"We want Google to be the third half of your brain." -- Sergey Brin

     Overall, I think that the Digital Public Library of America is a good idea. It will be a good way for people to have access to texts that they may not have been able to access normally. Of course, that only applies to epople that have the means/technology to use it.

     To hear that Google did not defend itself effectively in its court case against the Author's Guild and the AAP does not truly surprise me. Google, at the end of day, is a corporation. It may be a business powered by unlimited access to information, but it is a corporation nonetheless. I hope that Google manages to rework the settlement it has with the Author's Guild and the AAP, but like Darnton said, technologically, the nation is capable of creating it's own digital library without depending on Google.

     Personally, I kind of have to agree with the author's who choose to enforce the copyright laws. They did produce the work, and I think that in and of itself, should give them the power to decide what happens to it. Of course, it would be wonderful if authors were more inclined to let their work become public domain, but then how would they make a living?

   I truly hope that a compromise can be reached on this issue. Both sides have compelling arguments.

"Books are not made for furniture, but there is nothing else that so beautifully furnishes a house." -- Henry Ward Beecher

     James Gleick's article perfectly expresses the way I feel about digitization. I'm all for easy access to information, but I do have some personal quirks that stop me from fully supporting the move digital books/articles/etc.

     Gleick explains the position of those who oppose the digital movement, and I have to say that it is a position that I agree with. A big part of history is exploration and discovery. With everything available at your fingertips from the comfort of your own home, the need to go out into the world is lessened. Who needs to go to the Bibliotheca Alexandrina in Egypt to see a genuine manuscript of the Qur'an on display when you can simple search for the information on the internet? Sure you'll find the information, but the experience is not the same. For instance, when Professor Bowden brought her books to show to class, I was very excited. To know that I was being given the chance to handle something from so far back into the past was amazing. Not many people get the chance to do that, when you think about it.

     On the other hand, I do think that for academic purposes, it is a good idea for the British Library to digitize is books and such. As a student, I know how frustrating it can be to not have access to certain books and articles that may help me with my work.

     As with most thing, there are both benefits and drawbacks to our increasingly digital age. As long as a balance can be struck between the two extremes in the situation, everything will work out fine.

All men by nature desire knowledge. -- Aristotle

     When I think of Wikipedia, I never think that somewhere along the line, it had a starting point. It's always been a vast pool of information, whether it be about it Damascus or the medicinal uses of papaya (these are both topics that I have come across on Wikipedia). Of course, I know that Wikipedia is never truly a reliable source, simply because of its main function: to be an easily accessible source of information based in truth. Fortunately, but unfortunately for Wikipedia, truth is relative; this leads to friction amongst editors and information that can be less than reliable.

      I would never cite Wikipedia in any of my research for school, but I unashamedly use it as a jumping off point for almost everything that I am interested in. For instance, when doing our poetry-close reading papers, I needed to know what a paper nautilus was; now, thanks to Wikipedia, I know more about them than I ever needed to. I guess this is good information to have when I watch Jeopardy. Another topic that was interesting was the fact that non-professional editors had some hostility towards the professionals. I think that's a silly attitude to have, because at the end of the day, they're all there for the same thing: amassing information.

     It was nice to read about Wikipedia's conception. I always wondered about it, but never took the time to look too deeply into the matter. Despite it's humble beginning as Nupedia, Wikipedia has grown into a something that Wales can, and does, take pride in.

A superior man is modest in his speech, but exceeds in his actions. -- Confucius

     In Act III of Pygmalion, Professor Higgins proves that as always, actions speak louder than words (or linguistic style, in any case). Professor Higgins goes to visit his mother, who is a bit startled, as well as apprehensive, at his visit. She believes him much too eccentric to be brought in front of the respectable company that she is expecting. He explains that he wants to bring the subject of his experiment to her home, as he has a bet with Pickering. Although Mrs. Higgins is none too pleased to hear that a common flower girl will soon be entering her home, she allows it. Through out the visit to his mother's house, both Higgins and Colonel Pickering come off as enthusiastic, ineffective little boys, rather than the men of science they previously proves themselves to be. Mrs Higgins is constantly rebuking Higgins for his lack of manners, his behavior towards the guests, and his clumsiness. Overall, I believe that Act III proves that Higgins cannot be the romantic hero of Pygmalion; his attitude towards women has not changed at all. He tells his mother, "My idea of a lovable woman is somebody as like you as possible. I shall never get into the way of seriously liking young women: some habits lie too deep to be changed."

     Act IV opens with the trio's return to Higgins home on Wimpole Street. Higgins and Pickering are talking and interacting as though Eliza is not there. Higgins is bothered by the fact that he cannot find his slippers. Eliza is kind enough to find his slippers and set them down in front of him, but Higgins pays her no mind. Higgins and Pickering go on to talk about the experiment and how glad they were that it was over, as it had become boring. This really made me sad, as well as also angry on Eliza's part. Higgins and Pickering used Eliza and then tossed her away, as if she wasn't a human being with feelings. Later in the act, Eliza and Higgins argue, with Eliza making the point that to Higgins, she is not important -- "not so much as them slippers."

     I was very happy to see Eliza stand up to Higgins in the face of his bullying superiority. She forced him to recognize her as a person, and not just a cog in the machine of his experiment. She even says that she won't sell herself, in reference to Higgins saying that with her new way of speaking, she could get married. I'm glad that Higgins and Eliza argued; it made Higgins reconsider what women were capable of, and what they could be.