Subscribe to this blog in Radio:
Didn't find what you were looking for?
E-mail this blog's author, Bruce Umbaugh:  |
|
 |
Friday, August 12, 2005 |
Plamegate: How far does it go?. Think Progress posts a field guide to administration officials with "known connections" to the outing of a CIA agent. There are 21 of them. [Salon.com]
Salon excerpt:
It's not a short list: Think Progress identifies 21 people with what it calls "known connections to the outing of an undercover CIA agent." The list starts with Rove and Libby, of course, but it winds its way though knowns and unknowns -- from Condoleezza Rice and Stephen Hadley and Andrew Card to John Hannah, Adam Levin and Bob Joseph -- before winding up at Dick Cheney and George W. Bush himself.
It's easy to name names, but Think Progress has gone beyond that, providing evidence and links that tie the officials in question -- some more tightly than others, of course -- to the outing of Plame. Some, like Rove and Libby, have been implicated directly in the leak itself. Others are shown to have played a role in the efforts to discredit Wilson, to have had access to the information that was leaked or to have assisted with the denials and the coverup that came later.
As ABC's the Note notes, "In an age when the general public would be shocked at the degree to which major news organizations are wholly dependent on interest groups for their research, this one will get some Gang of 500 bookmarking."
We know of one "Gang of 500" member who has a certain fondness for reference works. Perhaps he'd like to check out this one.
10:48:08 PM 
|
|
No, Seriously. Save the Bananas.. Popular Science reports that the Cavendish, the version of the banana that rests on top of American breakfast cereals, is "on a crash course toward extinction." By PAUL B. BROWN. [NYT > Business]
10:39:49 PM
|
|
Google Print: Copyright vs. Innovation vs. commercial value.
The recent Google Print debate has been far-reaching, e.g. Siva Vaidhyanathan: Google Avoids Copyright Meltdown:
If copyright is to mean anything at all, then corporations may not copy entire works that they have never purchased without permission for commercial gain. I can't imagine what sort of argument -- short of copyright nihilism -- would justify such a radical change in copyright law.
When discussing the implications of the copyright system, I sometimes try to point out that there are intrinsic conflicts inherent in it, especially in terms of technological advances.
Let's step back for a moment. Why is Google doing this book-scanning project? It's not because it's just so cool (even if it is). While coolness may justify a small-scale promotional project, the scanning efforts are expensive. So Google, as a company, obviously sees some value in the effort. This is not wrong. But it's also a direct conflict with the granted monopoly know as copyright. Whenever there is value, particularly commercial value, there is conflict over who should be able to receive it.
It's not hard at all to see potential returns here. Besides the obvious selling of ads from searches, consider that it positions Google to be a potential partner in any e-books venture. It's not a guarantee. But if a company already has a scanned, indexed, "production" version of the book, that's a good selling point. From this perspective, Google's interest in working with libraries can be seen as a way to do an end-run around contracts with publishers, and Amazon's own evident efforts (talking about doing well by doing good!)
That's just an example. Look at it this way. Google is saying, "Let us make e-books of all library content, and keep them - for copyright reasons we'll only display search results". That's clearly very dubious under copyright. But ... it's obviously an innovation. However, it's a very commercially valuable innovation. Which brings us back to copyright. A problem with the polarized debate over copyright is that it's often framed in terms of morality of property rights, opposed by individual usage rights (which leads to screaming of "monopolists" vs "thief"). But if the Google Print scanning project is viewed as a balance of economic interests - between one company that wants to leverage its search expertise into the e-book area, and other companies which want to maintain their limited monopoly on the potential market, then assuming one believes copyright properly grants some exclusive rights - it's not obvious which is correct here.
That is, the technology company can't be right every time, almost by definition. Because copyright as a limited monopoly fundamentally restricts innovation in some ways. That's the trade-off. [Infothought]
10:36:57 PM
|
|
Google Library Database Is Delayed. Stung by a publishing industry backlash, Google has halted its efforts to scan copyrighted books from some of the nation's largest university libraries until November. By EDWARD WYATT. [NYT > Technology]
10:36:43 PM
|
|
Darknet: J.D.'s New Book is out.
Darknet From the site:
Darknet: Hollywood's War Against the Digital Generation is a new book that offers first-person accounts of how the personal media revolution will impact movies, music, computing, television and games
[unmediated]
Very interesting book. There's tons of stuff on the Darknet site, the book is available from amazon.com, and J. D. Lasica will be discussing it all at the Well's Inkwell for the next two weeks (starting about midday today).
6:34:07 AM
|
|
Using Others' Names Creatively (Alan Wexelblat).
(and with permission). Neil Gaiman posts about a very cool effort to raise money for the First Amendment Project. A number of "names" in the writing business are auctioning off the opportunity to have your name (and/or physical description) applied to characters or things in literary works, including Stephen King's new novel Cell, a Lemony Snicket book, a Jonathan Lethem Marvel comic, a gravestone in Gaiman's next childrens' book or a LOT more. I counted 16 offers up on the eBay page linked below, and there may be additions coming.
Gaiman's blog entry explains the history and reasoning behind the project. Or if you're impatient to bid you can just jump directly to the eBay auction. [Copyfight]
6:34:02 AM
|
|
Oh the games podcasters play.
(From Heather Green of Blogspotting) "After being squeezed out of the Top 100 list of podcasts at iTunes by traditional media shows, indie podcasters have figured out how to exploit a flaw in the technology behind the list. The top 100 list now is overwhelmed with indies--a big switch from just a week ago."
Rather amusing.
[rexblog: Rex Hammock's Weblog]
6:33:38 AM
|
|
Dumb Ideas, Part 2 (Alan Wexelblat).
According to Paul Festa at CNET, the US Copyright Office is soliciting comments on a proposal to create a Web service for prospective copyright owners that would support only Internet Explorer (IE). I just don't have the energy for the level of sarcastic commentary this really deserves. As a usability professional and a Web designer I sympathize with the problems of multiple browsers and incompatible levels of functionality. But I can't conceive of a reason for the national government not to produce a system that uses the basic, commonly supported technologies that would enable a wide variety of accesses.
Apparently they're pointing the finger at the underlying implementation technology, which some sort of Siebel software. Seems like a pretty poor excuse to me. [Copyfight]
6:23:47 AM
|
|
Home Movie Day 2005. WHAT IS HOME MOVIE DAY?Many archivists are concerned about what will happen to all of the home movies that have been shot on film during the 20th century, most of which are sitting in boxes in attics or basements. Besides their importance as family records, these films often contain a history of the hometowns and areas where these films were shot. We know that many people have boxes full of family memories that they've never seen because they lack of a projector, or are afraid that the films are too fragile to be viewed again. We also know that many... [Stay Free! Daily]
You can read the Stay Free article about Home Movie Day and visit the official Home Movie Day site.
6:17:39 AM
|
|
That’ll learn ‘em.
Those uppity Iranians decided “Eh, what the hell” and went back to playing with uranium this week. This, of course, was in direct violation of the wishes of the International Community. That is, if you CAN be in direct violation of someone saying, “Hey, um, would you mind, uh, you know, not doing that? It’s [...]
[The Politburo Diktat]
6:15:49 AM
|
|
In Power Age, Ripken's Way Is Forgotten. Some players will have to admit that they drank the Kool-Aid by the insidious conviction that baseball had to bulk up because it could not survive on the terms made famous by Cal Ripken Jr. By HARVEY ARATON. [NYT > Sports]
6:15:29 AM
|
|
Beyond the Multiplex. A disturbing new offering from the greatest documentary-maker working today, a would-be teen cult classic, a riveting civil rights story, and more. [Salon.com]
6:14:29 AM
|
|
High on the Hog. The stage might be set at last for the comeback of the great misunderstood fat: lard. By CORBY KUMMER. [NYT > Opinion]
6:09:37 AM
|
|
Auditors Find Violations by DeLay's PAC. WASHINGTON, Aug. 11 - A political action committee run by the House majority leader, Representative Tom DeLay of Texas, broke election law by paying expenses from the wrong account, an audit by the Federal Election Commission has found. By doing so, the committee effectively increased the amount of money it could spend on Congressional races in the 2002 campaign. By DAVID LEONHARDT. [NYT > Washington]
6:09:12 AM
|
|
Mac Hacks Allow OS X on PCs. Before Apple can bring computers featuring Intel processors to market, hackers get the company's operating system running on generic PC hardware. By Mark Baard. [Wired News]
6:07:43 AM
|
|
|
