Understanding the Limits of the Internet

[BobH]

The World Wide Web has long been touted to be the repository of all knowledge accumulated by mankind - better than encyclopedia and other resources. While I find wondrous and marvelous things on the Internet, I find myself barking my shins frequently on barriers that seem to have arisen - but are, in reality, only more visible given the ease of using search tools. There have always been bars to accessing knowledge ranging from the simple library card to triple-encrypted, multiply held, "tell you but have to kill you" documents for "eyes only". I think I might just be experiencing the natural protection given to intellectual properties, but seek the wisdom of the group in case it might by my lack of skill or knowledge in using the Internet.

Recently, as I've researched various topics - some out of arrant curiosity and others to advance my knowledge and support some small squibs I write - more and more frequently I discover a source and then find only an abstract or a first page of material that I would like to read thoroughly. Sometimes, access is held ransom to a fee, which is understandable. More frequently I find that I must belong to some group and pass admission scrutiny to access data (more than the simple blog subscription that one must do). This seems to be the case with a lot of scholarly work that is published or part of university library collections. I don't recall this being as frequent a problem in the early days of the 'net.

Is this just a case of my interests intersecting what has been the norm for such data? Have practices changed making such information less accessible (less so than I recall from past experience)? Or, is there a special handshake and tattoo that I must acquire?

[StuartR]

Think this has always been the case for published academic research. The journals that publish these papers charge a lot of money and would lose all their revenue if students could download them for free.

[DaveA]

All of the "Paper" collections are losing money to the use of the internet, so they (The Collectors) are setting up means to replace that needed money. Or a means to control the access so they can at least get credit for making the collection available.

[stuck]

The copyright on scientific 'literature' has always been guarded jealously. Photocopying stuff is seriously frowned upon and in the past my workplace has been subject to a photocopying audit, to ensure we comply with copyright restrictions.

Unlike some paper based publishers, newspapers come to mind, the publishers of scientific journals never took to the idea that the rise of the internet meant 'free'. They didn't join the scramble to get on-line asap, they built robust systems to protect their content and only went on-line when they were ready and able to continue to charge for access.

Ken

[BobH]

So! The idea of the Internet as a virtual library . . . an electronic repository of mankind's collective knowledge, available to all freely and openly, was a bit of hyperbole, eh?

The traditional repositories (libraries) typically required great amounts of capital to erect and to maintain. Did the Internet deprive them of their traditional sources of capital and maintenance funding? One would think that maintenance and dissemination of information electronically would be logarithmically more efficient and thereby less expensive to build and operate.

I have no desire to plagiarize, steal, co-opt, or use in any way without attribution (being reared in an era when cheating caused expulsion and having sat on honor courts and expelled those who did cheat). There have always been - and they continue today - copyright and patent laws and courts in which to redress wrongs. I'm just trying to figure out the rationale and modus operandi extant post Internet nascence. Could it be, perhaps, that the proclivity for use freed by the former restrictions of time and distance have created a demand so great that taking the knowledge hostage and holding it for ransom is now a desirable, profit-generating prospect (whereas, in previous times demand didn't rise to levels warranting exploitation, and there were other motives than purely fiscal)?

I have no complaints with the capitalist model nor with the profit incentive. I'm merely trying to provoke discussion to gain insight. What happened to Franklin's vision of the public acquisition, maintenance, and general availability of knowledge?

[DaveA]

All information must be paid for in some manner and has always been that way. In the past and most still do, our taxes paid for building and maintaining the "public libraries". Most of the schools libraries are paid for by our taxes, but some have always been restrictive in who and how one has access. Some if you do NOT have a "Doctorate" or are not working toward one, you do NOT have access to their information.

Have you ever tried getting into one of the Presidential Libraries and access some of the Presidential data, it ain't easy?

[stuck]

So! The idea of the Internet as a virtual library . . . an electronic repository of mankind's collective knowledge, available to all freely and openly, was a bit of hyperbole, eh?

There is no question that the Internet has opened up access to a vast amount of collective knowledge and that a very hight percentage of this information is free but I don't think it has fundamentally changed the way pre-existing repositories of knowledge, like the scientific literature, operates. OK, so now I no longer have to walk all of 100 metres from my desk to our information centre to access a journal, I can get it through my PC but if we haven't paid for a subscription I am unlikely to get beyond the abstract. In the past no journal meant requesting an inter-library loan but that was not free. As Dave pointed out:

All information must be paid for in some manner and has always been that way.

Being able to see the abstract is good business, it invites you to request a copy of the full article and with the aid of on-line shopping systems it is very easy to click a few buttons and hey presto it's in front of you. Much, much less hassle than having to fill in a paper form for an inter-library loan and then waiting 10 days for it to arrive.

Ken

[DaveA]

I do a bit of Family Research, and the internet has really help things out. We no longer have to sit in front of a microfilm machine cranking away at viewing the frames and the print out what we may want and get a crappy print out that we have to pay for. We do not spend our vacation traveling to far places to view the local records, as more and more of them are coming on line.

I now sit here at home at any time of the day or night and search by name or location. I can then view the "Transcription" and even view the image if the page. If that is what I want I can save a copy to my machine and/or print out a hard copy.
Yes I pay a subscription fee, but the work that was done so I can sit here do it and not have to go to some "Center" and then may have to wait for the film roll to shipped, because the local center does not have. I do now have the wait, and the shipping fees and if add a little more the local center would be able to keep the shipped copy.

With Family Search on the internet, there is a lot very good information, but there is also a hell of lot more BAD information that gets repeated by those that do not know that the information is incorrect. True we have the same problem with "Published books" but they are not out there in the same numbers as the data files are on the internet. This information is not put out there at no cost, some one needs to pay for the hardware, software, transcription labor and etc.

Even the different governments are seeking to make money from this, we can now order birth, death and etc certificates for a fee. Some states allow us to see the data so we do not order the wrong ones, others do not, they seem to want us to pay to view every John Smith that was ever born.

Well has Family Research been improved, yes and a lot more people are into it. It is the number 3 if not now number 2 money maker of the internet. As some of may know, porn is the number money maker and the last I read, buying and selling stocks was number 2.

[viking33]

All of the "Paper" collections are losing money to the use of the internet, so they (The Collectors) are setting up means to replace that needed money. Or a means to control the access so they can at least get credit for making the collection available.

So, Dave, you seem to be heavily into genealogy. What one program would you recommend for family data? We use Family Tree Maker, although not the latest version. My wife was\is still digging into her family tree but has run into a dead end roadblock when trying to research a branch of her family in northern Ireland.
Many days and hours spent in the effort.
I was lucky in that I received a huge packet of information from a distant
( unknown ) relative in Sweden. It had all I ever wanted to know of my tree, going back to the 1400's. No sweat on my part! What's that saying, "patience rewards those who wait?"

[DaveA]

Since you are using FTM I would stick with it. I have been using FTM since the 90's when it came of a 5 1/4 single sided floppy for DOS. I am currently using 2011 and is worth the up grade. I have used almost every upgrade since I started using FTM.

I do have a couple of other programs that I do use sometimes, BUT, all of my data is kept in FTM 2011. Use these other programs for a couple of reports that FTM did not provide but does now. I also need them to show the new users as I do a lot of presentations on using the internet and Family Search. There is a lot of interfacing with FTM and Ancestry.com, which with a subscription, gets you direct access to the "found Data" from within FTM.

Bottom line, learn one program and stick with it and it's upgrades, it will save you a lot of relearning and headaches.