Aaron the Librarian

The retreat consisted of five intense hour-long sessions with ~30 minute panel response sessions covering the following: Policy, Hardware, Networked Public Librarian, Web Applications / Social Networking, and Library Education and Librarians.

Here are bullets from my For Libraries and Librarians notes sections:

Libraries & Librarians foci, Policy:

• Increase focus on assistance with ordering (organizing?) and finding online information
• Increase focus on archiving and ordering for future discovery, pro-active archiving functions
• also need to increase focus on preservation of materials (physical, digital, virtual, etc.)
• Open internet means more opportunities for developing new services
• Closed internet locks down information services – we would have to live with the technological status quo for a long time
• Long-term mission of libraries and librarians requires commitment to open and privacy-conscious internet

Libraries & Librarians foci, Hardware:

• “Regular consumer” connections to libraries do not provide the bandwidth necessary to serve library users
• Fiber to the library would be plenty (for now, as bitrates go up and more users use services multiple fibers may be necessary) and ought to be part of a national technology plan
• Fiber to the library might serve as incentive for providers to provide better / faster connectivity to consumers in the area, as well
• Governmental policy discussions should be informed by librarians and library users

Libraries & Librarians foci, Networked Public Librarian:

• Reading and distribution at marginal cost
• Digitization of collections
• Expertise and skills
• Face to face (physical) space for local learners to interact
• Become “Networked Librarians”

Libraries & Librarians foci, Web Applications / Social Networking:

• Library should be a bridge between “communities of interest” (micro-interest)
• Identity management will be important, central to tracking and presentation services anywhere on the web
• Learning 2.0 initiative ties in nicely with libraries
• Libraries should consider a standard interface for searching (eBay, Amazon, Google, etc. look pretty much the same from anywhere on the planet) aggregated data of all library holdings (at the Book, Journal, Article, Chapter, and possibly Subchapter levels) – this flies in the face of the “local look for the local library” but it could be a good discussion

Libraries and Librarians foci, Library Education and Libraries:

• Focus on the information (finding, using, combining ,creating, etc.), not the technology that allows it
• Assume responsibility for being the information institutions for our society and communities
• Collections: a prediction of future need. Offer a wide variety of quality, credible collections, both physical and digital. Work on relationships with commercial efforts
• Access: an equalizing force in today’s society. Offer high-quality, fee-based resources in the physical library, virtual spaces, and digital devices. Provide access to help and other services
• Place: a local space for congregating and bridging interests. Provide physical and digital services and resources in digital environments to deliver services and resources in the real world

Here are links to copies of the preliminary statements of the presenters:

• Policy (.doc)
• Hardware (.doc)
• Networked Public Librarian (.doc)
• Web Applications / Social Networking (.pdf)
• Library Education and Libraries (.pdf)

­­­­­­­­

OITP: The Future of Information Technology and Libraries

The retreat consisted of five intense hour-long sessions with ~30 minute panel response sessions covering the following: Policy, Hardware, Networked Public Librarian, Web Applications / Social Networking, and Library Education and Librarians.

Policy

Mike Godwin: Where is policy headed and what does it mean for libraries? What are some of the “outside” forces we need to consider?

Started with overview of Technology Policy by describing the “1^st three Revolutions:”
MicroComputer Revolution ~1976, Internet Revolution ~1986, and the First Amendment Revolution ~1997. It’s ten years after the last “Revolution,” what’ll it be this time?

Copyright?

Perceptions of infringement threat: computer “copying” – computers misused as copying machines, network “copying” – networks misused as loci of infringing, new focus on legislating “copy-protection” (DMCA, etc.)

Reality of infringement threat: computers and networks are fundamentally copying machines, cost of incremental copying is approaching zero, copies can be broadcast as costs continue to decline, current copyright law assumes copying stuff is difficult or costly or both.

Outlawing Behavior didn’t work, will Redesigning the Technologies work?

Government and business interests are pushing in this direction e.g. broadcast flag, watermarking, closing analog hole, proprietary interfaces, data retention, traffic discrimination. Pipe owners dislike “smart edge” technologies and want to change from common carrier tradition to a pay as you go model.

Preservation of the flexibility granted in / by Copyright law and technology flexibility have and will help creativity to flourish. If the legal and technology flexibility is reduced we could see copyright laws pre-empted by content license practices, free speech may be affected (e.g. Google in China), privacy expectations may change with centralization of services, innovation may decline as flexibility diminishes.

There seems to be a basic assumption that people/users cannot be trusted with the full power of computers. We ned to make conscious choices about what future we want for users and computers. Do we want a “safe” future (safe as defined by telecom companies, cable companies, content owners, and law enforcement)? Do we want a dynamic, open, less “safe,” and less predictable future?

Libraries & Librarians foci:

• Increase focus on assistance with ordering (organizing?) and finding online information
• Increase focus on archiving and ordering for future discovery, pro-active archiving functions
• also need to increase focus on preservation of materials (physical, digital, virtual, etc.)
• Open internet means more opportunities for developing new services
• Closed internet locks down information services – we would have to live with the technological status quo for a long time
• Long-term mission of libraries and librarians requires commitment to open and privacy-conscious internet

Hardware

David Isenberg: Increasing capacity and big-time applications; Nomadic technology that un-harness the Internet from a set location; Other key trends to be aware of?

Imagine a peer to peer traffic network, as more vehicles are equipped with transponders each individual vehicle would become more aware of upcoming traffic conditions and would become able to self-drive and route around obstructions. This is a fantasy, but technology could do this in the relatively near future with the right massive initial capitalization and roll out.

A standard fiber-optic cable has 183 threads in it, each with ~120 (1200?) addressable light frequencies. One thread can handle ~300 GBps (is that the right number? My notes are scribbly) missed some other details about how much throughput a given population uses in a second – net result is one cable has the bandwidth to connect the US North East (Maine to Ohio to DC). The technology to do this has been available since 1998 – there has been no new research to better develop this since 1998 – and yet not deployed by service providers.

If all libraries were to become fiber connected, the neighborhood library could be the short-term or long-term answer for extremely high bandwidth. The FCC current bandwidth definition is >200 KBps in one direction – which is ludicrous compared to broadband rates for other countries. US consumers are missing out on potential new content and services because of the lack of high speed connections.

Libraries & Librarians foci:

• “Regular consumer” connections to libraries do not provide the bandwidth necessary to serve library users
• Fiber to the library would be plenty (for now, as bitrates go up and more users use services multiple fibers may be necessary) and ought to be part of a national technology plan
• Fiber to the library might serve as incentive for providers to provide better / faster connectivity to consumers in the area, as well
• Governmental policy discussions should be informed by librarians and library users

Networked Public Librarian

Yochai Benkler: The role of librarians in the networked information economy?

Yochai is an amazing presenter – would that my powers of retention were better, to do him justice. See a copy of his paper – he riffed off this and covered immense volumes of stuff in addition.

(paraphrase:) “The cultural role of the professional librarian is of an accredited trustworthy, non-commercial professional. This makes librarians valuable as an anchor against the cultural force of the commercial end of the spectrum.”

Commercial broadband deployment is lagging the rest of the world due to the monopoly structure and lack of regulation of the industry. Unless policy changes, higher-speed networks will reflect the commercial end of the spectrum. (see the figures in his paper)

Municipalities should invest in making public libraries – an already existing, stable, committed-to-openness organization – an internet Point of Presence (POP). High capacity fiber is relatively inexpensive to build these days and a WiMax or WiFi mesh is also possible in many communities.

Copyright policies of the last 80 years need to be fixed; then a practice of referring readers to previous works needs to be established (already sort of done in scholarly circles)

Curation through selection for inclusion in a small space is largely obsolete in this age of communications overabundance.

“Networked Librarian” – to fill this role, librarians need to focus on their own life-long learning and understand (and accept) that some users (of any age category) will always be out ahead of them on the technology curve. Blogosphere, Twitter, Meebo Rooms are just the beginning – change is coming fast.

Libraries & Librarians foci:

• Reading and distribution at marginal cost
• Digitization of collections
• Expertise and skills
• Face to face (physical) space for local learners to interact
• Become “Networked Librarians”

Web Applications / Social Networking

Beth Jefferson: Potential opportunities and pitfalls for libraries?

Beth had data galore in her 200+ slide presentation (most of which she had to glide over to fit in the time slot) – once the data is vetted, I hope she shares it widely (much of it is data that is not available from anywhere).

At this juncture of the “Social Web” libraries should be reframing the discussion away from “Risks and Opportunities” toward “Responsibilities”; away from “social networking” toward “social search and discovery.”

New divides are appearing with the Social Web “the interacting and the interacted.” Does the digital divide lead to an empowerment divide? Read some discussion about this.

Beth gave out some aggregated library data and contrasted it with McDonald’s, Starbuck’s, Amazon, book stores, etc.; a really feel-good moment for us. These are some of the data/numbers Beth wants to validate before disseminating.

Empowerment Divide, in 4 parts:

1. Participation Inequality: Who’s speaking and who’s not?

2. Attention Inequality: Whose voices are being heard, among those who have spoken?

3. Connections Inequality: Who’s being connected to who, for what purpose?

4. Inequality in Filtering Capacity: Relative abilities to deal with information overload

I was a responder to this presentation; here are the questions I came up with for the panel discussion:

• Who does what libraries “used to do” (or currently do)? Should libraries still do these things?
• “If we build it” was said a few times, Do *we* have to be the creators / builders? e.g. LibraryThing, SuperPatron, etc.
• Persistent Identity – is this a problem if the user grants us permission to store the data to improve their experience?
• Aggregated library data – these numbers speak volumes (data needs verifying)

Also, some ideas to consider

• “The Library Brand” OCLC Report
• Library website usage data from Beth’s presentation (not officially released yet, but Beth said the “My Account” and OPAC links were most used (to the tune of an order of magnitude); followed by database links use at ~4,000/month
• In a Wilson Library related journal from 1957, an article “Should you have a telephone reference service” was published

Libraries & Librarians foci:

• Library should be a bridge between “communities of interest” (micro-interest)
• Identity management will be important, central to tracking and presentation services anywhere on the web
• Learning 2.0 initiative ties in nicely with libraries
• Libraries should consider a standard interface for searching (eBay, Amazon, Google, etc. look pretty much the same from anywhere on the planet) aggregated data of all library holdings (at the Book, Journal, Article, Chapter, and possibly Subchapter levels) – this flies in the face of the “local look for the local library” but it could be a good discussion

Library Education and Librarians

Mike Eisenberg: Where is the Internet going and what does this mean for library education? How must we change public perception or ourselves?

Several good messages from Mike. Library Education is not broken; Syracuse (and UW among others) are setting a good model for “I-schools.” The mashup culture developing on the internet is dynamic, changing, and ultimately will powerfully affect libraries and other institutions.

We should remain skeptical of new technologies; we need to figure out what our goals are and use the technology to further those goals. Watch out for fad just for the fad’s sake, but be ready to use the technology to further our interests and goals.

Mike’s paper covers this better than I can (my ears were bleeding and brain was almost full by this point in the day).

Libraries and Librarians foci:

• Focus on the information (finding, using, combining ,creating, etc.), not the technology that allows it
• Assume responsibility for being the information institutions for our society and communities
• Collections: a prediction of future need. Offer a wide variety of quality, credible collections, both physical and digital. Work on relationships with commercial efforts
• Access: an equalizing force in today’s society. Offer high-quality, fee-based resources in the physical library, virtual spaces, and digital devices. Provide access to help and other services
• Place: a local space for congregating and bridging interests. Provide physical and digital services and resources in digital environments to deliver services and resources in the real world

Hey, if you read everything all the way down to here, say so in the comments

Also, please feel free to discuss and ask questions — assuming I remember to check, I’ll answer as best I can from what I remember…