For this week I decided to read Throwing Google at the Book by Farhad Manjoo in The Best of Technology Writing. I won't rehash too many of the details since quite a few people did so last week, but I wanted to read it and then respond it after having actually read it. First, however, I was rather surprised when I read that there is no government tracking of granted copyrights. I intend to focus on an intellectual property concentration in law school, and then hopefully find a job in that field. While my internship last summer mostly dealt with patents from various engineering sources, I know copyrights are a part of intellectual property and it is rather strange that copyrights are so loosely dealt with. The Patent and Trademark Office has guidelines, protocols to follow, and personally reviews each patent application. To read that copyrights are merely granted and then not tracked, cataloged, or even remembered in many cases seems rather odd to me. Then again, that's the government for you.
Anyways, on to the article itself. My first impression last week, without having read the article, was that while Google Print, now Google Book, should be allowed to continue in essentially the same manner as it has been. I did, however, have some sympathy for the publishers (okay, less for them) and the authors (more for them, except for the rich and famous in their ranks). However, after having read the article, I no longer feel any sympathy for them in their legal fight against Google. The facts are what the facts are. Books before 1923 have no copyright protection and the vast majority published after 1923 are either no longer in print or have dead authors/publishing companies owning the copyright to them. Furthermore, only 1.2 million different book titles sold in 2004 with 2% of these selling more than 5,000 copies. Unlike the music battles mentioned later in the article, it seems clear to me that Google scanning books, and then allowing users to search them with a small excerpt being available to users, can only help the vast majority of authors in selling their books (or perhaps even creating a demand for the republication of an out of print book). J. K. Rowling, Stephen King, or John Grisham aren't going to have any problems selling their books or getting knowledge of their titles out into the public view. These types of authors, however, do not comprise the majority or even a significant portion of the authors in the world.
While it will be interesting to see the legal decisions and future legislation on the topic, I believe this battle is simply the age old fight between the ideas and concepts that are familiar, comfortable, and in our past and present versus the ideas and concepts that stretch out into unknown territory, have loosely defined borders or none at all, and are helping to shape our future. It may take some time, but I believe that in the end, the future will conquer the past and Google, Yahoo, Amazon and others will win the right to scan the literary history of the planet and make it accessible to to us with a click or two.
Sunday, February 25, 2007
Monday, February 19, 2007
Update - Week of 02/18/2007 - 02/24/2007
I decided to travel the simple route for the first week and read the first article, Why the Web Is Like a Rain Forest by Steven Johnson, in Technology Writings. My first thought was that the title and the main analogy Johnson was trying to use was a sort of reversal from the sort I have gotten accustomed to. After 5 biology classes I've heard just about every sort of analogy for different biological cycles and processes as lecturers tried to bring the flow of photons, ions and ATP to something more tangible. In addition, the beginning was a fond memory of yesteryear as it reminded me of my first experience with the WWW, where my 4th grade teacher would have me go to our school library and use the one computer with a modem to check the weather and other daily information.
I was relieved, however, to see that Johnson decided to go with a closer to home analogy of a poodle breeder for how the "2.0 version" of the WWW will be different from what we had before. Most of it I already knew about, and though I was not aware of Technorati services for blogs, I am certainly not surprised that someone has created such things. The comparsion of the old WWW and the new one to the cycle and efficiency of energy in deserts and jungles was interesting, and I essentially agree with Johnson there, that the 2.0 web will make information on topics of interest to people easier to find and that less information that is of interest to people will be lost in the "jungle" of the web.
However, I don't think this 1.0 => 2.0 conversion of the web is going to be as dramatic a change as Johnson believes, for most people anyways. For certain topics of high interest to people, like Johnson's example of poodles for a poodle breeder, or say, a friend's 10+ hour a day obsession with World of Warcraft and rarely going to class anymore, I'm sure that some of the new technologies Johnson talked about would be helpful. Joining an e-mail alert newsgroup, being in a blogger group, Technorati services, tagging pages with certain category labels, and finding others with similar interests through the above services can potentially be useful for a topic that is of high interest for a person. Having said that, I think one could easily become overwhelmed with the amount of information, say dozens upon dozens or even hundreds more emails per day, that is being captured and "recycled" through the new 2.0 jungle instead of being lost in the 1.0 desert. Just because I follow USC football/basketball, the Angels, the Lakers, and the 49ers doesn't mean I want to be swamped in a massive rain forest of information on them, as opposed to simply missing out on a little information here and there. And really, with as many people as there are on the web and with this number growing, managing the information intake efficiently without it consuming an undesirable amount of time may take some real effort for even just one topic of interest. As with many things in life, I believe the ability to process information on the human side is more limiting than the technological ceiling that is currently available or that will be available in the future. While I'm sure I will eventually incorporate some of what Johnson talks about to some degree in my life, I think for the moment, Google searches, following around old school links, and hearing about sites, services, and people with similar interests through friends and family will get me by without drowning me in information.
I was relieved, however, to see that Johnson decided to go with a closer to home analogy of a poodle breeder for how the "2.0 version" of the WWW will be different from what we had before. Most of it I already knew about, and though I was not aware of Technorati services for blogs, I am certainly not surprised that someone has created such things. The comparsion of the old WWW and the new one to the cycle and efficiency of energy in deserts and jungles was interesting, and I essentially agree with Johnson there, that the 2.0 web will make information on topics of interest to people easier to find and that less information that is of interest to people will be lost in the "jungle" of the web.
However, I don't think this 1.0 => 2.0 conversion of the web is going to be as dramatic a change as Johnson believes, for most people anyways. For certain topics of high interest to people, like Johnson's example of poodles for a poodle breeder, or say, a friend's 10+ hour a day obsession with World of Warcraft and rarely going to class anymore, I'm sure that some of the new technologies Johnson talked about would be helpful. Joining an e-mail alert newsgroup, being in a blogger group, Technorati services, tagging pages with certain category labels, and finding others with similar interests through the above services can potentially be useful for a topic that is of high interest for a person. Having said that, I think one could easily become overwhelmed with the amount of information, say dozens upon dozens or even hundreds more emails per day, that is being captured and "recycled" through the new 2.0 jungle instead of being lost in the 1.0 desert. Just because I follow USC football/basketball, the Angels, the Lakers, and the 49ers doesn't mean I want to be swamped in a massive rain forest of information on them, as opposed to simply missing out on a little information here and there. And really, with as many people as there are on the web and with this number growing, managing the information intake efficiently without it consuming an undesirable amount of time may take some real effort for even just one topic of interest. As with many things in life, I believe the ability to process information on the human side is more limiting than the technological ceiling that is currently available or that will be available in the future. While I'm sure I will eventually incorporate some of what Johnson talks about to some degree in my life, I think for the moment, Google searches, following around old school links, and hearing about sites, services, and people with similar interests through friends and family will get me by without drowning me in information.
Monday, February 5, 2007
Internet Technologies and Me
This post is about my experience with VoIP. I haven't used Skype but have used both Teamspeak and Vent. Connecting is very simple as all I have to know is the server address for the TS or Vent server and any passwords necessary for the server and/or certain private channels that I wish to enter. Vent also requires that I know the specific port. Having a TS or vent server does require a monthly fee to rent, though if you look around you can find some pretty good deals, and if you have an actual server yourself it's even cheaper.
At first my use of TS and Vent was directly related to online gaming and verbal coordination between team members so we didn't have to type or wait for slow typers to respond to questions. Later, I began to use it more frequently as it was an easy way to keep in touch and talk to people that I was no longer living with in the dorm, with people who had moved away, or with long distance friends. Instead of making specific phone calls to people and using up minutes, TS/Vent allows us to just lurk around and chat if/when something comes up when we're at home.
I'm not sure why, but some people definitely seem to sound different depending on if they are on TS or vent. I know one guy who sounds fairly "normal" on TS, but totally goes Ray Romano on vent. Another friend sounds completely different on TS, seemingly like he's just starting to go through puberty, while sounding normal on vent and on the phone.
TS Screenshot:
Vent Screenshot:
At first my use of TS and Vent was directly related to online gaming and verbal coordination between team members so we didn't have to type or wait for slow typers to respond to questions. Later, I began to use it more frequently as it was an easy way to keep in touch and talk to people that I was no longer living with in the dorm, with people who had moved away, or with long distance friends. Instead of making specific phone calls to people and using up minutes, TS/Vent allows us to just lurk around and chat if/when something comes up when we're at home.
I'm not sure why, but some people definitely seem to sound different depending on if they are on TS or vent. I know one guy who sounds fairly "normal" on TS, but totally goes Ray Romano on vent. Another friend sounds completely different on TS, seemingly like he's just starting to go through puberty, while sounding normal on vent and on the phone.
TS Screenshot:
Vent Screenshot:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
