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”.
Sunday, October 26, 2008
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.
Sunday, October 19, 2008
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?
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.
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.
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.
Sunday, October 12, 2008
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.
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.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
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.
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.
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.
Sunday, October 5, 2008
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.
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.
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
