Future Concerns for Digital Trends

(Originally posted April 22, 2012)

Though the internet serves as an communication tool enhancing access to information, the opening of the proverbial floodgates comes with strings attached. As evidenced in the articles by S. Vaidhyanathan (2005), B. Gambles (2010), and K. A. Coombs (2005), there is reason to be concerned out future trends and the relative privacy of the consumer/patron.

In Vaidyanathan's "The Googlization of Everything and the Future of Copyright," the author addresses how Google's mass digitization efforts, while noble in intent, have received both resistance and criticism from authors, publishers, librarians, and the Copyright Office. The heart of the matter is the retention of the rights of intellectual properties. While Google hopes to make rare books available to the public through Google Books, there are concerns that the rights of the authors--even those who cannot be identified or located (creating orphaned works, still retain copyright ownership of their work (even if it goes unrepresented). Thus, the works sit in a virtual limbo.

Expanding on the notion of the digitized book is Gambles' "Rewriting the Book: On the Move in the Library of Birmingham" (2010). A project in the works, the Library of Birmingham is a novel concept which hopes to open in 2013. Just as the architecture is a fusion of old and new ideas, the premise behind the Library of Birmingham is to create an atmosphere which promotes emerging technologies which impact library patrons. Acknowledging the significance of Web 2.0 and tools/sites such as Google, Amazon, Twitter, and Facebook, the LoB views its mission as a place where users can make the transition to new technology and software--rather than to be restricted to aging means of research.

Just as Gambles demonstrates how one library is fully embracing the digital age, Coombs' "Protecting User Privacy in the Age of Digital Libraries" (2005) reminds us of the information libraries receive and are capable of retaining from users who connect online or use library computers. Though some of the information, such as browsing trends and site hits may prove useful in helping a library determine which products are utilized, there is the concern regarding personal information stored in the system. For this reason (and because of state and Federal laws which address the importance of protecting the privacy of users), Coombs emphasizes the importance of scrubbing library records and removing information which can identify a person or user.

Ultimately, accessing information on the Internet is a silent pact: the user agrees to make portions of their personal information available to a site in return for the privilege to view the information that site possesses. What kind of information that site retains, and what it elects to do with the information is the key, and while some organizations try to protect the rights of their users, others merely view their users as another product to be sold to a different customer or agency.
 

 _______________________________________________________________________________

Coombs, K. A. (2005). Protecting user privacy in the age of digital libraries. Computers in 

        Libraries, 25, 16-20.

Gambles, B. (2010). Rewriting the book: On the move in the library of Birmingham. 

        30-July-2010 Publication: Ariadne Issue 64: http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue64  

        /gambles.

Vaidhyanathan, S. (2005). The Googlization of everything and the future of copyright. 

        Retrieved from http://lawreview.law.ucdavis.edu/issues/Vol40/Issue3

        /DavisVol40No3_Vaidhyanathan.pdf.

Web ?.0

(Originally posted April 15, 2012) 

This week's readings can be broken down into two sections: "Fundamentals of the Internet and World Wide Web," and the "Emergence of Web 2.0." Jeff Tyson's "How the Internet Infrastructure Works" and Rich Tebb's "Introduction to the Web as a Platform" (2007) provide an overview of the history and underlying structure of the internet and how end-users connect and interact with each other through web sites.

Though not new, addressing the topic was a bit of a refresher and reminded me of terms I had not used in 17 or 18 years. I remember the squawk created from dial-up modems (and the word "baud"). Upon entering college, was given a crash-course in accessing the internet when I was manually installed the Ethernet card in my desktop (which operated at 33-50 mhz with a pre-Pentium processor and had a whopping 500 MB of storage on the hard drive). From there, I read a five-paged sheet which explained how I created identified my computer and connected it to the school's Local Area Network (LAN). I had no idea as to what I was doing, but with a little trial and error, I figured it out.

Updates in computers and computing technology followed. From the Ethernet and dial-up modems to cable to wireless: new technology brought more complications. While the original issue may have involved the computer, modem, or phone connection, modern problems include (but are not exclusive to) the computer, the connection to the router (password for instance), the router itself, the connection to the cable line, or the cable provider. (Fortunately, computers can identify the source of the problem and offer solutions.)

Wireless computing is but one of the catalysts for Web 2.0. As the clocked counted down to Y2K, the Internet bubble burst and millionaires became insolvents overnight. Thirty years in the making, the internet blossomed from a government-run project geared towards defense and research purposes to a place where anyone with a connection could socialize, shop, conduct research, and, yes, even play games. While O'Reilly is promoting innovations, his angle is what struck me.

Maybe I'm a cynic, but in reading Tim O'Reilly (and John Battelle)'s articles on Web 2.0, I felt like someone was trying to sell me something. Sure enough, looking at O'Reilly's background, one learns he has been involved in tech marketing for over 30 years. So what's O'Reilly trying to sell? Reassurance. He wants the public and investors to feel optimistic about the future of the internet and technology related to it by pointing out its flexibility and growth potential through products like Facebook, Twitter, and Flckr. True enough, Apple has grown from a floundering company to the wealthiest corporation in the world--riding high on the promise and potential Web 2.0 offers.

Are libraries taking notice? Obviously. It's hard to find an institution which does not have at least a Facebook page for outreach purposes (though more aggressive organizations also make use of Twitter and the development of mobile apps.) So is O'Reilly right? Yes and no. There is not really much of an argument. Technology improves. It's innovation. It's not isolated to internet technology (cars, movies, and even light bulbs have made considerable advances). Labeling this change, Web 2.0, as something new is more of an advertising campaign to further separate the success of the current innovations from the dot-com bust.