What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Best Buy Employees Turn Carolers For A Day view!
www.youtube.com/bestbuy - Go behind the scenes to see real employees croon their way to star in Best Buy's holiday campaign.
39 Comments
- pixel34, on 05/07/2009, -1/+20Isn't there some sour grapes here from the libraries? I personally think a digital library would be a great idea. Information wants to be free.
The thing that worries me are the privacy issues. I don't want google to know anymore about me that it all ready does. However, most libraries aren't much better. In one of the two libraries I have worked in if the law (FBI,local police, whatever) asked for a browsing history for a patron it was handed over without a warrant. - Jensaarai, on 05/08/2009, -1/+12I'm sorry, but this is 100% BS. The ability to digitize books has been around for quite some time. Library associations and publishers have had years to come along and do this, and set up a compensation model. But now that Google goes ahead and actually does it, they complain Google isn't doing it 100% in the way they would have done it.
What's stopping them from coming up with their own competing system if they don't like the way Google handles user info? Nothing. Hell, that could be the selling point OF such a system. But they'd rather sit on their asses, hoping to keep up the status quo and complain about the ones actually doing the work than do any of it themselves. - manova, on 05/08/2009, -0/+10I don't get something. How is this different from Amazon or the like? The only difference I see is a digital book vs a real book, but we know places like Amazon use our buying history for advertising.
- zip000, on 05/08/2009, -0/+9That was not the case in any of the libraries that I've worked in. A warrant or GTFO.
- ThsGuyRightHere, on 05/08/2009, -0/+7Libraries as they currently exist are overdue to go the way of the dodo. These are merely the death throes of an antiquated way of getting information.
- SpinningHead, on 05/08/2009, -0/+6The key phrase is, "as they currently exist". Thats why there is such a big move towards digitization and a more global information infrastructure.
- assafig, on 05/08/2009, -1/+6less paper, easier access to information, and finally being able to rub one off without getting arrested...
I dunno about you but this digital library sounds pretty good to me - pixel34, on 05/07/2009, -1/+6The EFF steps up to bat again.
- joe7845, on 05/08/2009, -0/+4I'd like to voice concern about all the missing pages from Google Books.
- thedarkwolf, on 05/08/2009, -0/+3Just as a warning, the invisible hand only works in competitive markets. At this point Google does not have a real competitor in the digital books market, which gives google extra power with regards to setting prices.
- TheMachine1, on 05/08/2009, -1/+4Tumbleweed....blowing by...
- SpinningHead, on 05/08/2009, -0/+3I just finished library school and there is a lot of talk about this issue. I love Google and the fact that theyre doing this program. My only worry is someone taking over the company later and claiming ownership of all this material that should be free.
- yurishoujo, on 05/08/2009, -0/+3The librarians I know are vicious about "warrant or gtfo." My girlfriend is one, her mother is one, several of my friends are librarians or going through library school, and it is something I've noticed them being very serious about. So, shame on that library for doing weird unethical things. I don't think most follow such procedures.
- SpinningHead, on 05/08/2009, -1/+4Oh, I don't think so. Libraries exist for community programs and serve as a public meeting space. They are a crucial part of our democracy. So much so that we often take them for granted.
- SpinningHead, on 05/08/2009, -0/+3Actually the issue is money. Plenty of people want to do it, but libraries aren't exactly flooded with funding. The reason there is any concern about this is not the digitization, but ownership of all the digitized works. The ethos behind librarianship is open access. The only cause for concern is the same thing we've seen with entities like the RIAA.
- jumpenjack, on 05/08/2009, -0/+3agreed but if it cost 50 dollars to buy a book on google, i'm just gonna go to a store.
- eir574, on 05/08/2009, -0/+3True, but I hope we won't get to the point where libraries don't physically exist anymore. Although I haven't found myself in a public library for years, I have fond memories of the programs the one near me ran when I was growing up. Particularly over the summer, they put a great deal of effort into encouraging reading. I already read a great deal, but their programs also got me to read books I probably wouldn't have picked up if they hadn't had programs that encouraged you to read one book from each of a list of categories.
- Willravel, on 05/08/2009, -0/+3Telegram groups slowly tap out concerns about telephone...
- 13att13, on 05/08/2009, -0/+2It looks like the biggest issue the library organizations have against this is how private your buyer information remains. Where this concern comes from is a mystery to me, considering many of these people probably have no qualm about forking over personal info any time they create accounts or make purchases online. I doubt your reading preferences will be monitored any more or less than your web browsing preferences.
- samedelstein, on 05/07/2009, -2/+4Heard about this on Democracy Now! the other day...scary that our online libraries would be privatized to some degree...
- withani, on 05/08/2009, -0/+1speaking as a professional public librarian (and slight douche for opening sentences like that) Google Books in no way threatens libraries. as long as libraries have photocopiers, and internet access to card holders, we'll be just fine.
- Elranzer, on 05/08/2009, -0/+1The people in these comments trash-talking libraries have obviously never used one. Where do you think you do all your research for a research paper? (Hint: it's not Google and Wikipedia).
Libraries subscribe to very expensive research databases (like Ebsco, etc) and a free membership at a library gives you access to them, or your college research library will have it too. There's no other way, and an individual subscription would cost you several thousand dollars a year.
A research paper written with Google/Internet and Wikipedia as the only sources would be laughed out of the classroom. - deloopisonfire, on 05/08/2009, -1/+2Diggers--this issue is more complicated than you think, and the article doesn't do a good job explaining how so.
Many libraries are worried Google will become like one of their article database providers, who charge ridiculous amounts of money each year to use their services so the public and/or students can have access to fully searchable articles, newspapers, etc. This is a legitimate worry--but you should look to other sources to find out more.
Also, while Google did provide each of the libraries who own each book they scan with an electronic copy of the book, the participating libraries did have to pay for a lot of the prep work and I think even some of the scanning, and now Google asserts they own the electronic version of the book. It gets further complicated by copyright, where books from before 1923 are in the public domain, but as the owner of the physical object, libraries often assert certain distribution rights, and now, as the owner of a digital copy (with preferred rights from publishers and authors) Google may be able to undercut one of the few moneymaking products available to libraries (in a time when library budgets continue to get slashed).
This whole situation is indeed a result of shortsightedness--many librarians thought Google was creating this service out of their "don't be evil" philosophy and a sense of altruisim, but now they realize that with this royalty database, the payment plans, and more, that they developed a clever business, and they feel cheated. Whether this is a legitimate gripe, or just sour grapes, I have no opinion.
Finally, for the user who said libraries should have been digitizing books first, many librarians would love to do so. But very few have the have the money to digitize books themselves or though consortiums. It is both an expensive and time consuming process, but if you want to help out, you may want to volunteer for Project Gutenberg. While not as fancy as Google's method, it is still a way of making more information available to more people, always a worthy ideal. - o76923, on 05/08/2009, -0/+1You know, I'd be more sympathetic to their concerns about Google tracking what books you read, if they didn't do the same thing. In exchange for subsidies from the National Government, they turn over a list of all books each individual checks out. I would trust Google more than the Department of Homeland Security without blinking an eye.
- jumpenjack, on 05/08/2009, -0/+1and authors will be paid how?
profit isn't an evil word - Elranzer, on 05/08/2009, -0/+1That's a sad thing. Libraries are the original bastions of knowledge. Well before the Internet, it was THE place to go to learn and expand your mind. It's also a community organizer, which now seems to be their primary function, at least in upstate NY.
If libraries go away, that would be a victory for the NWO types who want to control information. Once libraries are out, they'll regulate the Internet, and we'll have nothing. - inactive, on 05/08/2009, -0/+1I feel sorry for your grandkids
- Elranzer, on 05/08/2009, -0/+1The libraries here in NY are pretty adamant about a warrant for that sorta thing.
- mksmothers, on 05/09/2009, -0/+1do you feel sorry for my grandkids because they don't use a sliderule or a typewritter?
- SpinningHead, on 05/08/2009, -0/+1Many librarians use Google. Most of those databases have more specific academic data like medical journals. Some cost tens of thousands per year.
- jcronkhite, on 05/08/2009, -0/+1Reference librarians have feared search engines (specifically Google) for years. It's a job security thing. Walk the floor of an ALA conference for a good laugh. They'd rather pay thousands a year for subscription databases regardless of the fact the Google can provide many students with great sources without them. However, there are many cases when the nice expensive databases are worthy, they're just not always needed. We need Google AND librarians with their expensive databases.
- pwnsey, on 05/08/2009, -1/+2Exactly what is the problem with a privatized library sytem?
- askantik, on 05/08/2009, -0/+1Why don't people ever get up and arms about big corporations taking over things that really matter? I'm not saying information or public access to the material isn't important-- but I trust Google a hell of a lot more than I trust, say, Cargill and Monsanto, or Wal-Mart, or Exxon...
- estebancortez, on 05/08/2009, -0/+0I feel the digital revolution is inevitable (partially because its half underway already). BUT, we should be careful that our technological advents and drives to conquer niche markets (with regards to Google) do not eradicate institutions that are deeply embedded within our cultural histories. To digitize libraries and fade them out would not only put thousands of people out of work (standard argument), but it would completely remove that "aura" (Walter Benjamin's term not mine) you experience when holding original copies of a publication. Furthermore, de-centralizing Library information and subsequently re-centralizing it under the auspices of Google will remove any of that intellectual interaction you get at a library, where you bump into someone reading the same thing, strike up a conversation, divulge on all the wonderful things in life or whatever floats your boat.
- CanuckPenguin, on 05/08/2009, -0/+0Dugg for LILF (Librarian .....).
- mksmothers, on 05/08/2009, -1/+1Who needs librarians or libraries anymore. My grandkids will wonder what a library or a newspaper is. Progress has its own casulties.
- LonesomeFighter, on 05/08/2009, -3/+2this is the funniest and saddest thing i've read all day.
Google going to have your info and will set prices, ahhh! First, there's a thing called the invisible hand, the prices will always eventually go to what it's really worth so who cares if Google says they want $50, if it's worth $9.99 then it will eventually drop.
Second, them bastards take info in on the library card and don't recommend stuff for me like Google will. Nor does my local library have as many books as Google will have. - renemartini, on 05/08/2009, -3/+1The problem is digital libraries can be easily controlled compared to a physical book and the fact is Google has complete control over this information. They do not want access to information to be controlled by companies who make a profit from it... so if internet libraries where to exist is has to be on the condition its 100% free, no bias and no profit can be made. Basically make it all free or don't offer it. Then we come to what Actors strike is about, online residuals needs to be addressed.
- reyoo30309, on 05/07/2009, -6/+1Dugg for MILF
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is