Google to scan 800,000 manuscripts books from Indian university
"Google has agreed to index and digitize 800,000 texts stored at the University of Mysore in India."
"Written in both papers and palm leaves, there are around 100,000 manuscripts in our library, some dating back to the eighth century," said the vice chancellor of Mysore. "The effort is to restore and preserve this cultural heritage for effective dissemination of knowledge."
Impressive.
I wonder how long it will be before there's a Google Cuneiform clay tablet search.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuneiform_script
From the wikipedia page linked directly above:
"Cuneiform tablets could be fired in kilns to provide a permanent record, or they could be recycled if permanence was not needed. Many of the tablets found by archaeologists were preserved because they were baked when attacking armies burned the building in which they were kept."
How ironic that the improvements that took writing from the unwieldy medium of a clay tablet to the more versatile papyrus also heralded an enormously increased vulnerability to destruction of irreplaceable future texts.
Thursday, 24 May 2007
On the Mundane Behaviours of the British
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/6687667.stm
An article on the BBC website describes a project which started in the 1930s to catalogue the details of everyday activities - activities which would ordinarily be seen as so mundane as to not be worth documenting. Some choice quotes from the article:
" As well as asking volunteers to keep diaries, Mass Observation's researchers interviewed people in the street, listened in to conversations, and observed public behaviour in places like pubs and factories. It wanted to thwart the tendency in modern society to live our daily lives deadened by habit, "with as little consciousness of our surroundings as though we were walking in our sleep"."
• Implications of Peckham
• The application of face cream
• Upper and middle-class soup-eating habits"
Peckham is of course just another boring suburb of London. But what of its implications? :-)
The article also makes the obvious point that these days such attention to the 'man in the street' is common-place due to polls and rolling news interviews. Silly blogs such as this now add to the deafening noise.
Perhaps the only place left in the world where you don't hear the opinions of the common plebs is North Korea. Make of that what you will.
An article on the BBC website describes a project which started in the 1930s to catalogue the details of everyday activities - activities which would ordinarily be seen as so mundane as to not be worth documenting. Some choice quotes from the article:
" As well as asking volunteers to keep diaries, Mass Observation's researchers interviewed people in the street, listened in to conversations, and observed public behaviour in places like pubs and factories. It wanted to thwart the tendency in modern society to live our daily lives deadened by habit, "with as little consciousness of our surroundings as though we were walking in our sleep"."
" If you visit the archive today, you will see that the files have wonderfully banal headings, obviously provided by someone with a quirky sense of humour:
• Implications of Peckham
• The application of face cream
• Upper and middle-class soup-eating habits"
Peckham is of course just another boring suburb of London. But what of its implications? :-)
The article also makes the obvious point that these days such attention to the 'man in the street' is common-place due to polls and rolling news interviews. Silly blogs such as this now add to the deafening noise.
Perhaps the only place left in the world where you don't hear the opinions of the common plebs is North Korea. Make of that what you will.
Tuesday, 22 May 2007
Short article on India and carbon emissions
Blog from 'ethical man' from the BBC's Newsnight programme
Quite a short article - I presume there will be an ongoing series of posts and broadcasts from India - with interesting figures on India's position in the topic of climate change.
The figures are brief, though, and though there is a brief mention of the Indian Parliament raising the issue (allegedly for the first time):
"I opened the Times of India over breakfast to find that the Indian parliament had scheduled May the 8th for its first ever debate on India’s role in global warming."
... there is very little coverage of the opinions and intentions of the business leaders of India and of the opinions and levels of awareness of the common people, from the burgeoning middle classes to the people on the street. It is this that makes me suspect there are more articles and Newsnight programmes to follow on this subject, recorded during the reporter's time there.
Interesting figures also here, though not surprising given the population levels in latter years and I suppose the levels of industrialisation in the early years:
"Between 1950 and 2000 each American produced 642.0 tonnes of CO2 emissions. Each Briton toted up 499.1 tonnes. Over the same period the average Indian was responsible for just 16.5 tonnes. That is one of the lowest figures for any country on earth - 164th out of 185 countries - and is less than the average American is responsible for in a single year."
I did read a recent article though talking about the chronic lung disease suffered by those working in the high-density areas on Calcutta and such cities. I think there was a leader of a taxi trade union who was protesting against some changes.
I finally found it! Here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/6614561.stm
So yeah, this quote caught my eye, and it reminded me of the old cynics saying that when a company makes the claim that "such a change to our products would be detrimental to our customers" it is usually not the customers who are threatened by the changes but the company's profits.
Cynicism aside, it is fairly clear that the customers in this case - the commuters using the services of the Bengal Taxi Association - are already suffering, and paying with their lives.
In a way, I would agree with some of his sentiments - because in such a high-density population centre, any changes to the transport infrastructure, be it from taxation or legislation prohibiting certain classes of vehicles, could probably have a significant effect on the economy. Though for how long and by how much is a question I know I can't answer.
What are your thoughts on all this, Upasna and Vinay? Assuming Vinay can finally remember who I am, haha :)
Quite a short article - I presume there will be an ongoing series of posts and broadcasts from India - with interesting figures on India's position in the topic of climate change.
The figures are brief, though, and though there is a brief mention of the Indian Parliament raising the issue (allegedly for the first time):
"I opened the Times of India over breakfast to find that the Indian parliament had scheduled May the 8th for its first ever debate on India’s role in global warming."
... there is very little coverage of the opinions and intentions of the business leaders of India and of the opinions and levels of awareness of the common people, from the burgeoning middle classes to the people on the street. It is this that makes me suspect there are more articles and Newsnight programmes to follow on this subject, recorded during the reporter's time there.
Interesting figures also here, though not surprising given the population levels in latter years and I suppose the levels of industrialisation in the early years:
"Between 1950 and 2000 each American produced 642.0 tonnes of CO2 emissions. Each Briton toted up 499.1 tonnes. Over the same period the average Indian was responsible for just 16.5 tonnes. That is one of the lowest figures for any country on earth - 164th out of 185 countries - and is less than the average American is responsible for in a single year."
I did read a recent article though talking about the chronic lung disease suffered by those working in the high-density areas on Calcutta and such cities. I think there was a leader of a taxi trade union who was protesting against some changes.
I finally found it! Here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/6614561.stm
So yeah, this quote caught my eye, and it reminded me of the old cynics saying that when a company makes the claim that "such a change to our products would be detrimental to our customers" it is usually not the customers who are threatened by the changes but the company's profits.
Cynicism aside, it is fairly clear that the customers in this case - the commuters using the services of the Bengal Taxi Association - are already suffering, and paying with their lives.
In a way, I would agree with some of his sentiments - because in such a high-density population centre, any changes to the transport infrastructure, be it from taxation or legislation prohibiting certain classes of vehicles, could probably have a significant effect on the economy. Though for how long and by how much is a question I know I can't answer.
What are your thoughts on all this, Upasna and Vinay? Assuming Vinay can finally remember who I am, haha :)
One of my four cats is persuaded to take a leap
Spurred on by the prospect of a pot of yoghurt, Hubble bravely spans the chasm.
Interesting debate, Christopher Hitchens and Al Sharpton
The ever-outspoken Christopher Hitchens, publicising his recently published book entitled 'God Is Not Great - How Religion Poisons Everything' enters a debate with the Rev Al Sharpton.
The full, free, video can be viewed here at fora.tv and makes for fascinating viewing. I think it makes a pleasant change to see an interview or debate from the USA conducted in a polite erudite manner with no raised voices, and in front of an audience which is equally attentive and respectful. There's no whooping and hollering here - and applause doesn't appear after every other sentence, unlike in other places and on other shows.
The discussion is definitely worth watching. No big final agreement is arrived at, as you can expect - since the subject is, partially:
1) the existence of deity/deities and for the greater part the possibility of the existence of moral frameworks outside the influence of religious instructions or teachings and
2) of the problems (vagueness, contradictory teachings) with moral frameworks as set up by religious instructions.
Unsurprisingly perhaps, the debate takes mostly a focus on Christianity, Judaism and Islam when religious texts are referred to - the other major world religions like Hinduism and Buddhism aren't referred to as far as I can recall.
Nevertheless, both of the fellows taking part in the debate make very decent points - and Rev Al Sharpton, as the fellow defending religion and religiously-oriented morality, makes some concessions that I did not expect him to give - and I give him full credit for doing so. I had expected him to be a whole lot more dogmatic than he was.
At any rate there is a good deal of humour there - Christopher Hitchens is a fairly controversial character, and has a fairly powerful bite with some unusually strongly held views on various matters. None of them appear to be founded from the shaky foundations of a position of illogical or kneejerk reactionism; he can, and often does, back up his views with vigorous and convincing arguments. Convincing even if in the event that you finally disagree with whatever is his final conclusion.
To give an illustration of his unwillingness to bow to convention when he has decided such 'convention' is illogical or distasteful, view the following video. He is asked to give his views following the recent death of the rather notorious 'Rev' Jerry Falwell:
youtube video of Hitchens interview
You can also read Hitchen's full views at Slate, where he has a column: http://www.slate.com/id/2166337/
Quite outspoken, but entertaining.
The full, free, video can be viewed here at fora.tv and makes for fascinating viewing. I think it makes a pleasant change to see an interview or debate from the USA conducted in a polite erudite manner with no raised voices, and in front of an audience which is equally attentive and respectful. There's no whooping and hollering here - and applause doesn't appear after every other sentence, unlike in other places and on other shows.
The discussion is definitely worth watching. No big final agreement is arrived at, as you can expect - since the subject is, partially:
1) the existence of deity/deities and for the greater part the possibility of the existence of moral frameworks outside the influence of religious instructions or teachings and
2) of the problems (vagueness, contradictory teachings) with moral frameworks as set up by religious instructions.
Unsurprisingly perhaps, the debate takes mostly a focus on Christianity, Judaism and Islam when religious texts are referred to - the other major world religions like Hinduism and Buddhism aren't referred to as far as I can recall.
Nevertheless, both of the fellows taking part in the debate make very decent points - and Rev Al Sharpton, as the fellow defending religion and religiously-oriented morality, makes some concessions that I did not expect him to give - and I give him full credit for doing so. I had expected him to be a whole lot more dogmatic than he was.
At any rate there is a good deal of humour there - Christopher Hitchens is a fairly controversial character, and has a fairly powerful bite with some unusually strongly held views on various matters. None of them appear to be founded from the shaky foundations of a position of illogical or kneejerk reactionism; he can, and often does, back up his views with vigorous and convincing arguments. Convincing even if in the event that you finally disagree with whatever is his final conclusion.
To give an illustration of his unwillingness to bow to convention when he has decided such 'convention' is illogical or distasteful, view the following video. He is asked to give his views following the recent death of the rather notorious 'Rev' Jerry Falwell:
youtube video of Hitchens interview
You can also read Hitchen's full views at Slate, where he has a column: http://www.slate.com/id/2166337/
Quite outspoken, but entertaining.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
