Oh, how I do love a good Wiki.
I was thinking earlier about Google and how I suspect that anyone that still thinks the "Google will destroy libraries" argument holds any water is undoubtedly not involved with the real work of libraries. The truth is, we have benefitted from Google. Oh, I know, I can practically hear the tortured cries of how stupid the young folk are, now they all just use Google, but I'm standing firm with my "the kids are alright" worldview and instead would posit that all this rampant Google usage gives librarians the chance to do higher-level information analysis. This is a recurring theme for me, but I just don't buy the argument that young people are that dumb. So now they go to Google, or they go to Wikipedia and they gather information. They get a starting point. And then they get to the higher level stuff on their own or though the gracious assistance of a librarian. We have better informed users that are coming to us with more specific information requests, right out of the gate. This is a good thing. I mean--it would have been so wonderful to have Wikipedia when I was in college! Say I had the assignment to write a paper on Hegel. I would have gone to Wikipedia, read the entry on Hegel, picked out what part of his theory really interested me, and then, using the references cited at the bottom of the entry, proceeding with the research knowing what I was looking for (say, Hegel and his concept of "world spirit"). Or I would have gone to a librarian and asked for help locating print volumes on Hegel, and then would have used the index to look up "world spirit". Boom--done--walk away. And this would have resulted, frankly, in better quality papers than the stuff I was writing in college. Explain to me, again, how this is a bad thing?
Thing #10 is on Wikis. This is a fun Thing, my favorite so far. I visited the Library Success wiki which is a wiki devoted to library best practices. It hasn't been heavily populated with entries (yet). But the section alone on weeding is excellent. At the bottom it lists articles of further interest and included this fantastic blog post by ricklibrarian about the decision to weed Compassionate conservatism by Marvin Olasky. His post perfectly captures what goes through the mind of the librarian when weighing whether a book should be weeded.
Then I visited the Albany County Public Library staff wiki and liked their quick-and-dirty process for cataloging papaerbacks. And I particularly liked their work process "Checklist for Psycho Space Puppet's Departure" which I was unable to quite figure out but which delighted me all the same. Rock on, Albany!
Last, I visited the 23 Things on a Stick wiki and left a note there... Was interested in this comment: I'm experimenting with this. Wikis can be fun but how can you ever trust the "information" you find on them???? Name not left, so if it's your comment, please feel free to let me know. Now, not to harsh on anonymous poster, and also not to fall down some epistemological rabbit's hole--but--anon, how can we trust any information? Oh, I know, juried academic journals, established sources... etc. How do we know what we know? How do we trust what we know? I, for one, trust Wikipedia because for some reason people have some kind of emotional investment in the idea of "truth" which is why studies have shown that Wikipedia is just as reliable (if not more reliable) than Encyclopedia Brittanica. I'm just ruminating here, but maybe our idea of critical analysis should extend beyond just checking that a source is "reliable", i.e., objective. Because isn't that what the naysayers want and claim Wikipedia does not provide--an objective source? I'm not so sure there ARE any objective sources. Oh, I don't mean to sound so ponderous and self-important. I just think examining motive is essential, whether it be applied to an academic journal or a Wikipedia entry. And I suspect we will revisit this concept when we get to the Thing on folksonomies and tags.
Monday, June 16, 2008
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Zoho Writer is a beta app that works as a collaboration tool... In the simplest sense, it is a souped-up type of Microsoft Word that allows you to create docs and then allow other people acccess to it through the site, where they can make edits as necessary. The idea is that this type of tool eliminates the whole endless emailing of attachments back and forth. Users, coworkers, what have you, simply visit this site, log in, and work on the shared docs.
It's a great idea. But there are a lot of great ideas out there: Communism and those jars that contain both peanut butter and jelly spring to mind. Great in theory. But reality has a mind of its own. And things that are great ideas are often deeply flawed when put into practice (the former) or just straight-out disgusting (the latter).
See, I have some experience with this type of tool as my esteemed employer tried to implement something like this about three years ago. Through the company intranet we were all given access to "project spaces" where documents could be posted and then worked on collaboratively. No more attachments! they crowed. And this is the main aspect Zoho plays up, too. It's a great theory and I was something of a believer and I used our project space like a wild woman. Well, as wild as a woman can be when she's posting documents in a corporate setting. It's just not that wild-and-crazy of a scenario. But then I, like I suspect many others that walk the halls of this Death Star--oh! I mean Mother Ship! Mother Ship!--sort of... fell away from it. And the docs grew out of date. And the emails with attachments started to fly once again, the way weeds would poke up through the concrete in the post-apocalypse. Somehow like that.
So I am skeptical as to the usefulness and ultimate usability of this tool. About a year ago I was involved in an incredibly interesting research project for my job. We studied trends that would influence the development of legal research software applications. Really, I'm not kidding--it was incredibly interesting. And the main thing I remember from this project was that you can develop the coolest product in the world and if it's not some combination of cheap, easy, and adaptable it won't sell. What am I getting at? The fact is, this type of collaboration tool is not (yet) as intuitive and "easy" as the old way of sending email attachments. The steps aren't standardized enough (so it's not adaptable, i.e. flexible, pliable) and, let's face it, sending email attachments seems to work pretty well. So the sense I get is that people in development really want us to dig this type of tool, and they keep building more of them, and they keep trying to sell us on it's strong points, but the fact is, we just don't need this tool yet and so it won't be used. So stop trying to cram it down my throat.
Man, the similarities to Communism just keep getting stronger and stronger. I'm kidding. There are no similarities.
It's a great idea. But there are a lot of great ideas out there: Communism and those jars that contain both peanut butter and jelly spring to mind. Great in theory. But reality has a mind of its own. And things that are great ideas are often deeply flawed when put into practice (the former) or just straight-out disgusting (the latter).
See, I have some experience with this type of tool as my esteemed employer tried to implement something like this about three years ago. Through the company intranet we were all given access to "project spaces" where documents could be posted and then worked on collaboratively. No more attachments! they crowed. And this is the main aspect Zoho plays up, too. It's a great theory and I was something of a believer and I used our project space like a wild woman. Well, as wild as a woman can be when she's posting documents in a corporate setting. It's just not that wild-and-crazy of a scenario. But then I, like I suspect many others that walk the halls of this Death Star--oh! I mean Mother Ship! Mother Ship!--sort of... fell away from it. And the docs grew out of date. And the emails with attachments started to fly once again, the way weeds would poke up through the concrete in the post-apocalypse. Somehow like that.
So I am skeptical as to the usefulness and ultimate usability of this tool. About a year ago I was involved in an incredibly interesting research project for my job. We studied trends that would influence the development of legal research software applications. Really, I'm not kidding--it was incredibly interesting. And the main thing I remember from this project was that you can develop the coolest product in the world and if it's not some combination of cheap, easy, and adaptable it won't sell. What am I getting at? The fact is, this type of collaboration tool is not (yet) as intuitive and "easy" as the old way of sending email attachments. The steps aren't standardized enough (so it's not adaptable, i.e. flexible, pliable) and, let's face it, sending email attachments seems to work pretty well. So the sense I get is that people in development really want us to dig this type of tool, and they keep building more of them, and they keep trying to sell us on it's strong points, but the fact is, we just don't need this tool yet and so it won't be used. So stop trying to cram it down my throat.
Man, the similarities to Communism just keep getting stronger and stronger. I'm kidding. There are no similarities.
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
First off, you'll notice the avatar is gone. Her withering, unblinking gaze proved to be too much for me.
Then you'll notice the picture cube of Eldest and I playing at the beach. Now, this is perhaps a bad sign--why do all the additional page elements seem to freak me out?--but this cube eeringly reminds me of the crystal prison cube used to hold General Zod and his partners in crime, Non and Ursa (what in the world did we do before Wikipedia?) in Superman II. So it doesn't seem very auspicious to me to have Eldest and I imprisoned in some intergalactic space cube. It just seems like begging the Gods for trouble.
So, in order to meet the requirements of this Thing (it's Thing #7) I'll just comment long enough to say that I can think of cool uses for this in a library webpage setting, primarily as a way to display bookcovers. Snazzy.
But here's something else: while fufilling this Thing, I set up a free account at Thumbstacks.com which is a tool to display a slide presentation (think PowerPoint) on a blog or webpage. During the registration I was required to answer a few innocuous questions--age, zip code, etc. After registering, to get to the tools, I needed to click through a number of ads with offers for free samples and such. The ads were for asthma medicine and some kind of house cleaning product. Huh. Once into the section where the tools were, there was a sidebar with ads for businesses in my city. I tell you, it felt oddly like I was being stalked. And also insulted. Asthma meds and cleaning spray? That's what I rate? Not sexy shoes, rave drugs or subscriptions to The New Yorker?
A few weeks ago I went to a SLA (Special Library Association) discussion on ethics. (As a side note, I think people outside the library world would be amazed with how obsessed librarians are with ethics, particularly in regards to patron privacy. Don't yell the phrase "patron privacy" in a movie theater crowded with librarians as there'll be a stampede of librarians running to fall on the sword. Librarians are all secretly dying to go to prison for defending patron privacy. Defying a subpoena or what have you. They're a nutty bunch that way. I guess I'm guilty of it, too. People in my (corporate, business) library who are looking for a book will occasionally, when they find out it's checked out, casually ask who has it. What they're thinking is, "Oh, I'll just go up and ask whoever it is to give it to me when they're done". You'd think they asked me to sell state secrets to the communists or something. "Absolutely not!" I bark. Really, it's a bit much. But I can't help it. I'm a professional. I have the degree and everything.) So of course these ads targeted quite specifically to me, a housecleaning-challenged asthma sufferer in Minneapolis (that's actually not true, I don't have asthma), make me think of privacy, and that makes me think of ethics. Which is what made me think of the SLA discussion.
This ethics discussion became inevitably concerned with how Google now basically knows everything about us. Do our users understand that? And, further, do we have an obligation to make sure they do? Because conventional wisdom says our users are throwing away their privacy willy-nilly. The simple answer is no. Just as it's not our responsibility to inform the patron that checks out all the books on how to make a bomb (this is the classic library school example) that actually making a bomb and detonating it is illegal, it is not our job to make sure everyone understands that they leave a pretty wide swath of personal information behind them as they travel through virtual space.
I say that the simple answer, because in truth, I'm not even sure if this issue still exists. I think web 2.0 has perhaps altered our whole conception of privacy. I don't think people actually have any expectation of privacy once they start using some of the tools we have available now. Or if they do, they wager it's worth the trade. This is when (I hate to say it but) older librarians start huffing and puffing about "kids these days" but I'm not convinced it's just a matter of how stupid our younger users are. Because I don't think they're stupid at all.
Now, at the end of the day, librarians are professionally commited to protecting privacy. Which means we're not the ones pointing the authorites {cough Nazis cough cough} to user information or circulation histories. But perhaps we should spend a little more time mulling over our patrons changing relationship with the concept of privacy before we dismiss them as fools.
Then you'll notice the picture cube of Eldest and I playing at the beach. Now, this is perhaps a bad sign--why do all the additional page elements seem to freak me out?--but this cube eeringly reminds me of the crystal prison cube used to hold General Zod and his partners in crime, Non and Ursa (what in the world did we do before Wikipedia?) in Superman II. So it doesn't seem very auspicious to me to have Eldest and I imprisoned in some intergalactic space cube. It just seems like begging the Gods for trouble.
So, in order to meet the requirements of this Thing (it's Thing #7) I'll just comment long enough to say that I can think of cool uses for this in a library webpage setting, primarily as a way to display bookcovers. Snazzy.
But here's something else: while fufilling this Thing, I set up a free account at Thumbstacks.com which is a tool to display a slide presentation (think PowerPoint) on a blog or webpage. During the registration I was required to answer a few innocuous questions--age, zip code, etc. After registering, to get to the tools, I needed to click through a number of ads with offers for free samples and such. The ads were for asthma medicine and some kind of house cleaning product. Huh. Once into the section where the tools were, there was a sidebar with ads for businesses in my city. I tell you, it felt oddly like I was being stalked. And also insulted. Asthma meds and cleaning spray? That's what I rate? Not sexy shoes, rave drugs or subscriptions to The New Yorker?
A few weeks ago I went to a SLA (Special Library Association) discussion on ethics. (As a side note, I think people outside the library world would be amazed with how obsessed librarians are with ethics, particularly in regards to patron privacy. Don't yell the phrase "patron privacy" in a movie theater crowded with librarians as there'll be a stampede of librarians running to fall on the sword. Librarians are all secretly dying to go to prison for defending patron privacy. Defying a subpoena or what have you. They're a nutty bunch that way. I guess I'm guilty of it, too. People in my (corporate, business) library who are looking for a book will occasionally, when they find out it's checked out, casually ask who has it. What they're thinking is, "Oh, I'll just go up and ask whoever it is to give it to me when they're done". You'd think they asked me to sell state secrets to the communists or something. "Absolutely not!" I bark. Really, it's a bit much. But I can't help it. I'm a professional. I have the degree and everything.) So of course these ads targeted quite specifically to me, a housecleaning-challenged asthma sufferer in Minneapolis (that's actually not true, I don't have asthma), make me think of privacy, and that makes me think of ethics. Which is what made me think of the SLA discussion.
This ethics discussion became inevitably concerned with how Google now basically knows everything about us. Do our users understand that? And, further, do we have an obligation to make sure they do? Because conventional wisdom says our users are throwing away their privacy willy-nilly. The simple answer is no. Just as it's not our responsibility to inform the patron that checks out all the books on how to make a bomb (this is the classic library school example) that actually making a bomb and detonating it is illegal, it is not our job to make sure everyone understands that they leave a pretty wide swath of personal information behind them as they travel through virtual space.
I say that the simple answer, because in truth, I'm not even sure if this issue still exists. I think web 2.0 has perhaps altered our whole conception of privacy. I don't think people actually have any expectation of privacy once they start using some of the tools we have available now. Or if they do, they wager it's worth the trade. This is when (I hate to say it but) older librarians start huffing and puffing about "kids these days" but I'm not convinced it's just a matter of how stupid our younger users are. Because I don't think they're stupid at all.
Now, at the end of the day, librarians are professionally commited to protecting privacy. Which means we're not the ones pointing the authorites {cough Nazis cough cough} to user information or circulation histories. But perhaps we should spend a little more time mulling over our patrons changing relationship with the concept of privacy before we dismiss them as fools.
Thursday, May 1, 2008
And now with new kung-fu moves!
I'm back, better than ever [shadow boxing like Rocky, then alternating to a series of faux kung-fu moves] and ready to rock the world with my 23 Thing-ness.
I had skulked off into the virtual darkness after kind of petering out after an initial burst of enthusiasm. Basically, I had started to feel a little overwhelmed by the 23 things. Setting up the blog was as easy as pie, but then I started to come up against things that actually necessitated coherent thought which is not always my strong suit. So I wimped out.
But I had regrets, yes I did. I had let myself down. And I had proved myself as a slacker web 2.0 maven. (Topic for another day: how I truly am the epitome of the Gen X stereotypes. It's my generation, people! For real! I just look at those hardworking Millenials and think: man, am I glad they're motivated because someone has to be and this way it doesn't have to be me.) So I bashfully revisited the scene of the crime--the 23 Things blog, that states the steps (http://23thingsonastick.blogspot.com/) and found out that another round of the 23 Things is being planned, with registration to start May 15th. And all of a sudden, I'm not a slacker, I'm actually way ahead of schedule as I've already started the project. I'm the Hermione Granger of library 2.0 initiatives. Take that, Millenials! Eat my dust!
I also, this time, will actually register and hopefully the accountability will make a difference.
So. My legions of readers, by which I mean my friend Fresca, will notice I have added a Yahoo avatar which is actually a requirement of part of the first Thing. I created her awhile back, but didn't want to add the image because there's no way I look like that (except in a very roundabout way, as she has pale skin, brown hair, and is in what looks like a library) and apparently I'm a very literal minded person as this fact--that she doesn't really look like me--bothered me so much I couldn't bear to add it as a side element. However, in light of my renewed enthusiasm, here she is. Here's a thought: someone should do a study on what kind of people create what kind of avatars (in say, Second Life). Like I said, I'm a literal gal but I do admire people that create themselves as big robots with wings or what have you. So what personality type creates what kind of avatars? Scholars, get to work.
Frankly, my avatar kind of scares me, so I'm not sure how long she'll stay. A psychologist would have a field day with this.
Here are some of my goals for round 2 of the project:
1. Actually do it.
That about covers it right there. Succinctness, I am the esssence of you. Or is that: succinctness, of you I am the essence?
I had skulked off into the virtual darkness after kind of petering out after an initial burst of enthusiasm. Basically, I had started to feel a little overwhelmed by the 23 things. Setting up the blog was as easy as pie, but then I started to come up against things that actually necessitated coherent thought which is not always my strong suit. So I wimped out.
But I had regrets, yes I did. I had let myself down. And I had proved myself as a slacker web 2.0 maven. (Topic for another day: how I truly am the epitome of the Gen X stereotypes. It's my generation, people! For real! I just look at those hardworking Millenials and think: man, am I glad they're motivated because someone has to be and this way it doesn't have to be me.) So I bashfully revisited the scene of the crime--the 23 Things blog, that states the steps (http://23thingsonastick.blogspot.com/) and found out that another round of the 23 Things is being planned, with registration to start May 15th. And all of a sudden, I'm not a slacker, I'm actually way ahead of schedule as I've already started the project. I'm the Hermione Granger of library 2.0 initiatives. Take that, Millenials! Eat my dust!
I also, this time, will actually register and hopefully the accountability will make a difference.
So. My legions of readers, by which I mean my friend Fresca, will notice I have added a Yahoo avatar which is actually a requirement of part of the first Thing. I created her awhile back, but didn't want to add the image because there's no way I look like that (except in a very roundabout way, as she has pale skin, brown hair, and is in what looks like a library) and apparently I'm a very literal minded person as this fact--that she doesn't really look like me--bothered me so much I couldn't bear to add it as a side element. However, in light of my renewed enthusiasm, here she is. Here's a thought: someone should do a study on what kind of people create what kind of avatars (in say, Second Life). Like I said, I'm a literal gal but I do admire people that create themselves as big robots with wings or what have you. So what personality type creates what kind of avatars? Scholars, get to work.
Frankly, my avatar kind of scares me, so I'm not sure how long she'll stay. A psychologist would have a field day with this.
Here are some of my goals for round 2 of the project:
1. Actually do it.
That about covers it right there. Succinctness, I am the esssence of you. Or is that: succinctness, of you I am the essence?
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
I Stubbed My Toe On The Technology
Oh, I should forge on ahead and explore the next Thing--it's something really snazzy and techy: eFolios--online portfolios to be used as a career enhancer or some such thing. It had these action steps to take before starting:
Reflect: Reflect on what you’ve accomplished in school and in your career, and how it fits with your goals.
Collect: Collect the information for your electronic portfolio. To learn more about what to include, read below.
Select: Select those documents that are most pertinent to your goals and keep them handy as you work on your electronic portfolio.
Build: Build your site using the electronic portfolio tool. For ideas on what you can do with your electronic portfolio, see Gallery.
Publish: Publish your portfolio. You can let others read all, or parts of, your site. Targeting is helpful if you have multiple skills and are open to a number of different employment options.
Frankly, I read this and I became very sleepy. And I just had a mocha. That's a bad sign. I mean, I don't even want to think about action step 1. Does anyone out there really have an overwhelming desire to reflect on what they've accomplished in their careers? Apart from the masochists, I mean. And the show-offs. Don't get me wrong--I'm actually quite happy with my quote unquote career, I just don't have a desire to dwell on it, the way I lately have a desire to dwell on the logistics of homeschooling, the gathering of fiddleheads, the winning of lotteries and the cuteness of my children.
The other thing that made me sleepy, or I should say lethargic, is my library bud's blog http://23sticketc.blogspot.com/. It was so cool. She makes it look so effortless, this Stick stuff. So I looked at her blog and thought: what the hell is a screed? Am I supposed to know that? Did I skip that part? Did I miss something? Could I possibly be more fuzzy brained? And I became very tired.
Ditto my virtual bud (can I call her that? I feel like we're friends, although I have no idea who she is or where she is or even what her name is--funny, isn't it, the nature of these virtual relationships...) Anyway, my virtual bud Cara Mama http://caramamamia.blogspot.com/ who writes these really sweet and sharp entries about her daughter and here I am and you'd hardly even know I have kids, truthfully, I threw in the reference above about their cuteness just so I wouldn't feel like a horrible mother. A mother who has a blog and never even talks about her kids. How messed up is that?
Topping it all off is the ever-brilliant Well Dressed Librarian http://welldressedlibrarian.blogspot.com/ and his ridiculously over-the-top funny post which slyly compares reference assistance to unspeakable sex acts and/or prostitution (it's funnier than it sounds) and I should just crawl into bed, pull the covers over my head, and call it a day. Wake me up in the next millenium.
Reflect: Reflect on what you’ve accomplished in school and in your career, and how it fits with your goals.
Collect: Collect the information for your electronic portfolio. To learn more about what to include, read below.
Select: Select those documents that are most pertinent to your goals and keep them handy as you work on your electronic portfolio.
Build: Build your site using the electronic portfolio tool. For ideas on what you can do with your electronic portfolio, see Gallery.
Publish: Publish your portfolio. You can let others read all, or parts of, your site. Targeting is helpful if you have multiple skills and are open to a number of different employment options.
Frankly, I read this and I became very sleepy. And I just had a mocha. That's a bad sign. I mean, I don't even want to think about action step 1. Does anyone out there really have an overwhelming desire to reflect on what they've accomplished in their careers? Apart from the masochists, I mean. And the show-offs. Don't get me wrong--I'm actually quite happy with my quote unquote career, I just don't have a desire to dwell on it, the way I lately have a desire to dwell on the logistics of homeschooling, the gathering of fiddleheads, the winning of lotteries and the cuteness of my children.
The other thing that made me sleepy, or I should say lethargic, is my library bud's blog http://23sticketc.blogspot.com/. It was so cool. She makes it look so effortless, this Stick stuff. So I looked at her blog and thought: what the hell is a screed? Am I supposed to know that? Did I skip that part? Did I miss something? Could I possibly be more fuzzy brained? And I became very tired.
Ditto my virtual bud (can I call her that? I feel like we're friends, although I have no idea who she is or where she is or even what her name is--funny, isn't it, the nature of these virtual relationships...) Anyway, my virtual bud Cara Mama http://caramamamia.blogspot.com/ who writes these really sweet and sharp entries about her daughter and here I am and you'd hardly even know I have kids, truthfully, I threw in the reference above about their cuteness just so I wouldn't feel like a horrible mother. A mother who has a blog and never even talks about her kids. How messed up is that?
Topping it all off is the ever-brilliant Well Dressed Librarian http://welldressedlibrarian.blogspot.com/ and his ridiculously over-the-top funny post which slyly compares reference assistance to unspeakable sex acts and/or prostitution (it's funnier than it sounds) and I should just crawl into bed, pull the covers over my head, and call it a day. Wake me up in the next millenium.
Tuesday, April 1, 2008
Wow! Have you heard of this thing called "The Internet"?
I'm not so jazzed about the next of the 23 Things--IMing. Are people still doing that? It seems IM reference services were what everyone (if everyone is a librarian) was talking about three years ago. To my jaundiced eye it appears that--obviously--we need to offer IM reference along with all the other ways we need to offer reference assistance. Which is to say, if people are out there using [blank] as a way to communicate, then we need to be figuring it out. Any resistance is soooo 2003.
Does anyone else remember the very first time they accessed the Internet? I sure do. It was through the Gopher service run by the University of Minnesota, way back in 1994. And it wasn't even "the Internet" as we now know it, that's for sure. The first thing I saw was, I believe, a precursor to a Word doc, and it was some government communication (looked like a text file) out of Israel. And it Blew. My. Mind.
Nowadays, everything in the online world is so pliable, and the interface is so friendly. I'm fascinated, for example, by the layout capabilities of this blog. There are so many bells and whistles available and--most amazing--they can be utilized by a person like me with absolutely no programming experience.
You know, we talk and talk about how the relationship between people and information has changed--that there is this infinite amount of information out there and where do librarians fit in, do they at all, and oh my goodness what if people no longer need us? Of course they do. They do now, they did then, and they always will. People don't just need information, they need useful information. The University of Buffalo YouTube bit (which I will try to locate and post here) where they demonstrate their IM reference service is a perfect example: "Hey, overwhelmed undergrad--let me know what your paper is on and I will show you the way." Any student with an ounce of common sense will immediately see the value here. So you can place me in the camp of people who think this "information revolution" is all for the good in terms of librarianship.
I'm very impressed that I somehow managed to yank the content of this post somehow back to IMing.
Does anyone else remember the very first time they accessed the Internet? I sure do. It was through the Gopher service run by the University of Minnesota, way back in 1994. And it wasn't even "the Internet" as we now know it, that's for sure. The first thing I saw was, I believe, a precursor to a Word doc, and it was some government communication (looked like a text file) out of Israel. And it Blew. My. Mind.
Nowadays, everything in the online world is so pliable, and the interface is so friendly. I'm fascinated, for example, by the layout capabilities of this blog. There are so many bells and whistles available and--most amazing--they can be utilized by a person like me with absolutely no programming experience.
You know, we talk and talk about how the relationship between people and information has changed--that there is this infinite amount of information out there and where do librarians fit in, do they at all, and oh my goodness what if people no longer need us? Of course they do. They do now, they did then, and they always will. People don't just need information, they need useful information. The University of Buffalo YouTube bit (which I will try to locate and post here) where they demonstrate their IM reference service is a perfect example: "Hey, overwhelmed undergrad--let me know what your paper is on and I will show you the way." Any student with an ounce of common sense will immediately see the value here. So you can place me in the camp of people who think this "information revolution" is all for the good in terms of librarianship.
I'm very impressed that I somehow managed to yank the content of this post somehow back to IMing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
