Libraries Outsourced: Librarians Under New Management

Butrflynet wrote:

The other thing is the new technologies Chumly talks about are decades down the road.

I have not read a papered book in years, I have terabytes of data on a number of hard drives, I have high speed global internet I/O.

I am not convinced all that I talk about is "decades down the road" but for the things that are presumably "decades down the road" be mindful of the hilarity /absurdity / utter wrongness of one of modern science's greatest luminaries: "There is nothing new to be discovered in physics now, All that remains is more and more precise measurement." Lord Kelvin

And hey while were at it, let's not forget that Einstein spent a goodly portion of his adult life faultily trying to prove that the quantum theory he helped bring forth (AKA Heisenberg uncertainty principle) was simply in error and accurate measurement would be doable on a subatomic level.

0 Replies

Chumly wrote:

I have not read a papered book in years, I have Terabytes of data on a number of hard drives, I have high speed global Internet I/O.

i'm reading a book right now that is electronic, but internet is no excuse to not read books. if you truly haven't read a book in years, then you're a worse victim of the upgrade-everything-at-all-costs mentality than i thought. websites, forums, and wikipedia are great resources, but i hope to think you at least read e-books.

no one's going to strap you down and make you read from paper. all i'm saying is that you recognize that some people may wish to be afforded the same courtesy. we don't want to read from a screen (or transporter or whatever) all the time just because you believe it's superior.

i also know that lots of e-books are read-only, some have drm, and i imagine that most hologram projectors won't have the ability to write. underlining, dogearing, scribbling in the margins, sometimes these will be better with electronics, and sometimes, the advantages of a book outweigh the advantages of anything else. if you can't tell, maybe it's because you no longer know what a book is like. what an awful thought.

0 Replies

tinygiraffe wrote:

........but internet is no excuse to not read books.......

You sound like my wife.

0 Replies

she's obviously a smart woman.

as for "down the road," what happened to virtual reality in every day use? the nintendo power glove went off the market what, 15 years ago? and we had to make do with good old mice and trackballs until the wii came out, that's one of the closest things we have to vr in daily use. also, there is a fingersleeve invented by one of the atari ceo's, i read about it six years ago? it's not on shelves yet, obviously.

"down the road" is the time between talk like yours and daily experiences. there are robot vacuum cleaners now. why do you suppose people are using handheld ones? because the actual future is always down the road, at least for the common man. no amount of wishing will change that, either. we simply have to wait to make changes work together. they had electric cars for a while, we will again. but the ones we had before don't exist, because they didn't ever get around to building fueling stations.

these things take time, and also they almost never work the people swore they would. caveat emptor, and please excuse us if we do the same. it's not because we're backwards. futurism is fine in reasonable amounts, but like the march of progress, it has lessons we can learn from or completely ignore. i choose to take them into account.

0 Replies

tinygiraffe wrote:

no one's going to strap you down and make you read from paper. all i'm saying is that you recognize that some people may wish to be afforded the same courtesy. we don't want to read from a screen (or transporter or whatever) all the time just because you believe it's superior.

More of your straw man logical fallacy argumentation now pushing into the realms of the logical fallacy called argument ad nauseum.

tinygiraffe wrote:

.......sometimes, the advantages of the family spinet outweigh the advantages of anything else. if you can't tell, maybe it's because you no longer know what a family spinet is like. what an awful thought..

I know, more of the the logical fallacy called argument ad nauseum., with some injected humor on my part.

Question: can you play a musical instrument well and do you engage those dear to you with your musicality? I can and I do, assuming you don't "what an awful thought.."

I have to go to bed now, good night little g and all other kind posters!

0 Replies

Quote:

More of your straw man argumentation.

considering that i'm well aware of my intentions, i would think it's a much better theory to say that i might misunderstand you in the first place.

this isn't much in the way of a logical debate on either side. we're both using examples that appeal to logic, but all in all we're arguing chocolate vs. vanilla, one future vs. another. matters of opinion, not fact. i'd go as far as to call it speculation, where we are admittedly and even deliberately making giant leaps of logic so that we can talk more about things that haven't happened yet. (logic would let us do that, but it would be a shorter and perhaps a less meaningful conversation.)

from my perspective, your preference is odd. aren't candles more romantic than space heaters? both are dangerous, both are widely used, one is more modern by hundreds or even thousands of years?

technology can be romantic to, but what does logic have to do with which passion is more legitimate? all that bothers me is that you *seem to* think we should rid ourselves of the candles of the world and replace them with lasers (or something.) why isn't there room for both?

Quote:

Question: can you play a musical instrument well and do you engage those dear to you with your musicality? I can and I do, assuming you don't "what an awful thought.."

this would be a better analogy if i'd criticised your illiteracy, as many people are not the least bit musical. you and i both read, neither of us is faulting the other for not reading.

i specifically was referring to books, as they encapsulate information in a way that is available online- but to abandon even e-books would be to abandon culture, not just old technology.

then again, i realize that technology and culture are intimately related. if you did, your argument might be much different.

it's funny you ask, all the same. today i was creating a drum riff- on a software-based drum machine. oh i'm a real technophobe alright- the difference between my embrace of technology and yours is that i'm not forecasting the end of (or singing praises to the end of) physical drums. hey, music turned out to be a good analogy after all.

0 Replies

tinygiraffe wrote:

this would be a better analogy if i'd criticised your illiteracy, as many people are not the least bit musical. you and i both read, neither of us is faulting the other for not reading.

My argument has merit given that my spinet example points toward the time when (at least romantically and ideally if not realistically) the family would be more likely to gather around the family instrument and play the popular tunes of the day. I reasonably enough draw some technological parallels between this and the paper book.

I has been fun and I could not resist one more bit of more good natured argumentation, must sleep now!

0 Replies

you sleep? my goodness, what a quaint notion. personally, i stay up all night on coffee and tea. i thought that's what everyone did in this day and age.

only joking. (though i often have a bit of insomnia.) good night!

0 Replies

Chumly wrote:

jespah wrote:
Ah, cypher, I'll tell m'Mom; she's a retired Reference Librarian.

Chumly -- most libraries aren't strictly paper-based, at least not the ones I know. They tend to have a lot of computer stuff going on (plus help with job searches, etc.). Plus, and this is something we've all noticed here on A2K, there are a lot of people out there who are clueless when it comes to knowing how to search for information. Research is not working for them because they just don't have the skill. Libraries and librarians in particular can help with nurturing that kind of self-reliant skill. And, even if they know how to search, a lot of folks don't know how to interpret that information or how to spot bias. This is another area for librarians to help with.

Yes I am ware of what libraries are trying to become, but the more the world moves towards information decentralization, the less need there is for a government sponsored, overly centralized, brick and mortar, mega-sized, institutionalized, anachronistic monstrosities like libraries whether they have computers and high speed data throughput or not, it makes no real difference.

Few people seem to truly understand the longer term implications of massive information decentralization.

It's already stupidly easy to own many-many Terabytes of data on a home PC let alone cheap high-speed throughput.

Government sponsored intermediaries such as a libraries have / will become an anachronism regardless of whether they continue to be promoted / worshiped.

As far your beliefs about search engines, just wait until A.I. in concert (pun) with speech recognition, blended with mobile high-speed data throughout hits prime-time!

Even a moron will then be able to "access the world".

His personalized ever-learning, ever-adapting AI search engine will "understand", anticipate and guide him better than any librarian whom could not possibly "know" him as well.

The AI, etc. you're talking about is decades if not a century away. I've worked on voice rec as an engineer and it isn't even close to that sort of prime time. Accents, swallowed syllables, homophones, regional speech differences, contextual shifts, specialized vocabularies, lazy users who won't take the time to train the system or use it properly, and the female voice (higher voices are harder for the current technology to comprehend; I used to routinely get far worse recognition percentages than a male colleague and this was a typical experience in the industry) all conspire to make voice rec a nice idea whose time is coming but isn't even close to being here yet. Can't speak to AI but I imagine the situation is similar, at least in terms of looking like it's closer than it really is.

As for everyone having the 'net, etc., may I remind you of poor folks? And the technologically nonsavvy? Shared PCs exist -- they're at libraries! For people who only use a PC for a few specific purposes, e. g. to polish a resume or maybe do an occasional search, it makes zero sense to own a PC. Instead, they just go to a library.

A lot of the posts in this topic, also, seem to assume that librarians are a meek bunch (or a bunch of corporate stooges) who are going to roll over and take this kind of junk. I doubt that. The stereotype of the bun-haired old lady shushing everyone is not reality. Most librarians I have known -- and this is not just in the public sector, but my mother also worked in a community college and is active in the Jewish libraries association in her area, plus I went to school with some Library School students (yes, I know personal experience is not worth much, but these folks would agree -- they go to the conventions every year and meet hundreds of librarians) -- would not roll over to this kind of nonsense. They don't recommend books because their bosses have told them to. They don't kowtow to schools wanting to see what kids are checking out. I think credit is not being given to the independent minds who do this job. Are there going to be stooges? There are in every profession. But I do protest against the perception that it's all of them that are going to be like that.

Also -- government-sponsored -- I understand the objection but, really, wouldn't you rather have your tax dollars spent on a library than yet another bomber? Libraries are meant to be public continuing education and education extension. Are some of their aspects obsolete? Of course. I don't pretend that they aren't. But let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. There's a lot of good there, still, particularly for the poorer segments of the community. Let's not leave those folks behind, yet again.

0 Replies

marketing is the demon
There have been some wonderfully useful inventions, discoveries, etc. that I would not want to be without. The real problem is that money seeking entrepreneurs are always trying to find new markets whether or not they are needed. They tweak existing technology to entice the public to by a new device. It's all for the sales profit motive rather than advancing the technology.

How many gadgets have you bought that you end up tossing out? How many devices have so many features added to them that are never or rarely used, but resulted in a new sale to the manufacturer? For instance, I want a simple portable telephone that does not have 10 or 15 operating uses that I will never use. Can I find one? No! Computers are often loaded up with features I won't use. Hard to find one without them at a lower price.

It's all about marketing and profit. The same about books and reading formats. A book is perfect and doesn't need tweaking. The only problem about books is what to do with them when the reading is finished? I give away a lot of my books, but I love my large book library in my home. You can't cuddle a child on your lap while reading a book together if you are reading from a screen. Books are meant to rest on home shelves or to be passed along to others. The cycle never should end. I read a lot on my computer screen every day. But I wouldn't want to read a book from my screen.

BBB

0 Replies

Re: marketing is the demon

Quote:

A lot of the posts in this topic, also, seem to assume that librarians are a meek bunch (or a bunch of corporate stooges) who are going to roll over and take this kind of junk. I doubt that.

i do too, actually, and i hope we can count on them in this instance, as we typically can.

Quote:

The stereotype of the bun-haired old lady...

the old bun-haired lady is a force to be reckoned with, although she's often not so old, and they can be very pleasant if you get them at the right time. the bun does seem to show up often enough, just the same Smile

i would put my hair up too, before doing all that work moving books around. they often move several around at once, those things are heavy!

before she sold out (and i still think we should wish her the best, even if i don't respect her as a musician anymore) sheryl crow said that she was disappointed when she learned her album would probably never be available on vinyl. the funny thing is, people can still request that vinyl be made, and do, because it's useful for deejays doing techno and house, etc. she just went with the wrong record label.

i imagine that in the future, paper books will be at least slightly less common. march of progress and all. and i don't mind reading from an lcd screen, i just don't want to do it that way all the time. it's nice to be able to search a book by typing a few keys, and for books in the public domain, it's great to be able to make 100 copies (or share them online) without a thought about it.

i think books will still be printed, even by publishers, and i think you'll see a lot more e-books, it's just a question of percentages. i plan to never support an e-book with drm, but i don't know what exceptions i'll make. not too many if i can help it, drm is a ticking censorship timebomb, like a book that plans to burn itself later. our bun-haired heroes should really up their campaign against it and in favor of open alternatives.

but in the future, you may find that instead of finding a paper book on a shelf (which i think you'll still find yourself doing, just not absolutely as much as now) you might get an electronic version (which should be cheaper, as the cost of printing is much higher) by default (sometimes!) and then request a printed copy for an additional, but traditionally reasonable fee. don't let people attach newer fees to cheaper tech, like they do with cd's. those should be about 4 bucks, like cassettes tend to. dvd's should be about 5 to 8 bucks.

however, books are art and many deserve to be treated like art. i liked computer art before people knew what computers were, i like pixels and they're a fine medium in my opinion, with potential that didn't exist before- the average person has a greater potential in computer animation that may compare to the single most outstanding traditional animator of any generation. the 14-year-old kids of the future may put walt disney to shame, even the ones of the present.

but the idea of ridding the future of paper books is about as ridiculous as ridding the museum (or art store) of canvases. creativity is a force that moves across every medium, electronics will be a bigger and bigger part of that. singing the end of paper books however, well, i sometimes think that fetishists are inclined to become futurists.

it's nice to say that the future will be made of your dreams, but dreams are something we share, they're not something that one person owns. if technology is your fetish, i think you'll enjoy the future. lots of us dream about paper too however, and you're very foolish if you think the future will exclude us, or if we'll go quietly into the night- let alone of our own preference- influenced by a million years of artistic expression.

0 Replies

jespah wrote:

Chumly wrote:
jespah wrote:
Ah, cypher, I'll tell m'Mom; she's a retired Reference Librarian.

Chumly -- most libraries aren't strictly paper-based, at least not the ones I know. They tend to have a lot of computer stuff going on (plus help with job searches, etc.). Plus, and this is something we've all noticed here on A2K, there are a lot of people out there who are clueless when it comes to knowing how to search for information. Research is not working for them because they just don't have the skill. Libraries and librarians in particular can help with nurturing that kind of self-reliant skill. And, even if they know how to search, a lot of folks don't know how to interpret that information or how to spot bias. This is another area for librarians to help with.

Yes I am ware of what libraries are trying to become, but the more the world moves towards information decentralization, the less need there is for a government sponsored, overly centralized, brick and mortar, mega-sized, institutionalized, anachronistic monstrosities like libraries whether they have computers and high speed data throughput or not, it makes no real difference.

Few people seem to truly understand the longer term implications of massive information decentralization.

It's already stupidly easy to own many-many Terabytes of data on a home PC let alone cheap high-speed throughput.

Government sponsored intermediaries such as a libraries have / will become an anachronism regardless of whether they continue to be promoted / worshiped.

As far your beliefs about search engines, just wait until A.I. in concert (pun) with speech recognition, blended with mobile high-speed data throughout hits prime-time!

Even a moron will then be able to "access the world".

His personalized ever-learning, ever-adapting AI search engine will "understand", anticipate and guide him better than any librarian whom could not possibly "know" him as well.

The AI, etc. you're talking about is decades if not a century away. I've worked on voice rec as an engineer and it isn't even close to that sort of prime time. Accents, swallowed syllables, homophones, regional speech differences, contextual shifts, specialized vocabularies, lazy users who won't take the time to train the system or use it properly, and the female voice (higher voices are harder for the current technology to comprehend; I used to routinely get far worse recognition percentages than a male colleague and this was a typical experience in the industry) all conspire to make voice rec a nice idea whose time is coming but isn't even close to being here yet. Can't speak to AI but I imagine the situation is similar, at least in terms of looking like it's closer than it really is.

As for everyone having the 'net, etc., may I remind you of poor folks? And the technologically nonsavvy? Shared PCs exist -- they're at libraries! For people who only use a PC for a few specific purposes, e. g. to polish a resume or maybe do an occasional search, it makes zero sense to own a PC. Instead, they just go to a library.

A lot of the posts in this topic, also, seem to assume that librarians are a meek bunch (or a bunch of corporate stooges) who are going to roll over and take this kind of junk. I doubt that. The stereotype of the bun-haired old lady shushing everyone is not reality. Most librarians I have known -- and this is not just in the public sector, but my mother also worked in a community college and is active in the Jewish libraries association in her area, plus I went to school with some Library School students (yes, I know personal experience is not worth much, but these folks would agree -- they go to the conventions every year and meet hundreds of librarians) -- would not roll over to this kind of nonsense. They don't recommend books because their bosses have told them to. They don't kowtow to schools wanting to see what kids are checking out. I think credit is not being given to the independent minds who do this job. Are there going to be stooges? There are in every profession. But I do protest against the perception that it's all of them that are going to be like that.

Also -- government-sponsored -- I understand the objection but, really, wouldn't you rather have your tax dollars spent on a library than yet another bomber? Libraries are meant to be public continuing education and education extension. Are some of their aspects obsolete? Of course. I don't pretend that they aren't. But let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. There's a lot of good there, still, particularly for the poorer segments of the community. Let's not leave those folks behind, yet again.

The latest version of Dragon Naturally Speaking works just great, in fact I am using it as I speak.

As to some of your other views / claims / time-lines / expectations / present day assessments / beliefs etc, and not to put too beastly a point on it, I consider both Ray Kurzweil's & Marvin Minsky's viewpoints to have much more veracity than yours.

As to your belief that it "makes zero sense to own a PC. Instead, they just go to a library" and that poor people cannot afford a $200 - $300 PC well then you'd best try and argue these same people should not be able to afford a TV.

As to your lack of self reliance argument I consider it rather specious given that being more self reliant has long term net benefits the opposite of which is the potential for the classic ward of the state scenarios.

0 Replies

You do live in isolation...

0 Replies

ossobuco wrote:

You do live in isolation...

I'm in bed with my wife snuggling.

0 Replies

Hi-yah jespah,

I forgot to add: If you want to try and argue that a library's reson d'etre is somehow based in part on a number of people's inability to manage smaller amounts of money or in their choosing a TV over a computer, or to learn the basics of PC operation, it would be entertaining, I guess.

Why would a library have a greater responsibility to teach people to choose a TV over a computer simply because the library can supply a few PC's as opposed to the library teaching how to be a better lover?

Shirley the fundamentals of love making takes precedence over whether one should have a TV or computer at home, and whether the library should play a part in deciding which techno-fixture you go out for, and which one you stay in for.

0 Replies

tinygiraffe wrote:

.......only joking. (though i often have a bit of insomnia.) good night!

Great sex and a back massage can be a plus, not that I'm offering......

0 Replies

Chumly wrote:

Great sex and a back massage can be a plus, not that I'm offering......

oh i remember them both quite vividly, thanks for reminding me. i should do that again some time.

0 Replies

Tinygiraffe, you've expressed all the things that I would have liked to have said if I could ever bestir myself to get into this kind of exchange....I'm so glad someone was here to make these points, and you made them *so* well... The way people fetishize progress is something I think about often, and I really enjoyed the way you summed it up here:

Quote:

you *seem to* think we should rid ourselves of the candles of the world and replace them with lasers. . . why isn't there room for both?

I like that, I'm gonna remember that one Smile

0 Replies

Me too'ing.

0 Replies

i appreciate that.

i grew up a tech fetishist, and atheist, i can relate. i wasn't pushed into it, it was entirely my own thing. i honestly wondered why we hadn't paved the world over with concrete, i thought that would be so cool!

i still love technology, when in balance with nature, but the air is cooler and my feet are less sore, now that i know the pleasure of walking on grass or dirt.

although i have to say, my analogy was very stupid in the sense that candles are mostly for light and space heaters mostly for heat. i should have said fireplaces instead of candles, or something along those lines. flashlights aren't that dangerous, proving that technology is good for something.

0 Replies

Libraries Outsourced: Librarians Under New Management

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know