail, a book about the new business economics of =
the
net. There was Arianna Huffington, grand panjandrum of both the =
blogosphere
and smart East Coast society.
=20
But this wasn't just another jolly. There were also publishers and =
Google
execs, two groups of people who might one day soon be fighting for their
professional lives before the Supreme Court.
=20
For Unbound was another move in a strange, complex and frequently =
obscure
war that is being fought over the digitisation of the great libraries of =
the
world. The details of this war may seem baffling, but there is nothing
baffling about what is at stake. Intellectual property -- intangibles =
like
ideas, knowledge and information -- is, in the globalised world, the =
most
valuable of all assets. China may be booming on the basis of =
manufacturing,
but, overwhelmingly, it makes things invented and designed in the West =
or
Japan. Intellectual property is the big difference between the =
developing
and developed worlds.
=20
But intellectual property rights and the internet are uneasy bedfellows.
Google's stated mission is "to organize the world's information and make =
it
universally accessible and useful". The words "universally accessible" =
carry
the implicit threat that nobody can actually own or earn revenue from =
any
information since it will all be just out there.
=20
Furthermore, Redmer's point indicates that, for Google, the mission has
barely left base camp. Himalayas of information are still waiting to be
conquered. And the highest peaks of all are the great libraries of the
world, the repositories of the 100m or more books that have been =
produced
since Johann Gutenberg invented movable type in the 15th century.
=20
In December 2004, Google announced its assault on these peaks. It had =
made a
deal with five libraries -- with the NYPL and at the universities of
Stanford, Harvard, Michigan and Oxford -- to scan their stocks, making =
their
contents available online via Google Book Search (books.google.com).
Ultimately, it is thought, some 30m volumes will be involved. Microsoft,
meanwhile, has made a deal with the British Library to scan 100,000 =
books --
25m pages -- this year alone. Google has now scanned 1m books.
=20
The first thing to be said is that Google Book Search, though still in =
its
"beta" or unfinalised form, is an astonishing mechanism. Putting my own =
name
in came up with 626 references and gave me immediate access to passages
containing my name in books, most of which were quite unknown to me.
Moreover, clicking on one of these references brings up an image of the
actual page in question.
=20
But the second thing to be said is that I could read whole passages of =
my
books of which I own the copyright. At once a huge intellectual property
issue looms. The Americans are ploughing ahead with this, scanning in
material both in and out of copyright. The British -- at Oxford's =
Bodleian
Library and the British Library -- are being more cautious, allowing =
only
the scanning of out-of-copyright books. This may, of course, mean =
nothing,
since the big American libraries will, like the Bodleian and the British
Library, contain every book published in English, so they will all
ultimately be out there on the net.
=20
American publishers are not happy. Before its 2004 announcement, Google =
had
been doing deals with individual publishers to scan their books. But
digitising the libraries would seem to render these deals defunct.
Furthermore, since Google is acquiring copyright material at no cost, it
seems to be treating books quite differently from all other media. It is
prepared to pay for video and music, but not, apparently, for books. The
Google defence is that their Book Search system is covered by the legal
concept of "fair dealing". No more than 20% of a copyright book will be
available, the search is designed to show just relevant passages, and it
will provide links to sites where the book can be bought.
=20
Unimpressed, the Authors Guild, supported by the Association of American
Publishers, has started a class action suit against Google. A deal may =
yet
be done, but neither side sounds in a compromising mood, and it looks =
likely
that this will go all the way to the Supreme Court, whose ruling on this
case may prove momentous.
=20
But still, we are only in the foothills of the library digitisation =
issue.
When Google made its 2004 announcement, Jean-No=EBl Jeanneney, president =
of
the Biblioth=E8que Nationale de France, experienced "neither distress =
nor
irritation at the project. Just a healthy jolt". He welcomed the idea =
that
"a treasure trove of knowledge, accumulated for centuries, would be =
opened
up to the benefit of all," but he was also "seized by anxiety". Driven =
by
this anxiety, he wrote a short book, Google and the Myth of Universal
Knowledge.
=20
Though he declines to talk of "a crusade or a cultural war", the book is =
a
clear case of "aux armes, citoyens!" The citizens in question are, in =
this
case, European rather than just French, for Jeanneney sees the Google
project as an act of American cultural hegemony. He has won the backing =
of
Chirac for a project to develop a European search engine to rival =
Google,
the so-called "Airbus solution" -- the creation of Airbus was a =
deliberate
attempt to combat the ascendancy of Boeing in aircraft manufacture.
=20
Jeanneney says that Google is not what it seems. Its search results are
biased by commercial and cultural pressures. He has a point. Try this: =
go to
Google Book Search and enter Gustave Flaubert. The first results are =
full of
English translations of Madame Bovary.
=20
The books of the English-speaking world are given overwhelming priority.
Equally, Google's main search engine produces paid-for sites. Google is =
a
profit machine. Nothing wrong with that, as long as we don't delude
ourselves into thinking it is an entirely neutral source of information.
=20
But there are even deeper issues revolving around the distinction =
between
information and knowledge. "A search engine," says John Sutherland,
professor of English at UCL, "is not an index."
=20
An index is the work of a mind with knowledge, search engine results are =
the
product of an algorithm with information. Parents will already have seen =
the
power of the algorithm. Google has supplanted the textbook as the source =
of
homework research.
=20
Furthermore, with the advance of library digitisation, students will
increasingly get through their degrees on screen rather than in =
libraries.
Indeed, Bill Gates expects in the very near future that Microsoft will =
be
able to give all undergraduates a $400 hand-held device that will =
contain
all the text books they need for their course. We are, it seems, about =
to
lose physical contact with books, the primary experience and foundation =
of
civilisation for the last 500 years.
=20
Lynne Brindley, chief executive of the British Library, refuses to see =
this
in apocalyptic terms. With 100,000 of her books being scanned by =
Microsoft
this year, she regards the ultimate digitisation of the library's entire
150m-item collection (journals included) as "a wonderful outcome, though =
I
suspect I'll be long dead by then".
=20
Brindley disagrees with Jeanneney about having to fight off American
hegemony. She points out that search engines are still in their infancy.
Google has competitors that are bound to eat into its monopoly. =
Furthermore,
improved technologies will make search results more like indexes, =
working
more precisely as knowledge providers than simple information =
dispensers.
The British Library has no choice, she believes, but to go with this
technological flow. The alternative is to become little more than "a =
book
museum".
=20
Back at the NYPL, David Worlock of Electronic Publishing Services said,
"Ultimately it's not up to Google or the publishers to decide how books =
will
be read. It's the readers who will have the final say."
=20
No, it is the teachers who will have the final say. They will determine
whether people will read for information, knowledge or, ultimately, =
wisdom.
If they fail and their pupils read only for information, then we are in =
deep
trouble. For the net doesn't educate and the mind must be primed to deal
with its informational deluge. On that priming depends the future of
civilisation. How we handle the digitising of the libraries will =
determine
who we are to become.
=20
Additional reporting: Dominic Rushe
VICUG-L is the Visually Impaired Computer User Group List.
Archived on the World Wide Web at
http://listserv.icors.org/archives/vicug-l.html
Signoff: [log in to unmask]
Subscribe: [log in to unmask]
------=_NextPart_000_0028_01C73EEB.B5F35BD0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<p>
<html xmlns:v=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" =
xmlns:o=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" =
xmlns:w=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" =
xmlns=3D"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<meta name=3DGenerator content=3D"Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<style>
<!--
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:Arial;
color:windowtext;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext=3D"edit" spidmax=3D"1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext=3D"edit">
<o:idmap v:ext=3D"edit" data=3D"1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang=3DEN-US link=3Dblue vlink=3Dpurple>
<div class=3DSection1>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>Could this be the final chapter in the life of the =
book?<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>Bryan Appleyard<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>The Sunday Times January 21, 2007
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2092-2557653,00.html<o:p></o:p></=
span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>The world's libraries are heading for the internet, =
says
Bryan Appleyard. If this means we lose touch with real books and treat =
their
content as "information', civilisation is the =
loser<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>"The majority of information," said Jens =
Redmer,
director of Google Book Search in Europe, "lies outside the
internet."<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>Redmer was speaking last week at Unbound, an =
invitation-only
conference at the New York Public Library (NYPL). It was a groovy,
bleeding-edge-of-the- internet kind of affair. There was Chris Anderson, =
editor
of Wired magazine and author of The Long Tail, a book about the new =
business economics
of the net. There was Arianna Huffington, grand panjandrum of both the
blogosphere and smart East Coast society.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>But this wasn't just another jolly. There were also
publishers and Google execs, two groups of people who might one day soon =
be
fighting for their professional lives before the Supreme =
Court.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>For Unbound was another move in a strange, complex =
and
frequently obscure war that is being fought over the digitisation of the =
great
libraries of the world. The details of this war may seem baffling, but =
there is
nothing baffling about what is at stake. Intellectual property -- =
intangibles
like ideas, knowledge and information -- is, in the globalised world, =
the most
valuable of all assets. China may be booming on the basis of =
manufacturing,
but, overwhelmingly, it makes things invented and designed in the West =
or
Japan. Intellectual property is the big difference between the =
developing and
developed worlds.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>But intellectual property rights and the internet are =
uneasy
bedfellows. Google's stated mission is "to organize the world's
information and make it universally accessible and useful". The =
words
"universally accessible" carry the implicit threat that nobody =
can
actually own or earn revenue from any information since it will all be =
just out
there.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>Furthermore, Redmer's point indicates that, for =
Google, the
mission has barely left base camp. Himalayas of information are still =
waiting
to be conquered. And the highest peaks of all are the great libraries of =
the
world, the repositories of the 100m or more books that have been =
produced since
Johann Gutenberg invented movable type in the 15th =
century.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>In December 2004, Google announced its assault on =
these
peaks. It had made a deal with five libraries -- with the NYPL and at =
the
universities of Stanford, Harvard, Michigan and Oxford -- to scan their =
stocks,
making their contents available online via Google Book Search
(books.google.com). Ultimately, it is thought, some 30m volumes will be
involved. Microsoft, meanwhile, has made a deal with the British Library =
to
scan 100,000 books -- 25m pages -- this year alone. Google has now =
scanned 1m
books.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>The first thing to be said is that Google Book =
Search,
though still in its "beta" or unfinalised form, is an =
astonishing
mechanism. Putting my own name in came up with 626 references and gave =
me
immediate access to passages containing my name in books, most of which =
were
quite unknown to me. Moreover, clicking on one of these references =
brings up an
image of the actual page in question.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>But the second thing to be said is that I could read =
whole
passages of my books of which I own the copyright. At once a huge =
intellectual
property issue looms. The Americans are ploughing ahead with this, =
scanning in
material both in and out of copyright. The British -- at Oxford's =
Bodleian
Library and the British Library -- are being more cautious, allowing =
only the
scanning of out-of-copyright books. This may, of course, mean nothing, =
since
the big American libraries will, like the Bodleian and the British =
Library,
contain every book published in English, so they will all ultimately be =
out
there on the net.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>American publishers are not happy. Before its 2004
announcement, Google had been doing deals with individual publishers to =
scan
their books. But digitising the libraries would seem to render these =
deals
defunct. Furthermore, since Google is acquiring copyright material at no =
cost,
it seems to be treating books quite differently from all other media. It =
is
prepared to pay for video and music, but not, apparently, for books. The =
Google
defence is that their Book Search system is covered by the legal concept =
of
"fair dealing". No more than 20% of a copyright book will be
available, the search is designed to show just relevant passages, and it =
will
provide links to sites where the book can be =
bought.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>Unimpressed, the Authors Guild, supported by the =
Association
of American Publishers, has started a class action suit against Google. =
A deal
may yet be done, but neither side sounds in a compromising mood, and it =
looks
likely that this will go all the way to the Supreme Court, whose ruling =
on this
case may prove momentous.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>But still, we are only in the foothills of the =
library
digitisation issue. When Google made its 2004 announcement, Jean-No=EBl
Jeanneney, president of the Biblioth=E8que Nationale de France, =
experienced
"neither distress nor irritation at the project. Just a healthy
jolt". He welcomed the idea that "a treasure trove of =
knowledge,
accumulated for centuries, would be opened up to the benefit of =
all," but
he was also "seized by anxiety". Driven by this anxiety, he =
wrote a
short book, Google and the Myth of Universal =
Knowledge.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>Though he declines to talk of "a crusade or a =
cultural
war", the book is a clear case of "aux armes, citoyens!" =
The
citizens in question are, in this case, European rather than just =
French, for
Jeanneney sees the Google project as an act of American cultural =
hegemony. He
has won the backing of Chirac for a project to develop a European search =
engine
to rival Google, the so-called "Airbus solution" -- the =
creation of
Airbus was a deliberate attempt to combat the ascendancy of Boeing in =
aircraft
manufacture.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>Jeanneney says that Google is not what it seems. Its =
search
results are biased by commercial and cultural pressures. He has a point. =
Try
this: go to Google Book Search and enter Gustave Flaubert. The first =
results
are full of English translations of Madame =
Bovary.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>The books of the English-speaking world are given
overwhelming priority. Equally, Google's main search engine produces =
paid-for
sites. Google is a profit machine. Nothing wrong with that, as long as =
we don't
delude ourselves into thinking it is an entirely neutral source of =
information.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>But there are even deeper issues revolving around the
distinction between information and knowledge. "A search =
engine,"
says John Sutherland, professor of English at UCL, "is not an =
index."<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>An index is the work of a mind with knowledge, search =
engine
results are the product of an algorithm with information. Parents will =
already
have seen the power of the algorithm. Google has supplanted the textbook =
as the
source of homework research.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>Furthermore, with the advance of library =
digitisation,
students will increasingly get through their degrees on screen rather =
than in
libraries. Indeed, Bill Gates expects in the very near future that =
Microsoft
will be able to give all undergraduates a $400 hand-held device that =
will
contain all the text books they need for their course. We are, it seems, =
about
to lose physical contact with books, the primary experience and =
foundation of
civilisation for the last 500 years.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>Lynne Brindley, chief executive of the British =
Library,
refuses to see this in apocalyptic terms. With 100,000 of her books =
being
scanned by Microsoft this year, she regards the ultimate digitisation of =
the
library's entire 150m-item collection (journals included) as "a =
wonderful
outcome, though I suspect I'll be long dead by =
then".<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>Brindley disagrees with Jeanneney about having to =
fight off
American hegemony. She points out that search engines are still in their
infancy. Google has competitors that are bound to eat into its monopoly. =
Furthermore,
improved technologies will make search results more like indexes, =
working more
precisely as knowledge providers than simple information dispensers. The
British Library has no choice, she believes, but to go with this =
technological
flow. The alternative is to become little more than "a book =
museum".<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>Back at the NYPL, David Worlock of Electronic =
Publishing
Services said, "Ultimately it's not up to Google or the publishers =
to
decide how books will be read. It's the readers who will have the final =
say."<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>No, it is the teachers who will have the final say. =
They
will determine whether people will read for information, knowledge or,
ultimately, wisdom. If they fail and their pupils read only for =
information,
then we are in deep trouble. For the net doesn't educate and the mind =
must be
primed to deal with its informational deluge. On that priming depends =
the
future of civilisation. How we handle the digitising of the libraries =
will
determine who we are to become.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>Additional reporting: Dominic =
Rushe<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>
<hr>
<p>
Leave list:
<a href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">
[log in to unmask]</a>
<p>
VICUG-L is archived on the World Wide Web at
<a
href=3D"http://listserv.icors.org/archives/vicug-l.html">http://listserv.i
cors.or g/archives/vicug-l.html</a>
<p>
Send questions on list operation to
<a href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask] ">
[log in to unmask]</a>
------=_NextPart_000_0028_01C73EEB.B5F35BD0--
VICUG-L is the Visually Impaired Computer User Group List.
Archived on the World Wide Web at
http://listserv.icors.org/archives/vicug-l.html
Signoff: [log in to unmask]
Subscribe: [log in to unmask]
|
