March 2006 - gutvol-d - lists.pglaf.org

re: [gutvol-d] the secret garden demo
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 20 Mar '06

20 Mar '06

ah, humor. humor is good. -bowerbird

1 0

re: [gutvol-d] eGranary library
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 19 Mar '06

19 Mar '06

andrew said: > From this information, > I can't tell if they distribute PG texts or not. understandable, as they don't say so explicitly. nonetheless, since their mission is to provide electronic texts to places that have a hard time accessing the internet proper, with a server-box that holds a number of e-texts, i'd assume so... if you're filling a granary, you would definitely harvest one of the biggest fields around, not? but they might have harvested it once, and then not returned later as the field increased in size... so it would definitely be a good idea to send 'em the yield from the newest crop, once it's threshed. i'd assume michael plans on making a big noise when that d.v.d. is ready... -bowerbird

1 0

re: [gutvol-d] eGranary library
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 19 Mar '06

19 Mar '06

i would've been surprised if they weren't already familiar with p.g. ("amazed" would be a better term.) but of course they are quite familiar, as indicated on this page on their site: > http://www.widernet.org/digitallibrary/DigitalLibraries.htm so i'm quite certain _some_ of the library has long been included in their program. not sure how often they update, though, especially since the link on that webpage still points to the promo.net site... when michael's got his 35th anniversary d.v.d. ready, he should send it to them... -bowerbird

2 1

eGranary library
by Andrew Sly 19 Mar '06

19 Mar '06

>From the description, this sounds like a very worth-while project which distributes digital resources to places they might otherwise not be accessible. Perhaps somewhere that would be good to have PG texts? http://www.egranary.org/ A good summary here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EGranary_Digital_Library Andrew

1 0

Scanner recommendations?
by Al Haines (shaw) 18 Mar '06

18 Mar '06

I'm planning to purchase a new scanner sometime in the next few weeks, and am looking for comments and recommendations. My current scanner is an HP Scanjet 5P, flatbed-type, SCSI-connected. It works OK, but it's difficult to scan books that won't lie flat when opened (no binding "valley"). It isn't supported under Windows XP, so I have to keep switching my system back and forth between Windows 2000 and WinXP (drive racks are so cool for this - no dual-boot fussing). My current scanning/OCR software is Abby Finereader Sprint 4.0, which uses HP's Deskscan V2.9 software to actually acquire the image to be OCR'ed. For my purposes this combo works just fine and gives excellent results. (I've played with Abby Professional 6.0, but found that it kept "getting in the way," so I've stuck with Sprint.) Having said all that, it's the fact that the scanner, plus the Deskscan software, is SLOW, taking about 45 seconds or so to go from the start of the "Preview" scan to the finished "Final" scan of a page pair. After that, the actual OCR and saving of the resulting text file takes only a few seconds. Including turning the page, a single scan takes about a minute, which I've decided is too slow to keep on with. (In fact, it's the time investment that's keeping me from doing some of the thicker books I have. Scanning is BORING, and I can't face an 800-page book with my current equipment.) So, I'm looking for a scanner that's considerably faster than my current one, will handle stiffly-bound books without having to force them flat, is USB-connected, and works under Windows XP. I've Googled "book scanner", but most of the hits have been for those big, professional scanners with lights, an overhead camera, automatic page turning, etc., that seem to cost in the $20K-$40K range - a definite overkill for my needs. This search also pointed me to the Plustek Opticbook 3600, which I found mentioned in this forum's March 2005 archives, in the "Scanning/OCR Tips" thread. Comments/recommendations on this or other candidate scanners? Thanks, Al

2 1

18,000
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 17 Mar '06

17 Mar '06

congratulations to the project gutenberg volunteers for crossing the 18,000 marker on the mothership... -bowerbird

1 0

periodic update
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 17 Mar '06

17 Mar '06

for what it's worth... neither "the secret garden" nor "swiss family robinson" have been updated with corrections to the errors that i listed in posts here... -bowerbird

9 12

google and the translation thing
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 17 Mar '06

17 Mar '06

http://www.dancohen.org/blog/posts/no_computer_left_behind said: > Google researchers have demonstrated > (but not yet released to the general public) > a powerful method for creating 'good enough' > translations—not by understanding the grammar > of each passage, but by rapidly scanning and > comparing similar phrases on countless electronic > documents in the original and second languages. > Given large enough volumes of words in a variety > of languages, machine processing can find parallel phrases > and reduce any document into a series of word swaps. > Where once it seemed necessary to have a human being > aid in a computer's translating skills, or to teach that > machine the basics of language, swift algorithms functioning > on unimaginably large amounts of text suffice. Are such new > computer translations as good as a skilled, bilingual human being? > Of course not. Are they good enough to get the gist of a text? Absolutely. > So good the National Security Agency and the Central Intelligence Agency > increasingly rely on that kind of technology to scan, sort, and mine > gargantuan amounts of text and communications > (whether or not the rest of us like it). sounds like something you might find interesting, michael. of course, a "good enough" translation probably wouldn't be, not for literature, where the realm of creativity is instantiated, but could it work as a "first pass" that would do the bulk of the "heavy lifting", so a person knowledgeable in both languages could come in and spend relatively little time smoothing it out? well, it's certainly possible, i would think. and maybe probable. especially if progress on the technique proves to be forthcoming... -bowerbird

6 12

well, this is interesting
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 17 Mar '06

17 Mar '06

evidently, distributed proofreaders is "branching out" from project gutenberg: > http://www.solutiongrove.com/kmw/ctn/files/view/LINCTbiz_planKK_1.23.06.html it says: > Distributed Proofreaders, a well-regarded group of volunteers, will provide > public domain books. LibraryCity will contribute resources for DP to expand. sounds cozy... librarycity, one of the main organizations involved in this plan, has as its director david rothman, and i'm sure that jon noring is involved with it somehow as well... they're looking for "sponsors", suggesting "an annual fee of $1000", or even all the way up to $350,000, which buys you a "thank you" from within the browser of the one million of their clients you've sponsored... and this: > LibraryCity’s revenue will come from several sources. > It will partner with an Internet bookstore to > obtain large numbers of e-books from publishers > and to offer electronic books to libraries. > The model will be a mix of purchase, short-term rentals > and subscription fees. When libraries do not carry books, > patrons will have an opportunity to rent or purchase them > through the existing store and through the retail arm of > LibraryCity called BookTry.com. it continues: > LibraryCity and BookTry.com will help popularize the > OpenReader format and interactive software that OSoft will offer. > In return and also out of public-spiritedness, OSoft will agree > to donate a certain percentage of its earnings and/or revenue > to the Epie Institute, the 501(c)(3) pass-through, > for use with LibraryCity and other partners within LINCT. and then: > The above efficiencies and close relationship with OSoft, > a provider of interactive software that allows comments and > even blogs to be embedded within specific locations in books, > will enable LibraryCity to be more competitive against > such library-related companies as OverDrive.com. like the subject says, "interesting..." -bowerbird

5 6

re: [gutvol-d] Sponsors
by Bowerbird＠aol.com 16 Mar '06

16 Mar '06

marcello said: > Do we want to do this? no! -bowerbird

1 0