Al Gore Video Feed

The Arthur Curley Memorial Lecture at this year’s ALA Midwinter Conference was presented by Al Gore. What would such a famous speaker and activist say? How would he connect the crisis of global warming to libraries? I had high hopes.

“If you want a book to be signed, you have to buy them over there before the lecture!” This was my greeting outside the convention center ballroom as staffers gesticulated towards a bookstand. The tone was set, and the room filled quickly.

Gore started his lecture by acknowledging the suffering and destruction in Haiti. Empathy, he explained, is one of the most powerful emotions tying humans together. He asked us to empathize with future generations and consider the kinds of destruction they will inevitably face if we don’t act decisively to save the environment.

“Save libraries!” I was thinking. “Prevent global warming and the destruction of libraries!” What kind of world would this be without libraries?

Gore outlined our options for prevention, covering each chapter of his new book, Our Choice: A Plan to Solve the Climate Crisis, except the one chapter that was relevant to libraries and librarians.

Surely, the majority of the people in that room had already seen An Inconvenient Truth. The lecture did not stray very far from the same information. What if he had paid the most attention to the one chapter he skipped? Wouldn’t that have been inspiring and energizing?

I left the lecture feeling frustrated and dismayed. This presentation was another symptom of what I feel is a larger problem with ALA conferences. Bonnie Swoger wrote in the Undergraduate Science Librarian that “there is a disconnect between the library world and the research world.” I feel that a similar gap exists between libraryland and the technology, design, and marketing worlds.

Getting such big names as Al Gore to speak at our conferences is awesome, but let’s make it even better by inviting them to talk about their ideas relating to our profession. Let’s take the opportunity to hear something new.

We need to hear from our users, as Bonnie suggests, but we also need to hear from experts outside the library world to help us move forward and keep up with the ever-changing landscape our libraries are part of. We need futurists, philosophers, economists, designers, and technologists to speak at our conferences. We need to hear it from the horse’s mouth — what will effect us.

I still think librarians are a great source for programming at ALA, but I want diversity of thought. I don’t want canned presentations or recycled discussions. I think the change would help us keep up and maybe even change our general image from “behind the times” to “in the know.”

Today, I found out that Read Write Web published a post yesterday entitled All Your Docs Belong to You: Google Docs Now Exportable. My wish came true!

As of today, several bloggers have reported seeing this new feature, which allows users to grab all their Google Docs and batch export them as a zip file. Files can be exported in a number of formats, including Microsoft Office and Open Office formats.

I tried it and it worked. Hooray for backups!

See also: Data Liberation Front Blog‘s Liberating Google Docs.

For the upcoming ALA Annual Conference 2010, Jason Griffey and the LITA Program Planning Committee decided to switch the program proposal process from a paper form and in-person interview to an electronic exchange: a Google Form and email correspondence this year, and hopefully a conference planning system by next year. (The PPC ProgramProcess TaskForce recommends the Open Conference System, an open source application from the Public Knowledge Project.)

With generous help from Ranti Junus, Systems Librarian at Michigan State University Libraries, a senior member of the committee, and Chair of the PPC ProgramProcess TaskForce, I learned that the process used to be very involved:

1. The chair, co-chair, or vice chair of the Interest Group (IG) sponsoring the program would fill out the paper form and make many copies for each PPC member to read. (The information requested on the paper form was exactly the same as that requested on the Google Form this year.)
2. The IG would arrange an appointment and meet with the PPC for 20-30 minutes.
3. Feedback from the PPC was immediate: clarifications, potential audience, etc. PPC sometimes suggested the IG collaborate with other IGs within LITA or with other divisions. Typical collaboration usually entailed asking the other IG/division to co-sponsor to share information about the program with their own members. Time slots were also discussed. (Usually, the PPC chair had the timetable with her so she could check with the conflicts.)
4. The PPC would then come to a consensus.
5. A PPC liaison who was assigned to the IG would take over communication to the IG proposing the program after ALA Annual. The liaison was the go-to person for the IG for all PPC-related communications and was responsible for making sure that the IG would get the information they needed in a timely manner. Liaisons were also responsible for reminding the IGs about turning in other information such as the names of the speakers, communicating PPC discussions related to the respective IGs, and informing PPC about the IG’s progress preparing the program.

This year, with the use of Google Docs, Griffey was able to set up a Google Form for program proposals. The information from the Google Form was funneled into a Google Spreadsheet shared by all the members of the PPC. This was the process so far this year:

1. Griffey put out a call for proposals on the LITA Blog on June 24, 2009. This included a link to the Google Form (now defunct), a link to the form on ALA Connect, and an announcement that program proposals no longer need to be sponsored by an IG.
2. The committee met at ALA Annual 2009 and discussed the new procedure and intentions to change the LITA Manual by ALA MidWinter 2010. The program planning process no longer includes IG liaisons or required meetings with submitters at MidWinter. (View our Meeting Minutes.)
3. After the program proposal deadline on July 31, 2009, the PPC members read all the submissions and rated each on a scale of 1-10. These ratings were based on interest, the reflection of the program on LITA, its likelihood to draw a crowd, its currency, etc. Comments were also made and recorded on the spreadsheet regarding improvements or questions about the program. The ratings were averaged for each program proposal.
4. Every submission that received an average of 7 or above was approved, a 4-6 was marked as “maybe,” and a 1-3 was rejected.
5. Junus then plotted a schedule of LITA programs for Annual 2010 with the requested times of approved and “maybe” programs on a Google Spreadsheet. This was so our committee could better visualize what program belonged when. (We didn’t want programs that would draw a similar audience have to compete with each other.)
6. The PPC met on gTalk to discuss the outliers a few days later. Emails were sent to some submitters for clarification on their program proposals.
7. In mid-September, Griffey met with other Program Planning Committee Chairs at ALA in Chicago to discuss and arrange the preliminary schedule for ALA Annual 2010. (Hear more about the ALA Conference Planning Committee at Griffey’s blog.) Luckily, LITA was able to get through the scheduling without having to change much.
8. Pretty soon we’ll be volunteering to email approved submitters our congratulations and suggestions for improvement.
9. More to come as we get closer to Annual…

It has been an interesting experience so far, helping to shape the ALA Annual Conference 2010 and understanding how conference planning is done from the inside. I’m very excited for many of the programs LITA is sponsoring, but, secretly, I wish every day of Annual could be an unconference.

Joe Osborn preparing for his workshop on programming at USC

Joe started with some pointers:

1. Self-directed learning: In order to really learn a programming language, it needs to be self-motivated “otherwise it won’t stick.” Start with a programming language that makes sense to how you understand the world. If you’re good at/interested in math, start with a language that uses mathematical functions.
2. Google it: Google is tremendously important and useful to learning how to program, as is Stack Overflow, a Q&A site for programmers. ”Generally if you have a programming problem, there is someone who has solved it.”
3. When in doubt, try it: ”It’s not worth it to take the time and reason about it, just stick it in and try it.” ”Plug it in, run the numbers, and see what happens.”
4. Ask your friends: ”If none of the above work, ask your friends.”

Environments

As computers got more complicated, we lost the “basic prompt.” What we have now is a bunch of different environments that we have to install to use.

Low Inertia Languages

All of these environments are really self-contained — download it, run it, and start playing — low inertia to get it running

• Gamemaker Lite: draw tiles that say “move an object forward” or “stop an object,” good for prototyping, Windows only
• Scratch: created by MIT, for graphical programming and can be used for games, click and drag, no syntax to worry about, “get used to the idea of thinking in steps”
• Max/MSP: visual, “like programming with a flow chart”
• PLT Scheme: language similar to Lisp, basic principle is “function applications,” “One of the classic learning languages,” great book called How to Design Programs, highly recommended, often used it to teach programming
  • (circle 10) will create a circle 10 pixels wide.
• Squeak: created in 1980, environment for Smalltalk, “Squeak gives you a big interface, like an OS inside an OS,” some really cool features like any text can be treated like code and then run, breaks down barriers between running the program and writing the program, Squeak Wiki, Smalltalk designed to be accessible to everybody

More Involved Languages

• Python: Windows and Mac installers, editing text files
• Ruby: very simple as far as languages go, why’s poignant guide to Ruby (PDF)
• Adobe Flex: not as friendly as other environments, but there is a huge community of users — lots of community support, Flash is applicable to Flex

One of the really nice things about programming, is that as soon as you learn one thing, it’s easy to learn something else.

Every good programmer needs to really hate the language they’re using at some point, and want to make a new one.

Everyone who programs has an opinion; everyone is biased.

If you learn any of these languages, it will be a lot easier to learn other languages.

As Laura Carscaddon and Colleen S. Harris explain in their article in Library Journal, “Working the Social: Twitter and FriendFeed,” ”a major benefit of FriendFeed is the ability to converse easily on a specific topic with threaded discussions.” This appears to be true for many librarians, but for me, FriendFeed is just redundant. I follow few people on FriendFeed. Even for these few, I prefer reading the individual feeds they produce (via Twitter, RSS, or Flickr) to the context-less aggregate. When I feel the need to comment on what they say, I do so in context.

Why is that?

In order to use Twitter, I use a desktop application on the Mac called Tweetie. I use iScrobbler to record what I’ve listened to on my last.fm account. I go to Facebook daily (usually), and LinkedIn, Yelp, and LibraryThing occasionally. I upload pictures to Flickr using an iPhoto plugin after I upload them from my cameras, and visit Flickr occasionally. I use NetNewsWire (a desktop app that now syncs with Google Reader) for my RSS feeds.

After using FriendFeed for some time, it seems to me that the way to get the most out of the site is to keep it open in browser all day. Otherwise, one is bound to miss something in the sea of information generated throughout the day. Personally, I don’t like this practice. I read or see a lot of the information in other ways, I don’t like web apps, and I don’t like the design of the website. I’m bothered by the fact that I struggle to be an active user of the site.

I agree with Erin Dorney’s post on Library Scenester, “Social networking: be an active, responsible user.” I try to be an active user of social networking tools for different reasons. Twitter is a great way to see what is going on in the library world and to participate in it. I use Facebook mostly to keep up with friends and family, though the library world is part of that, too. As Erin wrote, “I would be on some of these sites regardless of my career because technology is something that is tightly integrated with the way I live my life.” And I also try to be a responsible user, not posting things that are too personal or too hasty.

So the fact that I am having trouble with a social networking tool is jarring to me; I usually get the hang of it quickly and easily. Maybe FriendFeed is just not right for me.

These realizations have made me curious: how do you decide what social networking tools work for you? Are there any that you just can’t use for one reason or another? Do you have a favorite?

(Tangentially, Meredith Farkas‘ presentation I mentioned in a previous post, “2.Broken: Cautionary Tales of 2.0 Gone Wrong” describes a similar kind of struggle for libraries, rather than the individual, and what to do about it. Erin Dorney’s personal social networking philosophy of being an active and responsible user can (and should) be applied to organizations using social media, too.)