On 2010-03-03, at 19:24, Jim Adcock wrote:
However, The DP/PG approach is extremely expensive compared to what Google is doing. Consider: Google Books == about 10 million books photo scanned. DP/PG == 30,000 books "fully restored." So Google's approach is about 300X faster than the DP/PG approach. My Conclusion: In the best of all world's there would be some measure of VALUE in choosing which books DP/PG chooses to put effort into fully restoring -- the idea that somehow DP/PG is going to be able to fully restore all the world's books is surely false.
I think that the bet made by Google, is that sooner or later, sufficiently smart AI and OCR technology will be developed to allow to process its scans and do the job of PG automatically. The only question is when it will happen, and some think that singularity will occur within 20 years. But this is probably not a reason to stop working on PG! :-) -- __Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/