In the wider spread of knowledge and general raising of mass comprehension, availablity of digitised books (such as through the good offfices of the Gutenburg Project) the internet is already a powerful force.

Of course there will always be preference for the real thing, but for those with limited reading time (and that sometimes piecemeal between other tasks) and limited space afforded by minimalist lifestyles, such availability is a boon.

I particularly enjoy when travelling being able to consult a pda which currently contains several thousand books and snatch a chapter or two of Dickens, Ptolomy or whatever without fear of sartorial bulk to which even pocket editions using India paper contribute.

Those who like to doze off to the drone of a somewhat mechanical voice unschooled in the arts of inflection reading such 'portable books' can even, I understand, do so through use of appropriate software and a headphone device, with possibe subliminal learning experience.

dr venables preller, Warminster, UK

Printed books already have too much that ain't so. At least you can tell how old they are. In digital form, something produced this second cannot be distinguished from ten thousand years ago.

"Its better to know nothing than to know what ain't so"- Josh Billings.

Michael Moore, Stockport,

Yes the Internet encourages book-reading. GoogleBooks etc. leads people to later editions, while preserving fragile early editions from overuse. We get both preservation & access.

Critics ask too much of pioneers like the real Page of Mountain View. Digitization cannot ensure copyright's future: that must be done by others -- and it will be, embracing new technique, just as it was for printing. We'll still need editors & publishers.

Nor are digitizers responsible for the sad state of many libraries. "Digital" libraries may sound like replacements waiting in the wings. But, as with copyright, reinventing libraries is a task for others. Digitization is no more central to libraries, their social & political functions, than printing was when it first came along -- libraries are older -- category mistake, confusing libraries with technique.

Digitization helps libraries, and reading: texts accessible to broader publics, books better-preserved -- and ultimately more users of both.

Jack Kessler, San Francisco, USA

No one company company, no matter how large it is, will ever be able to completely digitize all the books.


If this dream will ever be realized, the digitizing work has to be distributed efforts done by millions of consumers around the world.

Now with the new book ripper such as BookSnap, consumers will not only have to role to consume ebooks, but they can also help create and share the digital libraries as well.

http://www.atiz.com

Sarasin, Los Angeles, CA

Stanzler need not worry. One of the great advantages of the Internet is that anyone can add to it. Someone will think that David Irving's books are worth reading, and will upload them.

I also do not share Ben Macintyre's worries about copyright. If there were no enforceable copyright, pretty well just as much worthwhile material would probably be produced. Those with something to say, do not say it for the money.

Richard Baron, London,

Great, but who will want to write 'books' in the future? Google must eventually start buying the publishers - how do you persuade authors to write for Google rather than Macmillan or Bloomsbury? Should Harry Potter be available as a 'free' download ? No-one should be able to charge upfront for information? try this one on your own lawyer next time you get a bill -[nothing is free really as you pay for Google's $200 billion share price through advertising revenue that must be paid for by the user eventually..] so Google's $4.6 billion mobile phone purchase will be paid for by advertising on the pnones, tracking & using your search info - I wonder if they will own your phone conversation like your e-mails on googlemail? You can always try asking them, but they are the most secretive organisation in the world so a reply may not be forthcoming which is odd as they expect everyone else to give them information for nothing, and then make billions from tracking usage of the same,

Larry Page, Mountain View, California

If this ever fully comes about it will enable the comparatively easy penetration of a good deal of misrepresentation. I don t see them digitising manuscript music in a hurry as, for example, Elgar s Variations would abruptly lose their Enigma.

Henry Percy, London, UK

Can't believe the complaints about not being able to enjoy the tactile pleasure of holding the book--my God, you are being able to access books from everywhere--precious books are now available to everyone on the internet. Get over your worries, and start enjoying all those wonderful books.
If ever there was a great use for the internet, this repository of great and not so great books, is a perfect example of the wonders of the electronic age.

joel, dallas, texas

Remember your local library will have some fantastic online resources, picked out by professionals who will know what online information is relevent, reliable and up-to-date.

It's amazing the rubbish that you can find online these days....

Sarah, Gillingham,

Digitising as much as possible of the world's printed works is a good thing, even though some dangerous rubbish may "slip through".

Now that I am too disabled to get out much, but still working (from home) I'd be stuffed without the internet. There must be lots of people like me out there.

Julia Iskandar, London, e

An essential resource for those "living on the edge" - not able to join a university and have access to the reserved volumes, living miles from a library, and invisibly poor.

Jay, Whittlesey Fenland, UK

Whilst people may be able to access the content of the book, this is not necessarily enough. One cannot understand the impact of a work without examining it as an object: size, weight, binding and quality of paper all tell you something about the purpose of a book, its intended audience and how the readers may have engaged with it, they are not simply a matter of aesthetics. A digital copy (just like a modern facsimile edition) is at best a poor quality second best, unless one considers that the content of books is wholly divorced from their context.

Furthermore, what about manuscripts? Many of these are too fragile to be converted into digital format, but predominate(d) in many cultures. One cannot (for example) understand the literate world of the sixteenth century without examining the manuscripts that circulated; the works which were not printed but which continued to have immense impact.

John Scott, London,

Mr David Irvings books will never be published (on-line for all to read) for sure. I can think of hundreds of other examples. Who is going to decide what's right and what's wrong?

stanzler, ny, us

'I suspect, few will plough through a black-and-white, on-screen version of a library book when the genuine article is easily available..,'

Maybe true for those who live in London or some other major centre, but for those living 'on the periphery' such services as Google Book Search have come as a kind of miracle. In early 2005, I spent a month (all I could afford) sitting in the British Library, NAM, National Archive etc. from dawn to (way past) dusk consulting works, unobtainable anywhere near my home country, for my research project. Most of the time I was coughing up my lungs with a severe attack of bronchitis but had to keep going because I knew it was my only chance.

In the last year, thanks to the miracle of Internet, I have been able to reconsult many of the works I read then and download about twenty rare volumes that I didn't have time to see in London. Yes, it's my eyes that bear the brunt now, but at least I can 'suffer' in my own home, and it's worth the bother.

L. Waring, Montevideo, Uruguay.