Bb RealTech

I do have considerable sympathy for ¹Thomas Crampton, when he discovered that all of his stories at the International Herald Tribune have been pulled from the web because of a merger with the New York Times.

So, what did the NY Times do to merge these sites?

They killed the IHT and erased the archives.

1- Every one of the links ever made to IHT stories now points back to the generic NY Times global front page.

2- Even when I go to the NY Times global page, I cannot find my articles. In other words, my entire journalistic career at the IHT - from war zones to SARS wards - has been erased.

At the same, though, I don't have as much sympathy for Wikipedia losing its links to the same stories, as detailed by ²Crampton in a second posting.

The issue: Wikipedia - one of the highest traffic websites on the Internet - makes reference to a large number of IHT stories, but those links are now all dead. They need to delete them all and find new references or use another solution.

As I wrote in comments at Teleread:

I do have sympathy, I know I would be frustrated if my stories disappeared from the web, but at the same time, there is a certain level of karma about all of this.

How many times have webloggers chortled at the closure of another newspaper? How many times have webloggers gloated about how we will win over Big Media?

The thing is, when Big Media is gone, who will we quote? Who will we link? Where will the underlying credibility for our stories be found?

Isn’t this exactly what webloggers have wanted all along?

Isn't this what webloggers have wanted, all along?

I have sympathy for a writer losing his work, though I assume he kept copies of his writings. If they can't be found in hard copies of the newspaper, then I'm assuming the paper is releasing its copyright on the items, and that Mr. Crampton will be able to re-publish these on his own. That's the agreement I have with O'Reilly: when it no longer actively publishes one of my works, the copyright is returned to me. In addition, with some of the books, we have a mutual agreement that when the book is no longer published, the work will be released to the public domain.

I don't have sympathy for Wikipedia, though, because the way many citations are made at the site don't follow Wikipedia's citation policy. Links are a lazy form of citation. The relevant passage in the publication should be quoted in the Wikipedia article, matched with a citation listing the publication, author, title of the work, and publication—not a quick link to an external site over which Wikipedia has no control.

I'm currently fixing one of my stories, Tyson Valley, a Lone Elk, and the Bomb because the original material was moved, without redirection. But as I fix the article, what I'm doing is making copies of all of the material, for my own reference. Saving the web page is no different than making a photocopy of an article in the days before the web.

In addition, I will be adding a formal citation for the source, as well as the link, so if the article moves again, whoever reads my story will know how to search for the article's new location. At a minimum, they'll know where the article was originally found.

I'm also repackaging the public domain writing and images for serving at my site, again with a text citation expressing appreciations to the site that originally published the images.

By using this approach, the stories I consider "timeless", in whatever context that word means in this ephemeral environment, would not require my constant intervention.

Authors posting to Wikipedia should be doing the same, and this policy should be enforced: provide a direct quote of relevant material (allowed under Fair Use), and provide a formal citation, in addition to the link. Or perhaps, instead of the link. Because when the newspapers disappear, they'll have no reason to keep the old archives. No reason at all. And then, where will Wikipedia be?

¹Crampton, Thomas, "Reporter to NY Times Publisher: You Erased My Career", thomascrampton.com. May 8, 2009.
²Crampton, Thomas, "Wikipedia Grappling with Deletion of IHT.com", thomascrampton. May 8, 2009.

On Groundhog Day, I'll have had my Kindle for a year. I've been working on an anniversary review of the device, which will get posted either to the Frugal Algorithm or Secret of Signals. Or perhaps a bit in both, not sure.

The buzz about the Kindle now is that a 2.0 version is coming out, February 9th. I imagine a new version is likely, but contrary to what people have been saying, there has been more than one Kindle variation released in the last year.

Currently, there are Kindles running the following operating system versions: 1.04, 1.08, 1.1, and 1.1.1. Amazon has stressed that all provide the same functionality. The only thing to account for the difference, then, is variations in the device. Not a simple swapping of parts, either, because one doesn't need to update an operating system when one swaps identical parts.

I have a 1.04 version of a Kindle, and must admit to some curiosity about what improvements went into the 1.08 and 1.1 models. I know that one always takes risks buying version 1 of anything, but I don't think I've ever seen a case where an item's internal architecture has changed three times within one year. Changed enough to force a new version of the operating system. At a minimum, I have to wonder what will happen when new software functionality is rolled out. Do we 1.04 owners get the same goodies as, say, 1.1 owners?

To add further to the confusion, some people have reported in the owner forums seeing an OS version of 1.2 in their devices, and there are differences with this OS, but Amazon has stated this operating system has not been released. So rumor runs rampant in the forums, because we have no other source of communication about what's happening with the devices. To be blunt, Amazon does not communicate with Kindle owners.

Regardless of lack of communication, and despite being an "old" Kindle owner, I do still like my device, though I really wish we had folder capability. However, I'd really rather that Amazon support ePub, and release its AZW format to other ebook readers. And I'll have more to say on this later, too.

Virginia DeBolt has another Women in Technology series entry, this one on the Drupal community's Addison Berry.

Addison demonstrates something I've noticed: Drupal attracts the women in technology. There's something about the Drupal that has made the Drupal community friendly and encouraging to women. Other applications/companies/organizations should take note.

The interview with Addison is excellent, a lot more positive and upbeat than mine was.

I purchased my Kindle because I liked the idea of my library of books being at my fingertip. I also liked the fact that ebooks are, typically, cheaper than paper books. What I didn't expect was how much the Kindle opened up new avenues in reading for me, and it did so through the concept of Kindle samples.

As you're browsing through books, either with the Kindle, or online at Amazon, if you find one that's interesting but not sure whether you want to buy it or not, you can download a sample to your device for review. The sample is automatically sent to the Kindle, at no cost. At the end of the sample, you're asked whether you want to buy the book, or read more about it at Amazon. If you decide you don't want to buy the book, you can then use the Kindle's Content Manager to delete the sample.

How big the Kindle samples are depends on the size of books. Some of the samples were quite large, others the briefest of introductions. The structure of the samples differed, too, probably based on the ebook structure as determined by the publisher. Many books started directly in the first chapter, without having to traverse any preliminary dedication or cover. Other books, though, led off with every last bit of paper that proceeded the book in hard format, including copyright pages, forwards, dedications, publisher contact information, and so on.

I have purchased, and enjoyed, several books via Kindle samples—books I probably wouldn't have bought if it weren't for the samples. I've also avoided many more books because the writing in the samples proved disappointing, or not what I expected.

What was it about each sample that led to the Buy, No Buy decision? In answering, I decided to review the Kindle samples I download, regardless of whether I bought the book based on the sample or not. If I buy the book, the review will then transition into a full book review. If not, then the review will be of the sample, only, including a discussion of why I did not buy the book.

I begin my new sample reviews with an author whose name might be familiar to some of you: Seth Godin's Tribes.

Virginia DeBolt did me the honor of interviewing me for her first Women in Technology series at Blogher. If you're curious about my early years, my views on the semantic web, women in technology and how to modify the computer tech curriculum in order to obtain greater diversity, whether I like animals more than people, as well as some of the tech folks I read on a daily basis, you might want to check it out.

Warning, though, it is all about me, me, me.

And you will be tested.