I don't know how to do this in github or how feasible this is either, but example visuals (even just one graph) would be really helpful for this topic. It's going over my head

I don't know how challenging this would be to compile, but it would be nice to have an example of each of these hypotheses.

:)

What kind of collaboration are they speaking about? Like are they specific about the other industry professionals who should work with data professionals? I'm curious.

Oof. This feels especially poignant when in the research circles/design projects I'm surrounded by sometimes. It seems like the internet can be pushed to validate any result you want it to. Not a suggestion, just an observation :)

Maybe as you structure this post, dedicate an introductory paragraph to the differences between 2010-11 Google and the 2020 Google we know now? I'm not sure, but it could be interesting to have that context.

I think it might make sense to go more into Cat's character and her journey throughout the book. Most of the critique in this book on Google's approach to scanning resides only in her depiction, maybe if you talked about why that was the only place Sloan decided to be critical?

This is more of an angsty comment than anything, but the standards that this article set also seemed way to intense for Google to care about.

This also connects (later on, though) to our discussion about digital labor. The people who ultimately are involved in the process of physically documenting these book often don't get a voice into how this content is handled once it is digitized.

I agree with this. I think it felt a little odd to realize this at the end of class, after digging into so much about the quality of the two sides' arguments without this American Disabilities Act information.

This is an interesting point I forgot that we made! This relates closely to our discussion on Digital Labor we had later on

Why only art?

One key feature from bookworm: the filter functions (although also a little poorly designed) are much more intuitive and constructive towards research than Google's, which are more limited and often require coded, typed symbols.

We also brought up an interesting dilemma where tools that are designed to be extremely user-friendly can also come across as "powerful" or not a great tool for experts or experiences digital humanists. Design also have to leave some consideration for how "expert" they want their tool to appear, and whether a learning curve is detrimental or constructive to a product's success.

This also connects to that Wired article we read earlier that discussed how Google lost interest in this project. The author mentioned how Google has become this unofficial librarian that bibliophiles didn't want, and I think one big effect from this is the cultural mistreatment of texts

Specifically, I think we used the clock as an example of how much a user should know (should versus needs to was another discussion). We mentioned that because clocks are so ubiquitous, we trust the time we see on most clocks even though we don't know their inner workings.

I also think we had an interesting conversation about how deep-diving into this concept of innovation made us consider the how this innovation fit into the larger contextual space of its inception. The Toaster Project ended up bringing a lot of environmental issues that don't usually come to mind when a consumer uses a toaster

My favorite, because it contradicts itself within the same text: https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Traveller_s_Guide_Or_Pocket_Gazettee/cdgD3TMVe0kC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22the+united+states+are%22&pg=PA4&printsec=frontcover

I'm not sure if we fully discussed this, but I also remember talking about a concept for a final project where we considered comparing text with other pieces of data (cultural artifacts, etchings, etc.) to compare the relevancy of books to what was actually happening

I also thought our discussion about the word "speakeasy" was interesting. we were able to identify the creation of the term, but also how it's meaning was expanded after the Prohibition, when it's immediate meaning was made obsolete.

i like this.

I like that they talk about the colleges like little bullies

Is this enough to diffuse the bomb?

Interested to see if this point is addressed again

It's my understanding that this includes the Google Books corpus as well?

I appreciate that this article can remain remarkably poetic, even while alternating between complex decoding and quoting theoretical physicists.

When designing digital interfaces, I've often had to consider button and type size for accessibility reasons (not all fingertips are made the same!) but I've never heard this term before.