norm said:
>   My success with google pd books is about 30%.
and
>   The US is doing very well in providing a large number of useless images online.

see, now _that_ is the shame.
_that_ is what the complainers should be complaining about.
bad scans do _nobody_ any good.

***

jon ingram said:
>   I've scanned almost a thousand books for Distributed Proofreaders,
>   and the Internet Archive would be a great place to permanently store
>   the images.  Every time I've asked them on their website, however,
>   they either haven't replied, or have said that letting outside people
>   contribute material is something that they're planning on setting up,
>   but with no firm date.

see, this is bad too.  this needs to be fixed.
when you people are willing to do this work,
something like _diskspace_ needs to become
a solved problem, not a recurring nightmare.

so, who can solve this problem for you guys?
what could i do to help you guys get it solved?

amazon just announced a new storage system.
the rates seemed pretty low to me, but i'd guess
we're looking for so much space that it'd add up.
especially since they charge you for pushing it in.
we need some concrete figures to discern pricing,
could you give us a ballpark number on that, jon?

another alternative would be to store it distributedly.
we could chop it up into a thousand pieces and have
a network of two thousand people storing it at home.
michael keeps telling us how cheap terabyte disks are.
maybe we can recreate fidonet with terabytes and d.s.l.

but face facts, if we've got a complete scan-set, it has to
be saved.  it has to.

and saved without the waste of even a second thought about it.

-bowerbird