A future without books?

I just came across this article, The Future of Reading, and I must say, I'm both incredibly intrigued and a little frightened at the same time.

Some background:
The basic idea behind this story is that books can now be downloaded through Amazon, onto a device, about the size of a ‘normal’ paperback, called a Kindle. The user either downloads a book (costing around ten bucks) directly to the Kindle via wireless signals, or to a home computer and then to the Kindle. Interesting premise. Now, I must say, I’m both incredibly intrigued and a little frightened at the same time.

Now, let's start with the fright:
New books may well disappear from the face of the earth as I know it. Granted this is going to take a while – but I can honestly see a day now when books (at least paperbacks) would no longer be produced. The ideas of Epic 2014 might not be that far off. Truly scary!

And the intrigue:
It would be amazing to carry multiple copies of books at once! And research would be a breeze! Where was this thing five years ago when I started my undergrad? Who needs to actually read a book now when you can just search for a key word!? Arguably the index based searching so beloved in my early undergrad years was more or less the same thing, but this Kindle would make it way easier.
Plus – I’m curious as to the environmental impacts of the Kindle versus the publishing of multiple copies of paperbacks. It might be better to have a chunk of plastic than to cut down all those trees for books. Time will tell I’m sure!

A combination of fright and intrigue:
What about copyright? Would I be able to share a downloaded version of a book with my dad in the same way that we share paperbacks now? The cost of buying a book now is essentially cut in half for me, given that I know it’ll get at least two reads out of it (this rationalization allows me to buy more books – maybe it’s not sound rationalization, but it works for me.) Perhaps instead of sharing the digital copy of a book I’d actually have to lend my dad my Kindle… which raises a whole new set of problems.

Hmm… Much to ponder!

Plagiarism, firings, o my!

It would seem that PM Harper has been up to no good, using other people’s words as his own. First, it was a speech from the then Prime Minister of Australia and now it’s a speech from former Ontario Premier Mike Harris.

In the first case, the Conservatives acknowledged their crime and a speech writer admitted he borrowed the speech. He then resigned. All things acknowledged and seemingly accounted for, I forgot about the plagiarized speech.

Now I read this morning that again Harper has been criticized for using the words of Mike Harris. While this apparently happened in 2003, it’s still very interesting.

Rather than admit to the charge this time, however, the Conservatives accuse their opposition of simply using this as an attempt to divert attention away from their apparent lack of political campaign.

Admittedly, the Conservatives aren’t the only ones doing it… It would seem the Liberals are up to their own brand of plagiarism as well… The story and some of the potential evidence.

In other news, the entire staff of the Canadian Oxford Dictionary has been laid off. Somewhat shocking (even if the staff consisted of four people) and this could be an interesting indication of what’s to come for encyclopedias.

The reasoning behind the dismissal of the dictionary staff was reduced sales, due to the incredible popularity of free online dictionaries.

Canadian English will still be accessible through the subscription based Oxford site and by the sounds of things a physical, book based dictionary will still be published. The only difference now, it would seem, is that Canadians will no longer have an active role in monitoring their lexicon.

I have to seriously wonder, then, what’s in store for book based encyclopedias. Will they too be relegated to the digital world? Will encyclopedias take on a language based tone, rather than a cultural tone? Will we end up with the neutral point of view that plagues Wikipedia and provides it with an ‘Anglo-American’ perspective?

I certainly hope not – but at the same time, dictionaries and encyclopedias are alike in many ways, and it’s unfortunately not a far stretch to expect similar things to happen to the encyclopedic world.