Bad is Good for Librarians

I think if everything bad is good for you then this actually bodes well for libraries. I think it might be accurate to say that not everything bad is bad for you. I get really annoyed at folks who look down their noses and declare, “I don’t have a television.” Certainly as technology advances and information finds other ways into our minds there will be a natural inclination to declare that anything new is rubbish.

There’s a not-too-serious group of folks out there who believe that Francis Bacon actually wrote plays under the pseudonym “William Shakespeare”. Part of their reasoning is that Bacon was a barrister, and frivolous writing was seen as beneath his station. When motion pictures made their way into our culture they were seen as a foolish fad, but think of some of the great movies out there that have inspired you and you see where this leads. Everything new is bad—or is it?

So here’s where I think this all bodes well for libraries. As people begin to migrate more and more to the cyberworld, there is a need for all of the world’s history to make that transition. Books, movies, art—they’ll all need to have a presence online. How will all of this be organized? By librarians and the libraries that house these collections. There is now more than ever a need for innovative thinking and creativity in the library world, maybe more so than at any time in the history of the profession.

Class Notes

If I were The Steve, I wouldn’t change much about the class. This has been incredibly fun and enlightening. If I had to pick something, I’d only rearrange things. Gaming would be more fun if I wasn’t stressed trying to complete two final projects at the same time.

Maybe gaming could be moved to mid-semester, where things are a little less stressful and the games might actually be a stress reliever. I found myself feeling guilty playing games when I had projects to finish.

But that’s just me. I would have liked to have spent an extra week on wikis, understanding a little more of their collaborative nature. There’s something odd about making changes to a site without actually being the one who started the site. It seems to go against online etiquette, even though that’s the point.

I Like My First Life

I was introduced to second life about a year and a half ago through work. Princeton University has a Second Life presence and one of the first things built was a replica of the library in Pine Hall. Very ornate. SL now turns out to not have evolved much, at least graphically. It’s difficult to navigate as my system is lowly regarded by SL: “Your computer is a piece of junk and all of SL’s functionality may not be available.” Thanks. I found my system struggling to keep up with tasks, the result being jumpy images and commands.

I’m not a fan. Nothing personal to SL, I just have a strong dislike for games requiring role playing and fantasizing. I’ve never once played “Dungeons and Dragons” so maybe I lack that experience. It seems SL is getting eerily close to the fantasy world Anderson created in “Feed”.

My experience with SL was disorienting and disappointing. I was incredibly frustrated because my inferior laptop couldn’t handle the processing necessary and I found myself impatiently punching arrow keys to move around. The SL world seems pretty bland at this point but I assume there are bustling communities, which makes me sad—quit living your fantasy life online, get off your butts and live your life in the real world!

Gamey

First a note of caution. I'm not a gamer. I don't like Mountain Dew or Cheetos. I'll never become so involved with something that I need to wear an adult diaper.

That said, researching which game system to buy would require in-depth gamer research. I think I’d visit game stores and talk with kids/adults who play. Levine says the average age of gamers is 33. My guess though is that adults can usually afford a home system. A system in a library or perhaps other public arena probably needs to be geared to the high school and younger set.

Actually I saw a newscast recently that said that Wii systems are popular amongst seniors. Apparently it’s a fun way to “go bowling” or “play tennis”. It’s also good exercise for them too. I think this is terrific.

If I absolutely had to recommend a game system for a library I’d do obvious online research, talk with gamers and consult game store employees as to what are systems that are popular and can withstand heavy public usage. My choice for a library would be a “Playstation 3” as this is both a popular game system and is not physically demanding. I think this would be important for a library. Wii systems are attractive for getting kids off of the couch, but the physical activity would be distracting in a library. Although this would be my system of choice if there was a separate and sound-proof gaming room.

Screencasting

After screencasting a few things I don’t really have any best practices, but maybe just a few notes:

--A three-minute screencast takes at least an hour. The technology isn’t difficult, you’ll just find yourself doing it over and over...

--In Jing, the little yellow glob at the top of your screen is annoying. Under “More” there’s a quit button, which’ll make it go away. This may be simple, but it took me awhile.

--A good screencast should be wall to wall with good information. Be sure to use the pause button when recording!

--Make notes of what you want to say, and definitely rehearse. See first comment.

Pop culture is fun, not enlightening

The answer to “is popular culture (games, tv, film) just a method to "sophisticatedly deliver stupidity"? (paraphrasing George Will) is YES.

Take Johnson’s view of people’s Autism Quotient. This is apparently a measure of a person’s ability to read emotions in others. And apparently Johnson believes that shows like “The Apprentice” are sociological experiments forcing readers to assess the “social logic” of what’s going on in television’s dubbed and edited world. I believe this is foolish though. If people want to become skilled assessors of social situations, then they should put themselves in social situations. Apparently Johnson’s take is that pop culture is enlightening, but all it does is lower the bar, or raise it if you’re doing the limbo. You’re not a genius if you know all of the answers on Jeopardy.

I don’t want to be a curmudgeon here. I like pop culture, mainly because I can be amused by it, but I certainly don’t delude myself that indulging in pop culture (TV, trashy mags, movies) makes me smarter. They’re just a diversion.

Speed dating

Here's a screencast of me playing a game called "Speed Dating". It's keen insight into why I'm single.

Stickiness and Social Class

I found Boyd’s essays somewhat disheartening. Could social class really play a role in online interaction? I was enlightened by Boyd’s explanation of the history of FB and MS, explaining how FB originated as a college only site, which itself may imply social class, but it seems that the driving force behind this are the users themselves. People tend to organize themselves into groups and in this case FB and MS seem to be large organizations of generalized perception of class. Is it this social desire to align one’s self with a group or caste that makes social networking sites so “sticky”? Boyd explains that hegemonic kids (good kids) gravitate to FB while the social misfits prefer MS. Boyd indicates that this preference becomes and identity and this need for identity is likely a contributor to the stickiness of the sites. The “bling” design of MS appeals to the “social alternatives” and the more conservative FB appearance helps define the cultural impulses of the more socially conservative. Of course all of this is vast generalization. My opinion is that the stickiness of the sites is due to designers being keenly tuned into their target audience's preferences. Indeed Facebook was designed and created by a college student. As so much of our lives take place online it only makes sense that socializing online is a natural evolution of our online lives.

Ning

The idea of creating one’s own social network doesn’t have to reside within existing social networking sites such as Facebook or Myspace. Ning offers the advantage of customization, allowing one to provide unique identifying characteristics—such as company logos, team mascots or other unique identifiers. Of course what you lose in this process is a built in audience. The immense popularity of FB or MS means users are already familiar with the interface and likely are already logging in to their profiles to update their status or respond to messages.

But would it be advantageous for a company to use Ning to coordinate employees or project teams? I believe it would, much the same way a wiki would. A specialized social network allows for instant udating of status of personnel or project goals. Speaking from personal experience I believe it would be helpful in time-critical situations and also helps build a rapport amongst people working in different departments on a particular project. In a digital library situation it might be helpful for catalogers to know when digital images have been uploaded to a server for cataloging and metadata creation. Programmers might then need to access the images to determine programming needs for dissemination. So the bottom line might be that creating custom social networks is best for small, personalized or goal oriented tasks but a personalized network for the sake of having a personalized network may be swimming upstream, especially with the popularity and ease of use of existing social software networks.

Upload this

Like Steve, I keep Facebook pretty simple. Mainly I use it to keep track of family and friends, so I don't spend a lot of time comparing movie tastes or propagandizing issues or personal likes or dislikes. I mean everyone knows U2 is the greatest band ever and there's really nothing to discuss. Right?

So here's a very brief and simple explanation of how to upload a profile picture to your Facebook account.

Scils favorites

In reviewing my classmates' vodcasts I'm struck by how creative and, perhaps more disturbingly, how much of a voyeur I am when it comes to getting a little insight into who my classmates are. Probably because of the online nature of the class we don't really get a chance to interact with each other outside of class.

That said I think there are more than a couple of really fun and interesting videos. This one I liked because I hadn't heard "In the Jungle" in a long time.

Costa Rica

Of course I think the ferret/kitty comparison is a riot.

Kitty/Ferret

Danger--boring screencast!

This is an attempt to explain the difference between resampling and resizing when dealing with digital images. It's something I understand but have trouble explaining--I can't tell you how many takes this took and even then this is pretty hamfisted.

roelscrcast

Flickr Me Timbers

So I’ve reviewed the SCILS images and what I’ve found is that anyone who is working full time, has a family AND is trying to earn their MLIS should be institutionalized. Really fun photos though. Amazing, but everyone has access to a digital camera, even if it’s just a camera phone. Remember when buying a decent digital camera would cost a month’s salary? Quick show of hands—who still uses their film camera? Who still has a film camera?

Where would we be without our caffeine and our laptops? I see some folks using their desktop computers but when I began this program (online) I went out and bought a laptop specifically so I could leave the house, head to my local coffee house (It’s a Grind) and ogle the cute barista—I mean do my homework.

It looks like some pets are also in the SCILS program. Do they also have to pay computer lab fees or is that just a “per household” thing?

Educational vids vs. Entertainment vids

So in one corner is the knockout artist Entertainment video. Packs a powerful punch and has a strong following of loyal fans. In the other corner is Educational video, equally loyal group of fans but uses much more finesse.

Personally I believe there’s room for both in the current online environment. Certainly the envelope is being pushed with educational video. The grassroots movement of some universities to make lectures available online may have a sort of Gutenberg effect. As informative material is made more easily available to the masses so will grow the world’s collective online intelligence. Perhaps the biggest challenge, as indicated in the Horizon report, is the need to provide educational video on how to provide good educational videos. And of course organizing the content will be key—maybe use librarians or something.

Equally booming is the online entertainment video industry. Currently many high-end companies (Sony online entertainment) are producing made-for-the-web videos and gaming environments with more than modest success. Entertainment videos for the web are a bit of a conundrum though. Personally I much prefer the comfort of my recliner and my modestly sized HD television than being entertained by a video of poor quality broadcast on a small screen with bad sound. Dare I say that educational videos are more suited to the online environment than entertainment videos?

For your enjoyment

My attempt at entertaining you. What a chore this was. I collected and edited the images then found out that my completely updated Windows XP machine has a bad version of Windows Movie Maker. The application crashed immediately on opening. I happened to be traveling at the time and had to borrow another laptop (Vista) to create the movie. I copied the projects to my flash drive and when I got back to NJ I was able to open WMM on a different XP machine, but it didn't like the Vista generated projects I had created.

So after much profanity and with spiking blood pressure I redid the movies in iMovie. Death to Microsoft.

Click To Play

Educational vid

My attempt at an educational video...

What I'm trying to (briefly) show is how library collections make it online. Of course this is very simplified, but you get the idea.

Anderson and Libraries

Libraries are not for-profit institutions. Annual budgets, whether for a public library or an academic one, are designed to be renewed annually, not as seed money to foster self sustenance. Maybe more simply put, libraries are black holes for money. But this isn’t a bad thing. Like any public service, a library operates for the convenience and as a service to its clientele. Because of this relative freedom to act without the idea of turning a profit libraries are in a very good position to exploit the long tail of their collections. Of course there are logistical problems with maintaining analog collections (space, staffing) it behooves a library to digitize its collections to mitigate the concerns of maintaining analog collections.

So maybe the question becomes how a library will serve its customers in the future. Undoubtedly libraries are becoming and will continue to become both digital and brick and mortar entities. Should a library digitize the long tail of its collections or should a library digitize the short head, as Anderson calls it, and make room to accommodate long-tail materials?

Anderson has simple rules for a thriving long tail industry. Make everything available and make it findable. Believe it or not I think libraries have somewhat accidentally worked their way into an advantageous situation. Libraries have built-in cataloging systems to make everything findable and for at least the last 15 years have been moving toward digitizing collections. What’s interesting is how Anderson relates the cultural bias of the Dewey Decimal System. This will be a handicap to libraries that by digitizing their collections are suddenly becoming world entities. No longer is Smalltown Public Library just serving the needs of its community but may find their digital collections browsed and researched by students all over the world.

To Blog or to Podcast

While there are many cool aspects of podcasting it turns out it’s not the easiest thing in the world to do. Find a podcast hosting site, upload, then blog and paste in code…it seems like podcasting is for the very dedicated. Or maybe the very vain. Or maybe a professional information disseminator. While podcasting is a very cool experience I found myself recording and re-recording my stuff and still I don’t think it’s perfect. And by now it’s cliché, but I’m thoroughly disoriented by the sound of my own voice.

Whereas with blogging, there’s still a bit of anonymity. Admit it folks, you were wondering what your classmates sounded like so you’ve been listening to their stories, making value judgments based on how articulate they are, the tenor of their voice, their elocution. Or was that just me? Sorry, my bad. Blogging provides one less level of exposure. At least when I blog folks can only say to themselves “that was total crap.” But If I podcast folks would have the option to add “and he sounds like a dork.”

From a practicality standpoint, I think blogging is fast, easy and more manageable. If you spot an error in your blog it can quickly be corrected but if you want to edit a podcast the entire podcast must be recorded. I also think blogging is more of an amateur arena. You don’t have to be a professional writer to post interesting ideas or stories but those interesting ideas or stories may be mitigated or even disregarded because of the annoying nervous giggle you develop when you speak into a microphone. At this point I think I’ll leave the podcasting to the professional voices out there.

E.A. Poe, Portishead and Roel

So rather than bore anyone with an account of my life I decided to read a stanza from Poe's "The Raven", accompanied by Portishead. I was going for ambience but I think it just sounds like me talking with music on. Anyway, here's a link to the mp3:

http://www.switchpod.com/users/rmscils598f08/munozaudio.mp3

Or just play it here.

Superman, the Pope and a blonde walk into a library...

No punchline here. Just a way of understanding the vast differences of a potential intellectual community. I really enjoyed Anderson’s examination of Wikipedia. Perhaps an analogous example of Wikipedia is academic libraries. This community of intellect is seen in students who do research on obscure collections, giving new insight to previous thinking. I had never thought of this before but it’s interesting that when Wikipedia was compared with Encyclopedia Britannica both were found to have errors. In Wikipedia the errors were quickly corrected. Encyclopedia Britannica had to wait until its next printing.

Digital libraries are new producers, depending on the material they put online. I wrote in an earlier post about a digitized manuscript that only a handful of scholars may be interested in. This is an example of the new producer theory. Just because a handful of people are interested in it doesn’t mean more won’t be once it’s widely available.

To continue the long tail properties of libraries the new markets generated by libraries and their digital complements are making even small public libraries with an online catalog a potential go-to resource worldwide. Even academic libraries that primarily serve their students and faculty are seeing traffic from scholars all over the world. Which leads to the issue of libraries as new marketers. As library collections are reflective of constituent preference, this doesn’t mean that everything is valuable intellectually. In the case of digital libraries, often collections of little or debatable scholarly benefit become popular for reasons other than their content. As Anderson states, the long tail is often “full of crap”.

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times

My educational experience at SCILS has been an adventure, never boring and challenging to say the least. I began the program in January of 2006 and I’m approaching the finish line. I’ve been working in digital libraries for some time, 14 years now, and while I knew much about library issues it was truly remarkable how much I didn’t know. I’ve never worked a reference desk so reference was an eye-opener. I don’t do descriptive cataloging so that class was both fascinating and frustrating. I truly hope that AACR2 meets a heinous and disfiguring end.

I’ve appreciated the opportunity to take my classes online. This is a double edged sword though—I regret not being able to spend time in class and discuss topics more thoroughly with my professors. I loved doing homework and listening to lectures from the comfort of my home. I regret not being able to connect more with classmates. I loved the freedom to set my own schedule. I regret not being more disciplined in my schedule.

So here are a few recommendations to those considering the Rutgers program or any other library studies program. I’ve worked full-time during my time in SCILS and it has made for incredibly hectic semesters. My hat is off to those who work full-time, are parents and spouses AND are in the program. Sleep is over rated anyway. So my advice is that if you have the opportunity and desire to go to library school before beginning a career, take advantage.

Another piece of advice--have a sense of humor. If you’re not having fun, you’re doing it wrong.

Libraries and their long tail

It was fascinating to learn of the long tail and how business has made profitable inroads with such a wide audience in the digital age. I wonder if libraries aren’t so much affected by the long tail as justified by the concept. Libraries have lived in the long tail since Thomas Jefferson donated his personal library to government. Libraries don’t exist to make a profit. Public libraries are supported by taxpayers with no expectation of an interest earning return on investment.

Free from that monetary expectation libraries then have a large percentage of items on their shelves that circulate rarely. I’ll bet anyone can walk into their public library and find an obscure volume on Ireland’s legal system, open it, and find that the last time it was checked out was 25 years ago. But of course libraries have limited physical space. Low circulating items are de-accessioned or moved to storage, but this is not in the interest of profit, but in the interest of providing walk-in traffic volumes that are more desirable.

But what about the digital library? Is this the natural progression? Will digital libraries provide the long tail and turn low-circulating items loose on a world wide audience? I think an example is a volume of text recently digitized in the library at Princeton University. The volume is a manuscript of Aristotle’s Organon. Written in ancient Greek, it’s a rare volume that only the most serious scholars are allowed to peruse. This is definitely long tail material. I’d be willing to bet that maybe once every two or three years it’s pulled from the vault for a scholar. Now that it’s online it sees more “action” than it has since its acquisition, even though only a handful of scholars in the world are capable of reading it. Will digital libraries extend the long tail even further?

Adventures in collaborating

Google Docs strikes me as an excellent repository of combined work but it’s a little disconcerting to create a document from scratch on GD. Speaking as a card carrying control nut (Princeton Plainsboro chapter) it is difficult to make works in progress available for all to see. There seem to be no social rules for creating a group project. Is it ok to edit something you didn’t write?

So it seems the thing to do is to divvy up the workload, create a document on your own, then upload it to GD. In this regard, it makes good sense to have several sets of eyes to edit work. As a matter of fact I would advocate that people working on group projects in an academic setting should take full advantage of GD. As a student of SCILS I’ve been involved in several group projects and taking advantage of GD would have been a real asset. I also think it would be advantageous to faculty who are burdened with various versions of project software that often makes for headaches. Additionally, allowing faculty access to the project in GD for insights or recommendations would be extremely helpful.

Wetaint or PBwiki

Both services offer easy signup, though I liked that WP offered templates. Of course I’m a bit biased—we’ve been using PB in class and I’ve gotten used to it. In no way do I consider myself an expert, but it seems that PB offers more tools for an administrator, thus it becomes more useful in an educational setting, where a teacher can allow students to only have access to certain items. WP appears more collaborative and the site is much more oriented to the social aspect of wikis, where all have an equal say. Both require some technical knowledge—word processing skill helps, basic web knowledge such as hyperlinks or rss is useful and basic navigation and image editing are required if you’d like to add graphics. While both offer ease of use, ease is relative.

Also on both there is versioning, allowing one to revert back to previous iterations of the wiki site, it’s not obvious how or what the advantages are to a novice user. Then the novice’s site gets obliterated and they wish they could just revert to…hey versioning, now I get it! I guess my point is that wikis are not really for the novice user. As simple as both purport themselves to be they seem to be high maintenance.

Knowledge, Information and Education

I was struck by the thoughtful descriptions B&D provide in their assessment of knowledge and information. I had never really thought much about the difference but it’s so clear now. It’s probably naïve of me to say this—teachers probably have a thorough understanding of the difference.

A wonderful analogy B&D provide is the idea that if NASA wanted to land on the moon again, they’d basically have to start from scratch. The data and information necessary to go to the moon exists but the knowledge base—scientists, mission experts—have all long since retired or passed away. Further this attests to a knowledge community. The “community of practice” allows members of the community to learn from each other toward a common objective and to understand all aspects of the task at hand.

So how does this relate to our current education system? In terms of early education (k-12) the community may be analogous to the classroom. But I wonder if this isn’t more of a communal attempt to acquire information. Which of course makes sense because a strong informational base is required before attempting a more focused application of that information. No one expects 10th graders to build a car, but they should have the beginnings of good math and physics skills to do so. Beyond primary education the idea of community learning is shown in internship and residency programs for doctors. The information is there, but a medical degree is merely a component to being a good doctor. It takes years of practical application of information to deal with the complexities of medical conditions and human behavior.

The knowledge-information concept strikes a chord with me with regard to the “No Child Left Behind” paradigm. I’m no educator, so feel free to tear this apart, but it seems that NCLB is test focused, thus students are taught what they need to pass required tests. This would be a major shift from the idea that information is only a component of knowledge. Kids know how to take a test but they are not acquiring skills to apply that information so that it grows into knowledge.

Ma.gnolia/Del.icio.us

Wh.at give.s wi.th the f.un.ky pu.n.ctua.tion? Aesthetically speaking, Magnolia has a nicer looking interface and I like the simplicity of the start page. Functionally, they are similar but I gravitate to Delicious because I’m biased—I started with Delicious, learned how to use it and now I prefer it. From that standpoint, it seems that Magnolia’s target audience is anyone new to social bookmarking. There just isn’t enough about Magnolia to warrant abandoning Delicious. With that in mind:

• Both offer fairly simple bookmarking, descriptions, tagging, etc.
• Both offer the ability to bookmark a site through your browser. In Magnolia they’re bookmark applets, or bookmarklets. I think this is ridiculous English, or ridinglish.
• Magnolia offers a unique MacOS tool to allow you to bookmark through Dashboard—cool.
• Both have prominent and useful “Help” pages. Probably a testament to how new this technology is to many people.
• Magnolia has an “Import from Delicious” tool, but not the other way around.

I’d definitely be interested to hear from folks who switched from Delicious to Magnolia—what features make it worth doing this? Both require a significant amount of time and effort to create bookmarks, networks, tags, etc. What would make one worth abandoning for the other?

Slashdot

Like Delicious, Slashdot is a social bookmarking site but incorporates the ability to submit stories you’ve written. The site seems to aim itself at “nerds” though its popularity has made it a site for all. Or maybe you earn a “nerd” merit badge just by being a subscriber. As a browser, the site is much simpler to use, with subject headings taking the reader directly to posts of stories on certain subjects—technology, books, science, etc. Personally I find this site a much more technical than Delicious, also a bit more confusing to use. Want to see your bookmarks? Click on “Firehose”. Want to see your tags? Click on “bookmarks”. The page to add bookmarks was not readily obvious, nor was the page to add stories. Getting the impression that Slashdot bugs me?

OK the journal aspect of Slashdot is interesting. Subscribers may journal with the option to either “publish” or not—that is, make your journal posts available for all Slashdot readers or to keep them private. This feature gives the impression that Slashdot is trying to be everything—social bookmarking site, blogging site and nerd nirvana.

Information exce(r)ss

I think like most good things, moderation is key. So does RRS contribute to information overload? It certainly can. I use it to subscribe only to what I want to keep track of and of those things, I don’t keep up to the minute with every update. I use my aggregator as a convenient way to visit multiple information sources but I’m not addicted to information.

However there are some out there who are. For these people, I think RSS and aggregators are the crack pipes of information intake. Certainly the technology is useful but I think sometimes that just because we can, doesn’t mean we should. RSS gives us the ability to acquire information quickly and conveniently, but how good is the information? The web is filled with dubious information sources, sites with repugnant ideologies and criminal activities. Unfortunately RSS benefits visitors of these sites too. There’s always a caveat.

Feed, part deux

Anderson completes his fictional take on the future but I couldn’t, or maybe didn’t, appreciate the heavy handed approach to this cautionary tale. Of course, as mentioned in a previous post, I can understand how kids are becoming more and more creatures of technology, alienated and socially inept outside of their online worlds. That said, I think that today we are still far from the cruel world of Feed, though I wonder if the technology were available today, how many would adopt the technology into their lives and how many would revolt against it? A civil war of technology.

As for the society depicted in the novel—I think humans would become extinct before it got to this level. Darwin would rear his head and the frail nature of the humans of Feed would have been their undoing. Perhaps this is what the lesions are indicative of—a devolution of humans as bitstreams take over. Sort of reminds me of the world of “The Terminator”, where humans are just in the way of technology.

By the way, I “read” this entire novel via the technology of my iPod, where I was tortured by lame dialog, futuristic commercials and the noise of The Feed. I took frequent breaks and cleansed my aural palate with Coltrane—Blue Train, 1957. Oh yeah.

New to me 2.0.1

So another new 2.0 technology I’ve come across is online photo editing. One such site:

http://www.pixlr.com/

Even the concept of online photo editing is both terrific in its technology and fascinating in how quickly this technology has hit the mainstream. A mere 10 years ago this technology was a pipedream, inhibited by the immense processing power required. Not to mention the skill level of the user. As a photographer I’m perplexed by the fading away of film. I enjoy the instant gratification of digital, but I lament that many photographers are losing their technical skill, ironically, by not learning the concepts of depth of field, fast shutter speeds or how to create effects with analog tools.

Of course the functionality of this site is really impressive, on par with Photoshop Elements. One may crop, rotate, sharpen, resize or add filter effects. The tools are limited and simplified for novice users but this is an incredibly handy online image editor. The online application was developed by a Swedish team of programmers. The API is available for those who would like to incorporate use of the editor on their site, though they encourage that use be for non-commercial purposes.

I’m intrigued by what may be possible for online image databases with something like the toolset provided here. Currently there are simple tools, such as panning, zooming or rotating, available on many image browsing sites, but what if one could add sharpening, or control brightness and contrast to enhance image study? I’m convinced that it’s online tools like this that will drive the next level of functionality for image libraries.

Feed Poisoning

I, like, totally read the first 50 pages and thought, “This so big sucks.”

So I went to Princeton Public and checked out the audio version, downloaded it to my iPod and now it’s tolerable. It’s even kind of cool to hear “the feed” in the audio version, but I can’t really say that I’m a fan. I don’t really care for dystopic fiction and this hasn’t changed my mind, at least so far. And I think if there’s one thing that annoys me to no end, it’s teenspeak. Totally! Omigod! Whatev dude. The audio version really exaggerates this and I’m pretty sure my blood pressure is spiking and if I’d been exposed to massive amounts of gamma rays in my past I’d be going Hulk in my one bedroom apartment.

But to the point—is this where we’re headed with so much of our lives taking place online? I don’t really think it’s too much of an exaggeration to think that the ability to write, both the physical ability and the need to, are slowly eroding. Anyone recall the commercials on TV where the family is having a verbal IM conversation? I think this is a cell phone service commercial. My point is that kids are slowly starting to think in an abbreviated fashion.

And it’s not so far fetched that conversational skills are eroding because of technology. I think Titus’ fumbling attempts to converse with Violet are telling of this. Violet seems the most enlightened because she didn’t “get” the feed until she was 6. The rest have never known anything else, also eerily prescient. Kindergartners with cell phones—are you kidding me?

Do I think Anderson’s take on the future is possible? Definitely. Desireable? Definitely not, dude. I mean, like, da da da, information overload, da da da, art is dead, da da da, cockroaches, da da da, whatever.

BL vs. GR

I’ve had a GR account for awhile and this is my first exposure to BL. I think in terms of their functionality they are very similar. A slight difference I noticed was that BL immediately offered the option of where to place the new feed, in an existing or new folder. Google requires that I arrange my feeds after the fact. BL also allows for after the fact reorganization.

Like MichelleW indicates there doesn’t seem to be a big difference, so it comes down to how the consumer interacts with the product. GR seems familiar, though as indicated in the homework review, it seems that I’m turning over all of my online life to Google. Probably intentional on Google’s part and I’m at least glad that Google is providing an excellent product and not taking the Microsoft approach, which seemed to be “we’ve got ‘em, so they’ll take what we give ‘em—doesn’t have to be great.”

I think my only minor beef is the name. “Bloglines” seems to imply that only blogs can be subscribed to, whereas “Google Reader” has a more wide open sounding name. I have to admit that how a product sounds affects my consumer choices. BL may not have been my first choice as I’m not a huge blog reader. I currently use GR mainly to maintain my entertainment sites, especially movie reviews. I must say though that as I’ve investigated BL I like it’s navigability and how easy it is to organize things.

New to me 2.0

I was recently introduced to Delicious (del.icio.us) and it was a “eureka!” moment for me. I realize that social bookmarking and tagging has been around for awhile but I didn’t realize it would address a real need for me.

At work I often use computers other than my own and can never remember certain internal work urls, which are often long, opaque and code driven. I have them all bookmarked on my own computer but I was handicapped whenever I went into our other studio and I needed to check something.

I feel a bit ashamed that this was new to me—I realize I couldn’t be the only one going through this and that somewhere the need had been addressed. Of course now I’m able to bookmark all of these sites through my new and now heavily used Delicious account, which I access when traveling back to Denver to visit family or on the road at a conference--bit of a work junkie I guess. Or maybe a control freak?

I wonder what the Firefox/Delicious relationship is? In recent upgrades of Firefox I had to reinstall some of Delicious’ functionality. Other Firefox installs, such as the Google tool bar, automatically make the transition to the new version. Or is this simply a unique situation based on how my computer is set up?

Blogger and LiveJournal

I think both of these blogs offer good services to both the casual and “semi-pro” blogger. Both offer easy sign-up, clean, easy to use post tools as well as templates to personalize the look of your blog.

• An obvious difference is that Blogger only has one type of service while LiveJournal offers both basic (free) service as well as an enhanced (fee) type of service. Personally I find that the templates in Blogger are fewer, but more attractive, which of course is a subjective observation.
• On both Blogger and LiveJournal, I find that writing my posts in Word, then copying and pasting the entries into either blog yielded odd results. Blogger had trouble taking my Word 2003 document, at first indicating that there were html encoding errors. This happened while I was on my PC (XP). A later post from a Mac went smoothly. LiveJournal posted without errors, but note how the font looks different in LiveJournal near the end of the post—this despite selecting all and trying to assign a font and point (small) size. Blogger was also fickle with fonts.
• LiveJournal has much more advertising attached to it while Blogger has a much more clean look, focusing strictly on blog posts.
• Blogger is associated with Google thus signing into Google (gmail, etc.) means you’re able to go right into your Blogger account.
• LiveJournal uses reCAPTCHA, a technology that puts the public to work making corrections to OCR (optical character recognition) errors for various text documents scanned and run through OCR software. Basically, one of the words you saw when typing in the obfuscated word to eliminate automated computer sign up for accounts was a word from a text document that OCR couldn’t correctly assess. Last year alone, people exposed to reCAPTCHA have transcribed with 99 percent accuracy the equivalent of over 17,000 books. Cool! Here’s an interesting article about it from NPR.

Brown and Duguid

I think what struck me most about reading this chapter was the account of the failure of the hot desking experiment at the ad agency Chiat/Day. The details of how and why the experiment failed should be a cautionary tale for librarians who believe that technology should drive the direction of libraries.

Brown and Duguid relate the postulation that hot desking was the future. Wired magazine followed the attempts of Chiat/Day to enact hot desking, but the experiment failed to take into account the social aspects of office work. While the technology was new at the time it was believed that the existing technology would revolutionize work habits.

Instead, Brown and Duguid relate the “productivity paradox”. While technology has grown by leaps and bounds, productivity hasn’t. Perhaps this is an indication that society advances arithmetically while technology grows exponentially. Perhaps the lesson here is that technology can’t overcome society but society can harness and use technology in a supplemental way. Therefore, libraries shouldn’t be too goggle-eyed at the possibilities of technology. E-readers will never replace books but may be an interesting alternative. Digital libraries aren’t meant to replace brick and mortar libraries but are meant to be complementary to them. I think this realization will help bridge the generation gap that exists in libraries. Some “old-school” librarians are threatened by technology while some right-out-of-library-school technology geek thinks “old-schoolers” are out of touch. It’s most likely that these two types of librarians actually need each other.

Princeton Public's blog

Library Lounge

This blog is from the Princeton Public Library. PPL is a great public library that has successfully made itself into a community hangout. One of the ways it’s done this is through this blog, which acts as a bulletin board for information about library events. The blog also has reviews of new publications. Since I’ve been in the MLIS program at Rutgers (almost 3 years!) I’ve been compiling a list of books I want to read when I’m through with school and have some spare time. Much of what I’ve got is based on library blogs. And this one in particular. Check out the review for “Bridge of Sighs”—it made my list.

Additionally this blog has an open feel, making it easy to navigate. The blog posts are archived by month and searchable. The blog also allows for subscribing via rss for those truly interested in the most recent updates, which often provide information on noteworthy events such as author events or performance art.