Recently I came across this quote in my economic textbook that really made me appreciate how far the world has come in regards to the sharing of information.

“Suppose you want to find the numbers for inflation in Germany over the past five years. Fifty years ago, the answer would be to learn German, find a library with German publications, find the page where inflation numbers were given, write them down, and plot them by hand on a clean sheet of paper.”

The internet has truly spoiled us with the ease at which information can be shared. Of course, the internet would mean nothing if it were not for the concept of freedom of information, arguing that people should be allowed to freely explore and learn information over the internet. There is much debate currently going on as to whether or not this freedom violates copyright laws. I am hoping to adequately cover this issue in my first essay.

What struck me most about today’s trip to the printing center was the amount of effort involved in the printing process itself. The inking of the machine seemed to be very tedious, as much time had to be spent reapplying the ink to the machine to ensure that the prints remained crisp. Then, it took additional time to set the paper and actually set the mechanism in motion to print a single sheet. Based on this, it is easy to see how printing an entire book took a great deal of time and effort. What’s more, the machine we were viewing had the added benefit of an electronic inking process. It must have been severely annoying to keep earlier models of these machines well-inked. Today’s class gave me a true appreciation of how far the printing process has come along. Granted, there are some complaints that the shift to mass production has resulted in a decrease in overall book quality. However, witnessing how long it took to print a single page using earlier printing methods has shown that the decrease in book durability with modern printing is well worth it when considering how much time is saved in the whole printing process.

I have been catching up on the show the Office lately and there are many references to how it is a “failing paper company”.  I thought this related to our class because we have been discussing the digitalizing of books.  With books going digital this will decrease the use of paper and hurt some economies such as paper companies (Dunder Mifflin).

The hit that businesses are taking because of the decrease in use of paper is not usually looked at but is something that is worth our attention.  It’s not just paper companies like Dunder Mifflin but bookstores, newspaper and other types of companies that rely on paper products.  Bookstores have been on the decline because of electronic versions of books that are purchased through devices like the Kindle.  I know from personal experience there have been bookstores closing around the area I live and it is getting harder and harder to find bookstores.  Although the connection is not always made, the similarities between media and real life need to be seen and built upon.

Historic books have a certain aura about them that struck me on Tuesdays class and that I notice in general.  On Tuesday we saw a variety of books centuries of years old and every time I touched the pages it was different than touching a page form a modern book.  These books are more revered than books that we use everyday because of their age.  To me it was because these books were so important that they survived many centuries.  They are also interesting to just see what the paper was like during the time period along with the print, binding and covers.  For these reasons the old books just hold a different level of respect and interest.  The article linked below talks about a book of Aesop’s Fables from 1485  along with other ancient children’s books.  It describes the aura of old books the same as I felt.  http://0-ehis.ebscohost.com.libcat.lafayette.edu/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=c2499435-5f11-412d-addd-f202e95c017c%40sessionmgr114&vid=3&hid=109

After the presentation today I was wondering how commercial printing works.  The video link posted below gave me some insight to how it is done.  It struck me how printing has become so much less an art and craft and more of something anyone could do.  The computers do most of the work and there is no man power involved at all in the actual printing.  The machines used are also much larger than what was used today although that may just be because they are commercial and meant for bigger jobs.  On the other hand, I saw some similarities although they were slight such as how the machine works.  It reminds me of the machine that was demonstrated today only more modern so in some ways the printing is similar. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUlBueqStg4

I found this short article on the library’s website today announcing that, along with our preexisting digital collection, some academic ebooks will now be available through the library.  This further demonstrates the positive contributions that technology, specifically that which relates to digital books, has made to academia.  I hope to utilize this option provided by the library in the future.

When you think of “dealing with a book” the first thought comes to handling the physical book itself. However now a days, to read any book, you rarely need to actually have it in your vicinity. For convenience’s sake, I like being able to find books and sources online, to save on time when writing essays. But if I were to handle an important or rare book, it would be a must to physically hold it. Like an autograph, its worth feels much more to get it in person than to be given a photograph of it. The impact delivered in each case are on completely different levels.

In a less grand sense, having a digital book differs greatly from a physical one. For one, the weight. The weight of a book lets me know that I have it, and that it has information to give. Turning the pages and feeling the weight shift as I flip through a book lets me feel like I make progress. Neither of those sensations can be felt digitally. The weight remains constant. I can check how many pages I have left, but it still feels as if I haven’t moved.

In regards to a “hands-on” experience, I would have to say only handling the physical book would count, in the same way that cooking works: just because you see the picture and read the recipe doesn’t mean you know how to cook. Just because you saw photos of the pages and read them doesn’t mean you handled the book. Granted the situations differ by quite a bit, the point should still get across.

The past two classes with Diane Shaw in Skillman have solidified my belief that, while technology is incredibly useful for many things by making our lives easier, there is nothing like the real thing.  We have had the opportunity to not only see original historical works, but literally touch them, creating a “hands on” experience in the literal sense.  For me, being able to see, touch, and read one of Shakespeare’s folios epitomized this idea.  While I have read about the folios many times and have read many of Shakespeare’s works, those experiences were nothing compared to the “hands on” experience of the actual folio.  So, while it is still useful to have copies of Shakespeare’s folios and information on their history available in print and on the internet, the real experience and I feel that the real learning must be done with the physical text itself.

When I was conducting research for my paper I stumbled upon an internet petition response to a US school board’s attempt to claim ownership over its students’ and teachers’ work. Can a school board copyright all student and teacher work created during and after school hours? That is exactly what one school district in Maryland has proposed. That means a kindergartener’s finger-painted drawing would belong to the school system. From what I gleamed from the wording of this policy, if a student took home something he wrote in school and edited it then technically the student would be conducting copyright infringement.The school system, however, is not worried about owning the next potential student masterpiece.

This proposal is in line with the technological change in how teachers create lesson plans. It was proposed after the school’s chair and vice chair went to Apple demonstration of teacher-created apps, according to the Education News article. The main question fueling this debate is: who owns any curricula a teacher designs while using an app on a district-owned iPad? The policy was apparently written to “protect the school system from teachers trying to sell their lesson plans online.” What precedent would this set if all school systems held ownership?