it works

I think the summer class works very well as an introduction to 2.0 software. Just a few thoughts come to mind:

• I like the idea of doing the class (or at least some of it) in Second Life
• I'd like to have learned more about Skype, specifically as an educational tool
• I'd like to at least dip my toe into vodcasting and screencasting. It's tough to figure out how to fit it in, but it would be great if all the vids from the regular semester were available to us as supplementary material on the scils598vodcast.
  

[update: screencasting stuff is available on the class wiki.]

my avatar made me do it

My first experience in Second Life started out as a decision to just go to the main page, maybe sign up, and just see what it was about. It ended an hour or so later.

That's not to say that I was loving it, but I was challenged and intrigued. One female avatar just walked up to mine -- named Parx Galicia -- and gave him a kiss! I'm not sure whether that was sweet or creepy, but it made me aware that "there really are others here."

It's easy to go from place to place, and I checked out some SLURLS I'd heard about. The dream-like imagery was interesting and I marveled at the computing power and programming behind the whole thing.

I find it fascinating, and kind of disturbing, that it's so natural to identify with a controllable image on a screen. I find it weird that so many people spend so much time with it.

The bottom line is that I will use SL beyond this class, at least some. Not for the fantasy part, but because there are legitimate and interesting happenings and educational opportunities in Second Life. It's clearly popular and robust enough that it's worth knowing about from the inside.

I wanted to make a shirt for my avatar that says "Escapism sucks," but I'm afraid he'd get beat up.

Johnson reading: part 2

"If everything bad is indeed good for you, what does this mean for the world of libraries and/or educational organizations?"

You can't smell it, but Carbon Monoxide leaks are not good for you, even in a gym.

I like the insightful point that things we might assume are "bad" actually turn out to have some beneficial effects. It redresses an imbalance. That's important. But it could lead to flopping to the other side, and assuming that the "bad" elements are necessary (i.e. to draw an audience), or that they have no real effect.

Popular media probably has a "paradoxical effect", and is more like a recreational drug that turns out to have health benefits, than a medicine that happens to have a few nasty side effects.

This past week, I was inspired by Johnson's praise of The Sopranos to watch some of the first season. I didn't catch a lot nuance, but I did see lots of disturbing abusiveness. I noticed a slight increase in my urge to use the f-word with an Italian accent. If I keep watching, I'll see more nuance -- and get desensitized to the stuff that disturbs me now. Is it worth it?

A favorite movie of mine, also mentioned by Johnson, is Memento. I like it because of how the story is told. But violence is integral to the plot, and by watching, I agree to breathe some of it in.

If "new" television, movies and games are exercising our brains in certain ways, it's really good to know about. We can encourage that adaptive side effect of pop culture (if that's what it is).

While libraries and educational institutions incorporate pop culture into their collections and syllabi, they could provide a rare encouragement to stand back and think critically about it -- without condemning it -- so, rather than just becoming desensitized to toxins, young people can learn to get their workouts without breathing in bad s*@#.

Johnson, S. (2005). Everything Bad is Good for You. New York: Riverhead Hardcover.

fold.it

FoldIt (beta) is a type of online game I'd never heard of before yesterday. It was released last month (here's the Wikipedia entry to prove it).

It's essentially a clever way of enlisting people to help predict protein structures (by folding them) -- even if all they know about proteins is that you should eat them after exercising.

I checked out a few multiplayer games, but wanted to find something that wasn't just frivolous. Skill-building games like Scrabulous or TypeRacer are good, but FoldIt goes beyond honing personal skills to possibly contributing to cures for diseases, like HIV (and being a candidate for Nobel Prize!).

It's free, but not entirely online. You download a client to your computer, go through some sample puzzles to get the hang of it, and then you can join groups that are working collaboratively, or compete with people around the world as an individual.

Each structure is a complex, 3D puzzle that behaves in strange ways.

Competing with others online is kind of intimidating but all you're seeing is their ranked scores, and you can chat with them within the FoldIt interface.

It is a well designed game, and an ingenious concept, and it's extremely challenging!

Recommended (may result in losing all sense of time)

game shopping

"Which console would you buy for an academic library?"

I hate shopping and, before this week, I’d barely played video games at all since my brother and I had an Odyssey PlayStation in the 80s. So, in real life, I would not hesitate to ask for all the help I could get from people who know better.

Here’s what I think I would do:

• First, I would try to get out of it. If that didn't work, I'd:
• Talk to gamers, especially the real nerds who follow the newest developments and own more than one console themselves
• Informally survey students to see what they play, what they like, what they'd want, etc.
  
• Play games – as many types as possible, including the scarey MMOPGs
  
• Go online and use search engines to find out more about how other libraries or public institutions are using games
• Talk to librarians who are doing it at Ann Arbor and elsewhere
  

I’d consider:

• The audience, which would mostly be undergrads -- but also staff (could be part of special events or "game days" in the staff lounge)
  
• Their need: they would be looking for diversion, socializing, and movement, NOT more sit-down “education” or "work"
  
• Negative vs. positive influences of a game's imagery (I know, the kids have seen it all, I just don’t want to be a part of the negative stuff)
• the library's mission statement: what do we hope would come out of it -- more than just "circulating books"?
• advertising -- there would need to be a clever way of inviting students via students (wouldn't need to advertise to staff beyond a sign and an e-mail)
  
• prices - I'm pretending there's a modest budget
  

After reading, playing around and doing some searching online this week, I think I'd treat it like an experiment: provide more than one option for events and reservation and see which work and which don't.

• Provide a nice space for the avid gamers to plug in and do their MMO thing
  
• Provide some free games that involve physical activity, like DANCE!online
  
• Put some money (less than $400) into a Wii console - it's versatile, involves moving around, includes non-bloody, cooperative games, and it looks cool.*

*Nintendo's environmental record is dismal but we could recycle the Coke cans to try to feel better about it.

Johnson reading: part 1

"Is popular culture just a method to sophisticatedly deliver stupidity?”

Media producers do aim to capitalize on others’ stupidity, inattention or psychological blind spots. But I'm not inclined to believe it's a coordinated conspiracy.

S. Johnson’s (2005) arguments for the surprising positive effects of popular media are more convincing than his title “Everything Bad is Good for You.” But, still, if the activity and interactivity of trendy media is challenging our brains more than before, which parts of our brains, and at the expense of which others?

Last I heard, we (led by neuro folks) don’t understand that much about our brains. An argument that ______ is making us “smarter” or “dumber” needs backing up, and our ignorance leaves a lot of room for creative argument.

A snack, a game, or a line of thought could be good for you and delicious -- and I am enjoying Johnson's book so far -- it's just worth checking the ingredients and expiration date before swallowing.

In one sense, all the activity and complexity is "good" because it has real survival value in our frantic, cognitively demanding, ADD culture. But it could be argued that these entertainments are “good” calisthenics specifically in relation to the “bad” spiral that they're perpetuating.

The Sleeper Curve may be a real upward trend by some measurements -- I believe it is -- but I doubt it's simply a kind of "positive brainwashing" (p. xiii) -- it's not totally positive, and it's not intentional enough to be brainwashing.

I'd guess it also corresponds directly to downward curves -- like in the ability to process the emotions of the brain's limbic system, to be patient with other people, or to feel content.

Johnson, S. (2005). Everything Bad is Good for You. New York: Riverhead Hardcover.

Ning

The ability to customize a profile on these social network sites is great. The concept of being able to set up a whole network from scratch takes it a few steps further. It's immediately appealing, like a nice power tool at the store -- I want it, but I'm not sure when or why I'd actually use it.

On the one hand, there are already so many SNSs out there, ready to go, with so many possibilities for creating private networks, tailored to your own needs and interests, that it hardly seems necessary to go off and start a new private clubhouse. A possible limitation is that of cutting a niche group off from a lot more people and resources out there on the more populated sites.

And, closer to home, I can’t imagine using a Ning effectively in my current job. For group projects, a wiki would probably be the more effective medium. For networking, it would be more practical to pick up the phone or walk down the hall. And for 'hooking up,' well, that just wouldn't appropriate.

But, I can see a Ning being particularly useful for geographically dispersed networks -- task oriented or not -- including subcommittees of ALA, SCILS cohorts, or even extended family networks. I'm going to keep pondering ways to set one of these things up. For now, it's another great tool for my toolbox.

which one are you?

Class divisions, and subdivisions, do exist. In-group/out-group thinking goes deep and It would be naive to think that it wouldn't be reflected online.

Boyd’s (2007) sense of how class divisions are possibly being played out in MySpace vs. Facebook is interesting and is not something I would have noticed -- or even really thought about -- on my own, at least without a lot more exposure to these services.

This possibility is important to explore in the same way that it's important to explore what patrons might need and want when building collections. It could be a mistake to form solid assumptions based on this one speculative (but informed) article but librarians would do well to at least mentally bookmark Boyd's observations and concerns, if not to take actions, including:

• look into it: informally (through conversation, or studying activity on the library's SNS profiles) or formally (interviews, brief surveys) check with patrons to get a sense of whether this class division is prominent at their library (it may already be very obvious)
  
• when setting up a library presence on an SNS, keep in mind which group of patrons may be most likely to be the readership (and keep a watch to test Boyd's hypothesis)
  
• not (potentially) discriminating by being a presence on only one or the other (it's not a bad idea to have multiple profiles anyway)
  
• if there is a real division, considering the option of setting up a neutral SNS through Ning, as a middle ground and a bridge builder -- it might not work, but who knows?
  

What may be more remarkable than class divisions and cliques showing up on social networking sites is the intermixing online of people who normally would not mix -- that's surely happening too. Libraries can encourage this, and be sensitive about not adding to any divisions.

Boyd, Danah. (2007). Viewing American class divisions through Facebook and MySpace .Apophenia Blog Essay. June 24, 2007. Retrieved June 2008 from http://www.danah.org/papers/essays/ClassDivisions.html

a noob speculates

What makes services like MySpace or Facebook (SNSs) "sticky"?

I'm a noob. And this question could be rich dissertation material for philosophers, evolutionary psychologists, sociologists, educators, etc.

I’m taking “sticky” not in the sense that Boyd (2007) uses it to describe the topic of class division (“touchy”) but in the sense of being addicting and hugely popular. So far, I'm not stuck; I can only speculate on some of the more obvious reasons:

• we’re social critters and can't help it; it's like candy to a baby
  
• they're a potentially endless distraction
• they're entertaining
• they open up new possibilities for relationships, jobs, showing off, revenge, etc.
  
• they allow armchair social dramas and 'safe' social explorations
  
• they take the edge off of loneliness
• they are 'the place to be' to define oneself in many circles
  
• they are designed to be sticky by some very smart and wealthy people
  

Whatever all the reasons, I have no problem believing that SNSs are not going away, and that they will continue to flourish in all sorts of new forms.

SNSs are one tool that I will definitely use after this class is over, but I’m going to have to explore more to settle on which ones and on how to configure them.

So far, I'm not hooked. The experience of setting up and tricking out a MySpace page left my eyes and tired and attention scattered. Facebook was not as visually obnoxious, but both are a little intimidating, and I wouldn't want to start joining networks and uploading things frivolously.

Still, I'm eager to start really exploring these services and to see what comes out of them...

Boyd, Danah. (2007). Viewing American class divisions through Facebook and MySpace .Apophenia Blog Essay. June 24, 2007. Retrieved June 2008 from http://www.danah.org/papers/essays/ClassDivisions.html

show + tell =

What are the benefits/detractions of podcasts vs. text-based blogging?

Since podcasts can be included within text-based blog posts, and blogs can be linked to (or 'pointed to' verbally) from podcasts, they can work together nicely.

Text has the advantage of being easy to scan, but requires being stationary (at least with one’s gaze, even when moving with a mobile device).

Podcasts require more time to go through, since there’s no way to easily scan them or jump around precisely, but they allow for more versatility (and multi-tasking): you can listen to them while doing dishes, resting, avoiding homework, etc.

If it's necessary to chose one format over another, I'd like to know about the audience: are they likely to already be invested in the topic? Are they likely to be tire kickers? The medium should be gauged appropriately (as well as any 'special effects' like music or images).

One way they can be used in tandem is to provide concise text in a way that’s easy to scan within a few seconds, and then link to the podcast for those who are ready to invest the time...kind of like we did with our homework assignment.

Ear image from Yahoo education.

bring out your tails (& another thought)

What would we have to do to effectively utilize the long tail of library collections?

To paraphrase Anderson (2006):

• Make the whole collection available
• Help everybody find it
  

The library I work at has something over 6.5 million analog items. Needless to say, many of them would fall into the category of "tail". A subset of these are non-copyrighted works. About a million of these are being digitized by -- how did you know? -- Google. In one jump, this brings Princeton significantly closer to making its whole collection available, and to helping anyone to find it (via the Web, as well as the library's OPAC). So, digitization (if it's done well) is one way of achieving these long tail ideals.

Also, Anderson's rules of long tail aggregators (p. 218-224) could be loosely interpreted to apply to libraries, especially in terms of offering variety, letting patrons (rather than "customers") help (e.g., folksonomies), and making both analog and digital items available ("one product doesn't fit all")...

Another thing that comes to mind is that libraries can bring out their tails by putting some serious thought into their interfaces -- all of them, everything that connects the patron with the collection: the online catalog, the physical layout of the building, the positioning of books, the design of the Web site, the reference librarians (who can point to long tail items only if they know about them), etc.

& ANOTHER THOUGHT
Anderson says: "...it takes more than the turn of a century or two to change library culture..." (p. 160).

Really?

Sounds like an unexamined claim landing in the middle of an otherwise well-considered argument. It wouldn't follow from slow change in the past few centuries that library culture will take until 2100 to show any significant changes. So, what was he talking about? Does he know much about libraries? What is "library culture," anyway? And how would we gauge its rate of change?

Anderson, C. (2006). The Long Tail: Why the Future of Business Is Selling Less of More. New York: Hyperion.

hunting invaders: a true story!

On top of being a mild-mannered library guy by day, I'm preparing myself to go out into the woods and search for real invaders, who threaten to do a lot of damage -- some have done damage already. And the results of my mission will be hard data for a big academic research project.

So, ok. The invaders are just a bunch of plants. And the biggest danger is getting poison ivy or stubbing a toe.

Still, you might want to listen to a very short description here. Or, you can listen to it in this player:

learnin' some SCILS

You know what? I think my educational experience at SCILS has largely been one of learning to accept a overwhelm as a lifestyle.

Among all the useful and interesting things I’ve picked up about information seeking behavior, searching techniques, Web design, etc., I’ve been steadily practicing things like being in a constant state of partial attention (multi-tasking) and pushing beyond comfort zones (e.g., the bedtime zone).

It remains to be seen what I’ll actually retain and use from all of this, and which relationships will remain -- ask me in 15 years -- but these are survival skills for the info overload age, or whatever we want to call it. And I guess it does give me an advantage over my former self, and over my more comfortable and overslept colleagues.

Anyway, the images of this experience tend to be pretty repetitive: my computer, books, my computer, my tea cup, my computer, etc. I've put some of them up on Flickr, and my classmates have too. Check them out.

riding the long tail

The question is: how do libraries/librarians fill roles as Chris Anderson’s (2006) new producers, new markets, and new tastemakers?

It's a big one. Here's my simplistic guess:

Libraries don’t have long-tail thinking built into their basic architecture and traditional mission statements, since they arose in times of (relative) info scarcity. At one point, libraries were hits. Now, they're kind of a niche -- or a meta-niche, maybe, since they provide for multiple niches at once.

Libraries/ians can be new producers both by enabling patrons to produce (making AV equipment available, teaching software classes, providing Web design books, etc.) and by producing their own things: library blogs, wikis, multimedia tutorials, etc.

They can be among the new markets by essentially serving as aggregators for almost any type of published material, and – in some cases – by aggregating trendy technologies as well. Even if many patrons are not first introduced to new gadgets or materials at their libraries, they can get their hands on them and learn more about them.

They can be new trendsetters by serving as multi-faceted filters -- not like in the good old days of being smug authorities about limited information, but in the way they display collections, by the programs they present, by their recommendations, by steering patrons in reference interviews, and possibly by providing for collaborative filtering (social bookmarking) -- not to replace catalogers, but to add a new dimension to their collections.

Librarians can't be the rock stars they used to be, and the future of this business is uncertain. That would really be a problem if we couldn't be flexible or get excited by new toys.


Anderson, C. (2006). The Long Tail: Why the Future of Business Is Selling Less of More. New York: Hyperion.

don't worry, but i'm monitoring you

According to the eminently useful Google Analytics, there have been 135 (brief) visits to this blog as of today, June 17, 2008. That's up from 0 in May, so I guess it's pretty good.

A real surprise came in looking at the map overlay: there have been one-time visitors from 5 other countries, including India and Hungary (?!) Unfortunately, there's no record of what they said before moving on ("Damn. This isn't it...").

Most popular browser:

• Firefox 2.0.0.14

Most used connection speed:

• DSL

wet paint in my peanut butter

This is my beginner's comparison of two wiki services: WetPaint and PBWiki. For a professional comparison, try these tables (from wikimatrix).

From my project-minded point of view, both of these services work well enough: they can be set up and taken down within minutes and allow for ample customization to get the job done and they both are FREE (PB has for-pay versions). I've been using PBWiki more, so it's starting to take on that comforting aura of familiarity. I don't necessarily like its look or feel, but I'm learning where things are, and how add and edit elements. My WetPaint account has seen less use, and is still a little like a strange neighborhood. Its feel when editing is quite different (and the result not as slick as the WetPaint homepage), but I have to say that I've been especially impressed with the ease of adding widgets, namely videos (here's my sloppy test page). But, then PB has its "Plugins."

I'm not sold on either, but, as someone who had never edited a wiki before, I'm pleased with the ease of use that both offer, and their functional versatility. I would have been content to stick with PB, but I may have to go with WetPaint, if I had to choose just one. Tests are ongoing...

bookmarked by patrons

In relation to libraries, the first three chapters of Anderson’s The Long Tail (2006) help to set new technologies, and information overload, in their broader historical, and societal, context. If the long tail generally refers to the shift from a few hits to nearly infinite niches, what are the implications for libraries?

One immediate thought is that it might relate to collection development: don’t just focus on top sellers, go for variety. But, really, although I can’t comment on the library world as a whole, if I think of the libraries I am familiar with, they already have highly eclectic collections. And resource sharing (like interlibrary loan) opens up shelf space nearly infinitely. Through libraries with such collections and services, there are items in various formats for any niche available.

Another implication relates to how libraries position themselves in the Age of the Long Tail. How libraries fit in to the current economy is not easy to see, but it seems that, just as with new technologies, it would be fruitless, and even self-destructive, for a library to isolate itself, or to take a "nobly" defiant stance against change. One way to avoid this is for librarians to stay engaged and educated about what's new. With their finger on the pulse, info pros can be prepared to address niche interests as well as the communities arising around them, by providing items, services, spaces and training (including training in 2.0 technologies) to remain relevant, to stay within patrons' lists of bookmarks.
___________________
Anderson, C. (2006). The Long Tail: Why the Future of Business Is Selling Less of More. New York: Hyperion.

Digg...

... is kind of like StumbleUpon, with a human algorithm. It’s an interesting way to explore the Web. Rather than trying to exhaustively search for interesting or useful fragments, the Digg community helps each other, like a team of amateur archaeologists, and the result is a more holistic snapshot of what’s out there. People tag ("digg") items and you, the user, determine what diggs to view and how, as well as what you want to add to the mix. As with any good 2.0 site, it has a "clique feature": it can be limited to hand-picked friends. But doesn't have to be.

The interface is simple and easy to navigate. Main categories of excavated diggs are: news, videos, images, and podcasts. There is also a sub-menu of categories (which themselves have subcategories) under each of these. There is a lot of ability to customize, particularly under a settings tab (customize > settings), which allows you to filter topics, to pinpoint what you want to be viewing. Just one other useful feature is the ability to RSS specific search terms. Digg could be used for serious research, as well as leisure or virtual socializing. There's a lot to the service, and a lot more to be found through it.

But here's my favorite bit: a set of experimental visualizations, showing the activity of the community. [WARNING: may distract from homework.]

"hello, my tags are _____."

Tagging would be a great way to supplement asynchronous introductions (which get old fairly quickly). It involves a more active form of personal expression, builds practical skills, is fun, and also sneakily creates a sense of camaraderie, since everyone is doing the same activity (in their own way), discovering overlaps, and contributing to a common result. It’s like a virtual show and tell that demonstrates how networks form, almost accidentally. Brown and Duguid would be proud.

One possible downside is that it could become more information than anyone cares to look through, but keeping it short and simple would obviate this.

It’s definitely worth a try.

the social life of learning

The perspective in Brown and Duguid’s (2002) “Learning – in Theory and Practice” can educate our approach to staff training and development in any library/info organization, I think largely by providing a clear-headed framework for relating to the individual people involved, within their specific social context.

Here are some of the ideas -- implied or stated -- that I think make up such a practical framework:

• Regardless of philosophical debates about epistemology, a useful working hypothesis is: (impersonal) information is not (personal) knowledge; and persons are socially embedded

• Bullet points or prescribed techniques are not as important as the people involved

• to know the people involved, it’s necessary to observe and listen: what’s their experience level, how long have they been there, what do they know that coworkers may not…

• Training staff – or even getting them to participate – is not that easy

• The “classroom” and “textbook” model is limited; real learning happens in situ

• Experiment

• Trying to force a plan won’t work as well as highlighting an actual need and then allowing and encouraging knowledge theft (the legal kind)
  

Social software fits nicely into such a socially-grounded model of learning, but it could be used to compliment (rather than replace) face-to-face cooperation.

___________________

Brown, J., & Duguid, P. (2002). The Social Life of Information. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press.

for you

...a grain of salt, with which to read the opinions expressed here.

is it contagious?

My housemate decided to go to library school, a few months after I moved in... I decided to go to library school, a few months after starting work at one...

baby steps

After a few tries, just posted my first ever hand-typed RSS feed, and my first XML document. ("Homemade rss feed," below.)

• Arbitrarily chose Princeton Public's "Tuesday Night Technology Talks."
• Created a simple XML file in Dreamweaver (XML declaration was automatic)
  
• Uploaded to Eden (and set permissions)
  
• Validated it at W3C Feed Validation Service
  
• Got some JavaScript here (for the box)
  
• Added it to Blogger as "HTML/JavaScript" page element
• Went back and forth between these steps before getting it straight
  

Okay, it's really not such a big deal, since I basically transcribed examples from this and Castro's HTML text, but still.

rss it, but keep surfing

Does use of RSS/RSS aggregators mitigate or aggravate the problem of information overload?

Short answer: YES.

Medium answer: RSS/RSS aggregators can help manage information, but do not lessen it.

Longer answer: Wattenburg (2004), a very smart guy, points out that information overload is not really the problem; it’s how information is organized. Better design leads to better organization, leads to less overload. Okay. RSS and RSS aggregators allow even non-geeks to pretty easily organize information into discreet, cozy, hand-picked bits. Just when things were getting really overwhelming: sweet relief. But while we curl up with our precious favorites (at best, a tiny portion of what’s out there), Moore’s Law does not sleep. Computing speed continues to accelerate and Web content grows exponentially (including content from, and about, RSS feeds and aggregators). Some people – call them ordinary citizens – can afford indulging in the consolations of the RSS illusion: “Ah, it’s just me and my favorites.” But librarians need to be among those who stay “out there” and face the incoming tides. We need to keep up the practices of searching and navigating without fearing confusion or the occasional wipe out. If we can't surf info overload, how can we help ordinary citizens when they emerge from their online cubby holes, baffled and looking for a hand to hold?

[Disclaimer: the writer does not know how to surf.]
________________________
Wattenberg, M. (2004, May 24). Revalatory interfaces. [Webcast] Retrieved November 2007 from here.

Image of ostrich from here

Flock: the social Web browser

All this Web 2.0 stuff is pretty new to me, but I don't think I'd even heard of Flock before [correction: Steve did mention it in the RSS Camtasia].

• A Web browser especially for social browsing
• Built on the foundation of Mozilla's Firefox architecture
  
• Pulls users' preferred content into one place
• Highly customizable
• Has many supported services including Twitter, Blogger, and Flickr
  
• FREE to download and use
• PC World put it at no. 6 of the "Top 100 Products of 2008" (which must mean something -- even though 2008 is not over yet)

I'm downloading it and testing it out and will report back...

[Update:]

Okay, I'm editing this in Flock now.
It looks great, so far: tabs, 2.0-related tool bars, quick and easy RSS feeds, ability to star locations, add-ons... There's a lot to discover here.

Plus, it automatically imported all of my Firefox settings, including favorites. Very convenient.

[Update 2:]

I've been using it all week, and will probably continue to, at least some. Things I've liked: allows a Twitter side bar; smoothly installed StumbleUpon navigation bar; integrates RSS feeds; can log into accounts immediately; can edit blog posts within Flock; etc.

Here's a clip:

how many clicks make a click?

Brown and Duguid (2002) weren’t directly addressing librarians in "Home Alone" (p. 63-89), but librarians do work with software, hardware, workplaces, home offices (their own and patrons'), and networks (human and technical).

Here are a few points that might be pulled out and mulled over:

Cool the hype. Be realistic. Technologies are great and often necessary, but face it: they are often not designed that well and result in wasting money and time, and can actually limit productivity. If you don’t believe it, just read the home diary on p. 63.

Office space matters. Regular workspaces that can be personalized are good for you. If you doubt this, read about the Chiat/Day experiments.

Mix it up a little. Don’t isolate. Yes, we get on each others’ nerves, but we can also solve problems together and relieve each others’ anxieties. Don't isolate patrons either.

Libraries, like the systems they use, may be allowing your (and your systems people's) work to drift to patrons while ignoring their social contexts. If you’re doing that, stop it. Tap into the social contexts, don't ignore them. Utilize social spaces as well as social software.

Keep your brows down. Don’t brush off non-librarian staff and patrons. People without MLS degrees have all kinds of “embodied knowledge”, like that typesetter on p. 80.

Don't push make-believe. There is no Sanity Clause. And there is no “One click away.” Any convenient “one click” results from countless other clicks (of developers, graphic designers, merchants, librarians, etc.). So show off new and super fast library services, but don’t go invisible in the process: unveil the clicks behind that button while pitching what it can do.

___________________________

Brown, J., & Duguid, P. (2002). The Social Life of Information. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press.

feed your head

I’ve just read the first 150 pages of Anderson’s Feed (2004). Even though some philosophers seriously propose that we may be in a matrix-like reality (examples), I’m pretty sure that I don’t have a chip in my head right now. I am very sure that I’m online almost everyday, that I’m influenced by it, and so is everyone else I know.

I don’t think of myself as being especially immersed, but today, when the power went off – just for a few seconds – turning my computer screen black, I was literally stunned. Without realizing it, all of my thought processes had been directed toward what I was doing or planning to do on the computer, and it was all gone.

After reorienting, it made me think.

Our brains have been described as “anticipation machines." Perhaps as a survival strategy, we tend to try to imagine the best and worst of what could be, so we can be prepared, though most often what happens eludes extremes.

I don't buy utopic visions and I don't lose sleep over dystopic ones, but both can be instructive.

How close are we to having the Internet in our brains? In one sense, not very close at all. Even the smartest of us don’t know our brains nearly well enough to pull it off. Judging new reports of monkeys just now starting to move prosthetic limbs, the neurosciences have a long way to go to get to that level of sophistication.

But, neural hardware is not necessary to affect many of the symptoms displayed by Feed’s characters. My experience today showed me that I already have the Internet in my brain to a larger extent than I realized. And this reminds me of considerations (realistic in my view) that computer activities affect our plastic neurophysiology (e.g., Prensky 2001a, 2001b).

It is not difficult to imagine our language declining, our attention splitting, advertising jingles and images in our heads, our president becoming less sophisticated, and people in power using new technologies to influence the rest of us. All of that has happened, some would say to an alarming degree.

To me, the value of Feed, at least so far, is in its being a cautionary tale about awareness and critical thinking. Violet feeds her own head. She's unusually self-aware, and aware of some underlying patterns and of how people are being unduly influenced and dulled. I look forward to finding out where she goes with this...

[Update: ...She got sick and died. It was a downer, but in an interesting, thought-provoking way.]

___________________

Anderson, M. (2004). Feed. Cambridge: Candlewick.

Prensky, M. (2001a). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5). Retrieved October, 31, 2006 from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/

Prensky, M. (2001b). Digital natives, digital immigrants, part II: Do they really think differently? On the Horizon, 9(6). Retrieved November 4, 2006 from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/

entering the feedlot

Checking out two Web-based aggregators: Bloglines and Google Reader.
Here are some first impressions.


Looks
Looks aren't everything, but it's a fact that the first impression persists. If Bloglines were a baby, its interface could be politely described as "interesting." It's just not very attractive. Which is surprising, seeing how polished the Ask search engine is. They're working on it, I know.

Bloglines also commits the no-no of having menu items jump around from page to page. It's annoying if not disorientating.

Google has the user-friendly interface thing down pretty well. It looks more polished, even if it isn't. I found it easier to navigate, and it doesn't produce claustrophobia or text overload (though it makes me wonder whether Schmidt & Brin are reading my feeds from their office, and what they're saying about them).

Functions
The main function that we're considering here, subscribing to RSS feeds works easily enough in both.

Bloglines doesn't (easily?) allow marking a feed as "unread." I really don't like that. Going back to a previously opened feed opens the blog itself. There may be a way around this, which would lighten the transgression, but the fact that I couldn't find it easily still earns demerits.

I like that Google Reader allows starring things and that the feed doesn't go away after being opened once.

These are the superficial comparisons of a beginner. Both services are nice, though Google seduces with it's promise of super ease and convenience -- all your info on Google's servers (and you may have to dig a little to find out how they'll treat it).

Traffic
Tried to compare Web traffic on Alexa.com, but it doesn't compare the "Reader" sub-domain. I couldn't figure out a meaningful comparison with other sites, but Alexa does show that Bloglines traffic is climbing.

hit the main points, sit down, and shut up

There's a Web 2.0-related discussion at Princeton Public Library tomorrow evening. If I can bear to break away from homework, I'm there. I'll post something about it after.

Update 6/3:
Made it. The format was Pecha Kucha: 20 seconds for 20 slides. The presentations were on:

• Specialized search engines
• Virtual reference
• Gaming
• Social Networks
• Sharing online
• Skeptical response (to the other presentations)*

*The "skeptic" was Peter Bromberg, of Library Garden.

a note on the images

Unless otherwise noted, images on this blog are from Wikimedia Commons or Microsoft Office Online, where they're listed as copyright-free. (And I often edit them in Fireworks).

blog vs. blog

I've opened a new blog at Wordpress.com (WP) to compare it to Blogger (BL). First impression: Blogger is friendlier.

Some other quick observations:

• Both are FREE (though WP offers purchased upgrades)
  
• Blogger interface (for bloggers) is more "intuitive" and clean.
  
• 3 main tabs to WP's 5
• BL "settings" is a main tab; in WP "settings" is way off to the right in smaller font-size
• WP uses light blue text on light blue background (low contrast)
• "Delete blog" comes to the left of (before) other menu items (counter-intuitive)
  
• wysiwyg and HTML customization is quick and easy in BL (didn't see option to customization of CSS)
  
• WP allows customizing CSS but requires purchasing upgrade
  
• Load times in WP were sometimes slower (at least on a Mac)
• WP documentation is a bit wordy, search terms aren't highlighted (they are in BL) -- e.g., finding clear info on permalinks was easy in BL, but not in WP
  
• Both have forums
  
• Both allow some recovery from errors, as by doing CTRL + Z; it's easy to delete posts and even the whole blog
  
• Etc.
  

Basically, I continuously got lost navigating WP ("Where was that?"). Also, it took a while to get clear on the difference between WP.com (hosted) and WP.org (open source, not hosted), as well as what is on offer at WP.com.

Both BL and WP are good options, but I would probably go with Blogger as the best (most user-friendly) blog for novices, even though I have questions about Google's privacy ethics.

facebook losing face?

We're not to the social networking class yet, but this news appeared on BBC today: Facebook is being challenged by a Canadian privacy group.

Brings up the question of privacy with any of these 2.0 tools.

Tim Berners Lee:
"Imagine that everything you are typing is being read by the person you are applying to for your first job. Imagine that it's all going to be seen by your parents and your grandparents and your grandchildren as well." [taken from here]

first post

It's a fine day in Princeton, NJ. The cicadas are not yet emerging for their frolics, but the Princeton alumni are beginning theirs.


But how could the intelligentsia and the Insecta have anything in common?