The Problem of Centralized Data
One of the big advantages of the Internet as a whole is that, to some degree, it puts the sum total of human knowledge at anyone’s fingertips. Rather than sifting through masses of paper and dusty books, you can run a search query from the right archive and probably will find what you want in short order.
I’m reminded of the Harvard professor who used to hand the same assignment to his freshman students every year. He knew which references they’d require, where they’d to look, and how long it should take to complete the work. The exercise was designed to teach them how to do research, use the libraries, and deal with source material.
In 1995 or so, he came to us and demanded that the university cut off student access to this “Internet” thing. Why? Because he’d given the assignment to his students again, and they’d finished it in a day. He was astounded, and asked how they’d done it. Guess what the answer was?
This said, there are dangers to having everything available only in digital form, like the big Google Books project. What if the scanned books include errors? What if certain “inconvenient” works (maybe controversial or little-known resources) aren’t made available? What happens if the main Google data center gets hit by an asteroid? Or, what if Google simply loses interest in the project sometime in the future? They’ve done it before, and could easily do so again.
Personally, I like books. Real, paper books. I hate reading long documents online, and usually print them out (the “paperless society” is a huge myth, incidentally). I like digging through huge libraries, since I never know what I’ll find next to the book I was looking at originally. Sure, this experience can be duplicated to some degree in a digital format. And yes, electronic documents make it easier for multiple people to read certain material simultaneously. But for me it’s just not the same.
Central data storage, whether of books, government documents, or medical records, is a good thing. But it shouldn’t be the only option. Decentralization means less disruption in cases of a major data center outage or other disaster. And keeping all ones’ eggs, or books, in a single basket is just asking for trouble.
October 10th, 2009 at 12:03 pm
The venerable music compact disc is destined for the heap. People get instant gratification and convenience with downloads (even if it’s inferior sound (unless lossless like FLAC)).
So in a few years perhaps most of the music produced will never be made available in physical form. Perhaps even video at some point.
If Kindle and other technologies become popular, will the same happen with books and reference materials? Will we eventually wind up in a society where we have access to these materials solely in non-physical form? If so, who will maintain such collections? Will they edit or censor this material? Will their selection of content be guided solely by profit or other motives? Will someone control who sees what? Will the government decide to ban some materials and effectively eliminate them? Will powerful religious authorities?
Hopefully we are not on the road to censorship and having information closed off. Although some people use information for vile purposes, humans are overwhelmingly at their best when exchanging information, learning, and using new ideas freely. It benefits us all. To lose a large storehouse of knowledge is devastating, as with the destruction of the Library of Alexandria. All eggs in one basket is scary.