Really Silly Situation

Really Simple Syndication is not for me. I was successfully able to set up a feed, but wish I hadn't. I ran into problems because I didn't want to set up a favorite on a work terminal, and if I want updates from a certain resource my strategy has always been to GO THERE, not COME HERE. There is something to be said for the act of seeking and discovering. There is something lazy about really simple syndication. Maybe it's too simple. Maybe I haven't had time to properly explore this "most useful resource", I'm too busy searching for what hasn't already been fed to me. Either way I'm glad it's over.

What's next?

I Googled Google

So many products to choose from... Hmmm... I work at a library... Google Books?

Google BOOKS!

As a purist, the idea of digitizing books has always made me feel sick. It still does, but boy do I like having access to all these books online. There's a lot of books out there that I won't be able to buy in my lifetime, although I'm trying to buy every book I want, but now I can access books that aren't on my shelf.

The best part about Google Books is the search function. Being able to CTRL+F a book is hugely useful for research, or to find specific parts of a book without re-reading for hours, even if it is only a "preview".

One problem with Google Books is that the book you need is rarely available due to its copyright limitations (which is great!). Sometimes it seems like they purposely digitize only books for other people. Who are those people, anyways?

There's a whole lot more to this that I should explore, but it's been really busy here in Humanities with National Poetry Month and I'm a sub so I don't work as much as I'd like to.

F%@#BOOK, 2.0 part IV

Facebook is definitely not a time-waster for me. Even in the instance that I am just wandering through the site, wasting time, that's when I will end up finding something - an event or opportunity of some sort, that I wouldn't have heard about anywhere else.

The only aspect of Facebook I don't like is how other people sometimes use it. Anyone who feels the need to report their thoughts on an hourly basis should start a new facebook of their own - some kind of ultra-facebook. I feel sad for these people and then stop wanting to be their friend, even in real life.

Nowadays, it's the promotional potential of Facebook that impresses me. Being able to "Become A Fan" of certain pages and get regular updates on events is really useful. And the ability to announce interesting opportunities, and the possibility of finding them, to and from people I generally respect, is a really good thing.

Wiki-wiki-WHACK!

While researching sandstorms in the American Southwest this winter I came across a lack of information concerning a sandstorm that occured in Tucson, Arizona in 1971. The only online details of this storm were: "A dust storm that occurred near Tucson, Arizona on July 16 was extensively documented by meteorologists." Continuing my search I came across this sentence again and again - "extensively documented by meteorologists"... and nothing else. Through our E-Library I found an article abstract from the January 197X edition of Scientific American, then found the magazine in the basement of Central. I have posted details from this article to Wikipedia's "Sandstorm" page.


I also attempted to write a Wikipedia article, but it proved to be too complicated to do so properly while maintaining customer service duties at the info desk. This attempt greatly increased my respect for the validity of Wikipedia articles. There are a lot of hoops to jump through, and tons of reading, to submit a valid article. I will use Wikipedia even more now, with increased faith, knowing how much work goes into an article's creation.

2.0 (delicious).

What are the advantages of storing, sharing, and tagging web content this way?

1) Well, there are a lot of resources out there and it isn't very practical, efficient, or professional to go and google what you need every time. This is a wonderful way to narrow down the ridiculously large "on-line world" into a more manageable, library-specific size.

2) A lot of really smart people work at the library and these aren't the type of resources that come up in training so this way we less tech-savvy workers can get in on what the real smart full-timers are using.

3) The only advantages to tagging it this way, I think, are so that we can find it. I don't see how else this could work.


What are the disadvantages?

1) Maintenance of this, at least in a library setting, must be a nightmare. URLs change and then we've a got a dead link. The internet's claim to fame of being an ever-changing, fluid resource does not react well to being pinned down.

2) Titles of some of the bookmarked sites are so similar to each other that they blur into a blue meaningless mess, unless you really squint, which may cause head pain.

3) Some of the most useful (or newer) sites may not have made it on to Delicious, so you may be doing yourself a disservice, missing out on the latest greatest stuff. And there's no "thrill of the chase".

Otherwise it's quite nice. There are no disadvantages to sharing or tagging. Sharing and tagging are like bees pollinating flowers.