A thought-provoking lecture by Clay Shirky on Web 2.0, participation and surplus time:

http://www.warrenellis.com/?p=5885

Software Review: Koha

From a mission perspective it seems natural for libraries (as organizations committed to making information accessable) to adopt the open source software model, but the cost of conversion is a real barrier for non-profit organizations. Koha delivers all the services required from an ILS and many other features that vendors do not. In terms of quality the open source model appears to have a firm advantage over vendor options because it is designed with its users in mind. The principle reason for rejecting a proposal to implement the software is the steep cost of installation, data conversion and training in terms of time, labor and financial resources. For this reason, I would recommend that a library transfer its systems to Koha if and only if its management and support staff are committed to a demanding – if potentially rewarding – project.

There. Two more papers to go until...well, more papers.

Microsoft Vs. Linux

I came across this article on the legal victory of Novell/Linux over SCO/Microsoft, which I thought was useful background reading about the lawsuits Professor Nickerson mentioned in Wednesday's class:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/tech/courtdecision-linux.html

This course has me seriously thinking about using Linux. Does anyone use it, and if so how disruptive is the process of switching over?

Big Ideas

I don't know about the rest of you, but the new Radiohead album is pretty much getting me through the week.

Since there's no official album art, fans have been creating their own. Me, I hope the band chooses this image when the official CD is released.

Librarians Buy Books, Too!

This is the conclusion to my tech. review assignment. I still can't believe that Paul Miller cites his OWN BLOG as his only source on the habits of "Digital Natives".

Conclusion:

"This review has demonstrated that Chad and Miller consistently fail to provide evidence for their claims while confusing the boundaries between corporations and public institutions; this in turn led to their inability to anticipate the practical and ethical implications of their initiatives. Libraries need companies like Talis to focus on matters of practice and to limit their sloganeering and "evangelism", particularly when many of the values of Library 2.0 are those already held by librarians.

These critiques are not intended to cast doubt on Web 2.0 technology itself, but rather on the ability of Chad and Miller to serve as its ambassadors. Walt Crawford distinguishes between the technology of Web 2.0 (i.e. Library 2.0 without quotation marks) and the “confrontational” hype of “Library 2.0” (Crawford M., 2006, p. 2-3). As he says: "Some (probably most) of today’s most innovative librarians see these new initiatives within the broader framework of successful existing services, and see the desirability of attracting new users within the framework of retaining the users who love what libraries currently do" (cited in Crawford M., 2006, p. 3). We would all do well to make this distinction."

RSS Feeds

I knew that news websites such as the CBC provided blogs for their columnists, but I didn't realize that I could subscribe to them through RSS. After Wednesdays' class I signed up for a few, and I'm thinking it's an excellent way to keep on top of advances.

I once read that Noam Chomsky subscribed to, or at least read, something like 80 publications. I don't remember if that was 80 publications per month, week or day, but I fully intend to rival him with my newfound RSS savvyness. Only I'm pretty sure Chomsky is superhuman, so it probably was each day...

EDIT: Ok, so I've already failed.

Blogging Around

This blog is a highly ambitious guide to library technology for the following reasons:

1) Its author knows next to nothing about libraries.
2) Its author knows next to nothing about technology.
3) Its author has, to this point, been skeptical of the value of blogs.

All very auspicious, as far as beginnings go.

And already I've misspoken. I know that like any technology, the value of a blog depends entirely on its user. It probably goes without saying that for professionals, a blog can be as valuable a resource as a trade journal or a listserv. What I really mean to say is that I'm suspicious of the utopian enthusiasm (which often cumulates in grand statements about Democracy and/or Community) that tends to go hand in hand with each new development in the "Web 2.0" frontier. The same rhetoric has often followed major advances in communications technology, and the internet is no more likely to enlighten humanity than the telephone did.

I would say, then, that my reluctance to follow blogs stems from the glut of resources available. Pitchfork Media, my favorite on-line source for music news, ran an enthusiastic feature a few months back predicting the demise of criticism: http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/article/feature/39527-column-get-that-out-of-your-mouth-30

Although the author reluctantly concludes that critics are still needed to produce "compelling, original and well-argued writing", that's the entire reason I consult Pitchfork (and indirectly support their advertising) in the first place. I want to read well thought out opinions and I don't want to sift through thousands of opinions that I don't entirely trust. Five billion people don't suddenly become Lester Bangs just because they got a free blog and start writing reviews (not that the blog you're currently reading isn't skewing the ratio more towards noise than signal).

To bring this somewhat long-winded rant back to FIS 1311, I will make one of my goals for this class to push aside my prejudice against blogging and to get into the habit of consulting insightful blogs. Besides, if there's one thing I know about librarians, it's that we know how to pull the right resources from a near-overwhelming number of choices.