plus.google.com: Tim O'Reilly - Before Solving a Problem, Make Sure You've Got the Right Problem  #

tim o'reilly fragt im weissen haus nach, wo denn die beweise seien, dass raubkopierei hohe wirtschaftliche schäden verursache (via jeff jarvis). tim o'reilly:

In the entire discussion, I've seen no discussion of credible evidence of this economic harm. There's no question in my mind that piracy exists, that people around the world are enjoying creative content without paying for it, and even that some criminals are profiting by redistributing it. But is there actual economic harm?

In my experience at O'Reilly, the losses due to piracy are far outweighed by the benefits of the free flow of information, which makes the world richer, and develops new markets for legitimate content. Most of the people who are downloading unauthorized copies of O'Reilly books would never have paid us for them anyway; meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of others are buying content from us, many of them in countries that we were never able to do business with when our products were not available in digital form.

mittlerweile hat jeff jarvis seinem google+-beitrag einen blogartikel hinterhergeschoben, in dem er die diskussion um SOPA auf eine grundsätzliche ebene führen will: die frage, ob es wichtiger ist freie meinungsäusserung zu schützen oder eine ohnehin sterbende industrie.

etwas anders und fast euphorisch liest sich die reaktion des weissen hauses bei mike masnik von techdirt:

Make no mistake about this: this is the White House asking for a hard reset of SOPA/PIPA and saying start again from scratch. This is an astounding turn of events, and a much stronger statement from the White House than anyone honestly expected. This is almost entirely because of the outcry that came out of the internet over the last few months. Without that, it is unlikely that the White House ever would have come out with such a strong position that questions the key provisions of these bills.

das ist quasi der amerikanische zensursula-moment. sieht aus als sei SOPA dank der proteste im netz vorerst vom tisch.

 stevenlevy.com: Is too much Plus a minus for Google? #

ziemlich fundierte betrachtungen zu den änderungen und hintergründen der plussifizierung von google von steven levy (unter anderem autor des google-buchs „in the plex“):

But there is a risk to proceeding on this path. The company has spent its entire corporate life protecting the integrity of its search product. When writing In the Plex, I learned that the secret behind Google's somewhat bland design was that if Google looked like it was designed by a machine, users would implicitly understand that Google search itself was unpolluted by strong opinions. Google meticulously positioned its flagship product as a neutral judge of what was relevant to the user.

Search, in short, should appear to be like Caesar's wife, above reproach. When using its algorithmic wizardry to deeply integrate social information into its search experience, it behooves Google to avoid even a whiff of bias. With SPYW, though, the odor is unmistakable. No matter how you cut it, the search engine now increases the value of participating in Google+. It may be Google’s right to do this. But it also may turn off a lot of users. And it also provides ammo for Google’s detractors, including those in Washington.