Class Assignment:

It seems talk of cloud computing is everywhere. I attended an event at DU last week on records management and even they brought up the idea that you should at least be familiar with cloud computing when approaching the industry because there are many applications where it will be employed in the future.

I used to be an early adopter of technology. I no longer am. Not only is it often
prohibitively expensive, it is generally quickly outdated. I spent $350 on a 3 megapixel camera. It was state of the art at the time.

The confluence of technology trends and cloud computing in this module got me thinking about the obsolescence of cloud computing; that’s not to say that is obsolete but I have to wonder about it in the same way I wonder about all technology today. I told my husband I was going to start an Internet museum dedicated just to our own outdated technology, with detailed photographs of his Apple II and my Sony MiniDisc player taken with my 3 megapixel camera.
Cloud computing is an interesting area and I think it’s filled with opportunities to bring technology to new places and the number of free Internet-based applications and software is sure to level some of the digital divide (particularly since libraries are playing an important role—wouldn’t it be nice to have libraries provide programs letting the average library user know what kinds of freebies are available to them on the Internet? I’m sure this is already happening in places I don’t know about).

I think the popularity of wireless applications in the cellular world will continue to bridge that divide. For example, I read recently that Twitter is very popular with businesses, celebrities and lower income cellular phone users (those who don’t have access to computers regularly but have adopted text messaging capabilities.

However, as future librarians (and archivists and records managers) it’s important to remember how quickly trends come and go and to be mindful of our client’s future need to access information from outdated modes.

Class Assignment:

I found the readings/videos in this module very exciting. I look forward to the day that we have a true Semantic web—I feel like I’ve been waiting for it forever! I’m also looking forward to not having to drive my car.

The Borland article was pretty fascinating—it was interesting to think about how the organizational methodology of librarianship could be applied to emerging technologies. I wish this were a bigger field of exploration in our MLIS studies generally.

I think one of the most interesting elements of the Semantic Web is the criticism of how complicated it is. (I like that it might employ some catalogers). But, really, what isn’t complicated in web infrastructure and coding? It’s not like everybody learned HTML and SEO in high school (perhaps in some areas these days, of course, but not most). Like so many businesses with a presence online, as the Semantic Web is rolled out, the top tier companies will take on the endeavor because they already understand that functionality means business—real business and real dollars. Why do companies spend so much on SEO? SEO can be pretty complicated and time-consuming but it can also make a fledgling business hit the tipping point.

I’m also not opposed to keeping it simple. In fact, it’s the only way to do it on a mass scale. Leave complicated Semantic Web linking to organizations that need them and would truly benefit from the interconnectivity.

And while I know we’re supposed to tie everything to libraries, I actually think the Semantic Web will result in more jobs for knowledge management professionals—and I think that’s good news. Libraries will benefit from the implementation of a more organized Internet but I’m not sure how they will help create it—at least in public libraries (OCLC and Zepheira aside). I can see how academic libraries could implement these things. And god knows that the databases libraries regularly employ need some better search functionality.
I saw this posting on Allan’s Library and I couldn’t help but think this is the problem with library discourse. There are lots of “ooh, this is connected to something about libraries…” And I see the parallels and how it’s connected? Lots of things are closely connected in concept but that doesn’t mean they truly intersect, create stability in funding for libraries, or create library jobs.

And what, exactly, are librarians bringing to the Web 3.0 table? I hope it’s organization but I’m not sure.