Anthony schreef:
On 1/21/07, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
I have read enough to learn why Google is getting the opposition to its program. I agree with that opposition. However, you will also have read that Bruster Kahle acknowledges that his project is very much a reaction to the Google project. The opposition that exists is not unlikely to have Google to reconsider its position. When we consider Google a friend, we can as a friend discuss these issues. When we consider Google an enemy, we will not even try to engage in a conversation.
When we consider them a corporation trying to make a buck, and not a friend or an enemy, we are best positioned to engage in that conversation. By all means this world we live in rewards those who form symbiotic relationships. If I ever referred to Google as the enemy, then I admit I was wrong for that.
I object to see enemies everywhere, I prefer to see friends that have a different outlook, friends that may be convinced to consider an other approach. I think this approach is more productive.
I prefer to see corporations as corporations, entities that are bound by law not to have friends or enemies but only to consider what is in the best interest of their shareholders in terms of making the most money (in terms of for-profit US corporations, anyway). By all means I think we should recognize that corporations do change their approaches. But that has nothing to do with them being a friend and everything to do with it being in the best interests of both of us to do, whatever.
I'd love to see Google do a complete 180 on its relationship with the open content movement. Do you see any way they could do that without destroying their entire business? For now I think it's enough that they don't actively try to harm Wikipedia and other open content sites by biasing their search results against them. So thank you Google. Thanks for not destroying us. We love you.
Anthony
Hoi, Yes, I see Google change several of their business practices without destroying their business model. It is in the fact that they DID make their applications in such a way that you are able to remove your data from their applications. This gives users some confidence. It is in the fact that their motto is to do good. I see it in organisations denying Google the possibility to digitise their content because of the reasons given; this thwarts their objective and at some stage even Google has to collaborate in order to achieve what they really want. They do not require exclusivity here either to be the best.
In this day and age where Time makes "us" the person of the year 2006, it will take time to get companies and organisations to connect to the changed way of this new brave world. It is for us to understand what is key in what we do, and keep to those values. What we have to learn is how to make our effort sustainable giving the growth of our projects. It will not be easy and neither will it be uncontroversial however it is the road in front of us.
Thanks, GerardM