The Librarian in me loves Google's new image labeler. I don't care if I'm basically serving as cheap labour for an image labelling project, it's fun an addictive and this post is going to be short so I can get back to it.
The idea is that you and one other person are shown the same image from the web. You both type in tags (or index terms in librarianspeak) that you think are suitable for the image, and when you have a matching tag, the image changes. This goes on for 90 seconds and you get points for each match. When the time is over, you can see your score, the top scores for the day, and a list of the top all time scorers. Note: you'll need to sign up for a Google account if you want to appear in the lists as something more interesting than guest.
Sometimes it's unbelievably frustrating, for a few reasons. The "game" doesn't know what the image is; that's the point - a large proportion of the images on the web appear to be really boring groups of people standing around having their photo taken, or worse company logos and the like. My screen is tiny and sometimes I can't tell what the piccy is actually of. And sometimes you get paired with a complete idiot who doesn't know what the moon looks like.
But I love it. Unfortunately I've spent so long writing this post that I have to go to work now and be a real Librarian. Hmmmph.
Showing posts with label Google. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Google. Show all posts
Friday, September 15, 2006
Tuesday, November 01, 2005
Who do Google think they are?
I'm not sure what there is to say about Google and their digitisation project, except do they think the rules don't apply to them? I don't think I've ever seen such blatant disregard for the law.
Whether or not Google intend only to make small portions of the texts available to users, they're missing the point that the very act of making the unauthorised copy is illegal. Now they seem to think that out of print and out of copyright are the same thing.
Maybe I should start downloading pirated films from the internet. Using Google's logic I could justify my actions by publishing a small amount of my illegal download on this website and claiming it was all good publicity for the film. I could announce it in press releases and make sure the whole world knew about it, and surely all the film companies would be falling over each other to thank me.
I used to have a great deal of respect for the way Google operated, but now they seem to be just another faceless corporation, bulldozing their way through the law and common decency in pursuit of money.
Don't get me wrong. I don't equate illegality with immorality, and I don't think copyright law is perfect, but it's there and it's there for a reason. Authors have a right to protect their work from exploitation, and to that end to be able to control who is authorised to make copies of it and for what purpose. Google need to acknowledge that authors have that right, if only because it's the respectful thing to do.
It's not about money. As far as I'm concerned, all they have to do is ask. Or is that too much effort?
Whether or not Google intend only to make small portions of the texts available to users, they're missing the point that the very act of making the unauthorised copy is illegal. Now they seem to think that out of print and out of copyright are the same thing.
Maybe I should start downloading pirated films from the internet. Using Google's logic I could justify my actions by publishing a small amount of my illegal download on this website and claiming it was all good publicity for the film. I could announce it in press releases and make sure the whole world knew about it, and surely all the film companies would be falling over each other to thank me.
I used to have a great deal of respect for the way Google operated, but now they seem to be just another faceless corporation, bulldozing their way through the law and common decency in pursuit of money.
Don't get me wrong. I don't equate illegality with immorality, and I don't think copyright law is perfect, but it's there and it's there for a reason. Authors have a right to protect their work from exploitation, and to that end to be able to control who is authorised to make copies of it and for what purpose. Google need to acknowledge that authors have that right, if only because it's the respectful thing to do.
It's not about money. As far as I'm concerned, all they have to do is ask. Or is that too much effort?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
