Post #3214945

2025-07-02 04:01 UTC

@ehasbrouck@urbanists.social @Yuvalne@433.world Thanks again. The URL-per-page is a technical aspect (one that I rely on daily for managing references to materials in the #BiodiversityHeritageLibrary - part of IA, but separate from the OpenLibrary). The issues at question are the channels by which books become scanned copies, the proportions of such texts that can be accessed by users, and whether IA is operating properly as a library in what its doing for the still-encumbered works. I do understand your concern and won't try to argue you into seeing IA as a positive, although I am confident it is one of the most important efforts we have for ensuring the preservation of human knowledge and culture in increasingly dark times. I do believe that the NWU page weakens its case by repeatedly insinuating bad faith (e.g. in the comments following the take-down of the freelance writers' guide).

Replies (2)

@ehasbrouck@urbanists.social 2025-07-02 04:28

@dhobern@scicomm.xyz @Yuvalne@433.world - IA provides a valuable service -- one I would be willing to pay for, if the payments went to those whose work is used. The problem is that the cost is being exprpopriated from creators (even while IA staff are paid). See: https://nwu.org/we-need-federal-funding-for-distance-learning-during-the-pandemic-and-after/

Open ##3214946
@ehasbrouck@urbanists.social 2025-07-02 04:34

@dhobern@scicomm.xyz @Yuvalne@433.world - As for bad faith, perhaps the clearest evidence of bad faith by IA was its public promise to honor "robots.txt", when those who monitored traffic could tell that they *never* honored it, then claiming they thought people with robots.txt *specifically directed to exclude IA* didn't really mean to exclude IA, then dropping it entirely without notice, only a "by the way" buried mention after the fact.

Open ##3214947