4 ms·

> I see that as an embarrassing result for UC Berkeley and any institution that follows suit. Clearly, there is value to making the material available It's not

> I see that as an embarrassing result for UC Berkeley and any institution that follows suit. Clearly, there is value to making the material available It's not "clear" at all that there's value to put it up for them. They probably did it out of good-will, in which case the easiest option was to simply record the lecture. I don't think it's fair to imply malice at all. So the solution is for them to give you a call, and you'll do it for a cut of the profit (i.e. free), right?

endswapper 10y ago
There is value for them and for the public: goodwill - business : the amount of value that a company's good reputation adds to its overall value[0] [0] http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/goodwill http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/goodwill I didn't imply malice at all. No, they should not call me. They should start with an inclusive perspective that eliminates the need for lawsuits. And when things slip through the cracks because of advancements in technology, or cultural shifts in perspective they should lead. My point is that it's embarrassing because they had the opportunity to do the right thing, and instead they did the easy thing, which was to take it away.
- guitarbill 10y ago
  I was being facetious about them calling you, but somebody has to make a start. > they had the opportunity to do the right thing, and instead they did the easy thing, which was to take it away. Nope, by providing it for free they definitely were adding. As you will see when they take it offline, it was completely additional. EDIT: I see you were talking about UC Berkley, I though "they" referred to Harvard and M.I.T, my mistake. Yeah, they took it away, but lawsuits have that effect. I doubt the plaintiffs would have settled for "we'll crowdsource the captions" :) > They should start with an inclusive perspective that eliminates the need for lawsuits IDK. It's taken millennia to get to where we are. Improvement isn't an option? A campaign to crowdsource the close captions might have been far more effective and definitely less mean-spirited than a lawsuit. The all-or-nothing approach isn't practical and will likely result in nothing.
  - endswapper 10y ago
    Your sarcasm was not missed. I'm not sure what you're saying here, "Nope, by providing it for free they definitely were adding. As you will see when they take it offline, it was completely additional." I think your crowd-sourcing idea is a good one. I think that would be great, but in this instance it is circuitous. The simple reality is that in the US, we have agreed as a society that lawsuits are how we settle things. That is how we improve things.

endswapper 10y ago

There is value for them and for the public: goodwill - business : the amount of value that a company's good reputation adds to its overall value[0] [0] http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/goodwill http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/goodwill I didn't imply malice at all. No, they should not call me. They should start with an inclusive perspective that eliminates the need for lawsuits. And when things slip through the cracks because of advancements in technology, or cultural shifts in perspective they should lead. My point is that it's embarrassing because they had the opportunity to do the right thing, and instead they did the easy thing, which was to take it away.

guitarbill 10y ago
I was being facetious about them calling you, but somebody has to make a start. > they had the opportunity to do the right thing, and instead they did the easy thing, which was to take it away. Nope, by providing it for free they definitely were adding. As you will see when they take it offline, it was completely additional. EDIT: I see you were talking about UC Berkley, I though "they" referred to Harvard and M.I.T, my mistake. Yeah, they took it away, but lawsuits have that effect. I doubt the plaintiffs would have settled for "we'll crowdsource the captions" :) > They should start with an inclusive perspective that eliminates the need for lawsuits IDK. It's taken millennia to get to where we are. Improvement isn't an option? A campaign to crowdsource the close captions might have been far more effective and definitely less mean-spirited than a lawsuit. The all-or-nothing approach isn't practical and will likely result in nothing.
- endswapper 10y ago
  Your sarcasm was not missed. I'm not sure what you're saying here, "Nope, by providing it for free they definitely were adding. As you will see when they take it offline, it was completely additional." I think your crowd-sourcing idea is a good one. I think that would be great, but in this instance it is circuitous. The simple reality is that in the US, we have agreed as a society that lawsuits are how we settle things. That is how we improve things.