| Cache = Cash |
Ever since Google introduced GoogleCache (an alternative, high-speed, and
faithful storage of other people's content -- See
Kamat's Potpourri in GoogleCache ), everybody is trying to catch up.
Content aggregators, Portals, Bloggers all have a need for caching, so that stories
they link to are not broken when the content originator goes out of business,
changes the content, or starts charging for the content. Caching solves that problem, but as
Anne Holland mentions,
what's the difference between caching and stealing?
It is indeed a very perplexing question with no easy answer. We all benefit tremendously
from GoogleCache and the Way-Back-Machine; so did we from Napster. But at whose cost?
And where are we going to draw the line? Proxy servers cache content - is that stealing?
What about the Internet clouds (like Akamai) that cache content to speed-up the delivery?
Is that stealing?
One thing is certain though. There is tremendous interest, value (and money as Google has shown us with
the Usenet cache -- Google is the only place you can relive the glory days of Internet groups,
and read some of the finest writings of the period) in the caching servers and technologies.
You can start caching such treasure houses of information like The New York Times, Fathom (both of
which are free today after registration) and
after two years, when they are no longer free, you can start charging money for accessing the cache.
My Computer Architecture Professor, while explaining Cache memory had exclaimed "C-A-C-H-E is good but
C-A-S-H is great". The time has come now to turn the former into the latter.
Money does not grow on trees, but it does on cache.
|(Comments Disabled for Now. Sorry!)||First Written: Saturday, November 3, 2001|
Last Modified: 1/30/2003