Thoughts on Completion

I think that was a superb program that was organized and run very well. Ellen and Jim did a great job and should get a lot of praise. As my job involves the use of a lot of these programs, it wasn't as new to me as it might be to others, but I certainly found it useful. It's nice to see what others are doing with programs. It also gave me the idea to create a video about how libraries are using some of these technologies.

An excellent learning opportunity!

YouTube & Me

I've long been familiar with YouTube and I'm torn. On the one hand, I love seeing rare stuff that I can't find elsewhere. On the other hand, I'm a firm believer in copyright law and I hate the massive posting of copyrighted material without permission. My favorite poster on YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/user/Hammerman8699
Okay, Hammerman8699 is a friend of mine, but he's posting priceless Marty Feldman material that otherwise would be totally unavailable.

Web-Based Desktop Applications

Negative Carl here for another report on web-based applications. We're told that the biggest benefit is that mutual people can collaborate on a document without worrying about file compatibility. When is the last time that has been a problem for you? I collaborate all the time with people in Australia, South America, and Asia and I have never had a file compatibility issue. I hire people to write and edit scripts and have never run into any issues with compatibility, nor have my collaborators. I guess it's handy for people who don't want to lay out the money for Microsoft Office and so they can use spreadsheets and the like without buying a program. Plus, now I'm supposed to learn another program and another sign-in and another password?

Wikis - Overrated and Unreliable

The main benefit techno-nerds advance for Wikis is also their fundamental flaw that makes them useless. "Anyone can add information" trumpet Wiki supporters, as if that's a good thing. There is no verification process on additions, meaning bad information can remain onsite for days, weeks, and months. Wikipedia, the main offender, claims that's not true and that bad information gets spotted and corrected right away. For the real story, check out how Wikipedia allowed an anonymous user to slander John Siegenthaler for months:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2005-11-29-wikipedia-edit_x.htm
What's worse is once a falsehood gets into Wikipedia, it gets picked up as a "fact" by other websites and their webcrawlers, so even if Wikipedia corrects the falsehood, tracking down other sites and information that repeat the false information is maddening. On a less dangerous level, I have had dozens of people report to me information about Get Smart that is on Wikipedia and is untrue, yet once it's up there everybody believes it. Wikipedia allows urban myths to be stated as fact.

Underlying my issues with Wikipedia is their belief that experts are not valuable in providing information. A real encyclopedia finds reputable, verifiable experts and hires them to provide information. Wikipedia allows anyone to claim anything and a person with no education or scientific background is considered just as useful a source on nuclear fission as someone with a Phd who has worked in the field for thirty years. That's not right.

I'm always amazed at librarians, who for years derided the lack of reliable, accurate information on the Internet, embrace Wikipedia. Librarians used to trumpet their role as "Internet information guides" and stressed how they could tell good information, yet that all disappears because of the ease of finding an answer, whether it's correct or not, on Wikipedia.

Blogs, Tagging, and Exploring

I did a couple of blog searches for tagging and found it amazingly useless. I did a few searches on my hobbies and by the time I narrowed down the tags, the only blogs were poorly-written expositions. I'm really not interested in Jamie from Oklahoma's views on macaroni and cheese and since I don't know him, why would I want his comments on my macaroni and cheese? Let's face it 90% of blogs are pretty dull, poorly written, and a waste of time. I'm including mine in that category too!

Tagging

It's probably me, but I just don't get social tagging. I mean, what's the point of delicious and could they have a dumber URL? I visit maybe ten websites regularly and I have them in my bookmarks and in my head. I don't need a website to keep track of my bookmarks and I'm not one of those mobile people who need to access their bookmarks anywhere (how many people really are that mobile?). If you're that mobile, wouldn't you have your own laptop? I'm really not interested in finding people who tag things the same way I do either.
[mdlearn2]

Rollyo

I avoided the temptation to create a goofy search site on Rollyo and instead created a search that searches all the Get Smart sites on the web. I guess this would be a useful tool if you did a ton of searching or something, but I have no problem using search engines like Google to find just what I need when I need it. I rarely use "search this site" buttons on websites because I rarely have trouble finding information I need on websites that I use.

Library Thing

Now this is a useful site. I've started creating my own online library and I think it's one of the best tools around on the web. Thanks for including it.

Flickr

I used one of the Flickr add-ons to create a magazine cover:
http://flickr.com/photos/12011684@N08/1204067303/

It's nice, but for those of us who have been using Photoshop for a while, it's kind of old hat.

RSS Feeds - Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Okay, here's my thing about RSS. Who cares? Some of this stuff is great, but 98% of it is useless. I've been using RSS on my My Yahoo page for years without knowing that is what it's called. Most of the stuff is just plain junk, however. I went to the site with all the feeds and I couldn't find a single one that interested me. Who needs daily papparazzi pictures or a phrase of the day or junk like that. I certainly have no interest in getting updates from blogs. If these people were really talented or actually expressed original thoughts or ideas, they would have a legitimate outlet, not just be one in a billion people typing inane thoughts on inane issues.

Flickr and the Meaning of Liff

The Meaning of Liff. Many years ago Douglas Adams wrote a book called "The Meaning of Liff." It was an attempt to create words to describe many common experiences that had no short description. For example, "kerry" was chosen to describe "the small twist of skin which separates each sausage on a string." Ballycumber was chosen to describe "one of the six half-read books lying in your bed." There is a Meaning of Liff group on Flickr and one of my favorite photos comes from this group:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/imb/167264272/in/pool-liff/

Easiest Habit

The easiest habit of the 7.5 habits is to use technology. I use technology every day in my job and am used to constant revisions, updates, and improvements. It's important to use every tool at your disposal, if they are needed, to create a successful outcome.

Hardest Habit

The hardest habit for me is "Create Your Own Learning Toolbox" because it sounds like one of those trite sayings that take place in management school and so I dismiss it almost at once. I expect to see that title on a bestseller in the business section any day now. Do we really need to be told something so obvious as this?

Flaws of Online Tutorials

The first thought I have about the 7.5 Habits is that they really, really need to use a professional narrator if they're going to do a tutorial like this. A monotone voice does nothing to encourage learning and detracts from the message being given. Spend the extra money to have a professional read the copy with enthusiasm and verve and you'll have more successful and motivated listeners.

Initial Thoughts

I have signed up for the blog to discuss Libraries 2.0. Everything seems very easy so far.