This is an olde post, that I’m coming back to, and adding onto. Two interesting uses of twitter:
1) Twitter as Subject Stream – Over on techcrunch there’s a post about how Quora is using Mechanical Turk to automate the creation of twitter accounts. Quora is a mass Q & A website for anything. You ask a question: “Where’s the best place to crowdsource an icon?”, and you get a response, for example from user alton sun :”99designs.com….“.
Quora the site is organized into many subject areas which you can subscribe to (UI, Startups etc.). They are creating a twitter account for each of these subject areas, so those interested Quora users can subscribe to the feed and get the newest message from that subject area. It’s cool.
2) Twitter with a High-Pass Filter: This is the newer part of the post, Jeff Miller, has created a twitter feed that broadcasts Hacker News stories when they reach a certain point value. http://twitter.com/newsyc100 was the first one I noticed, it broadcasts stories once they reach 100pts. But it seems he also set a feed with 2opt, 50pt and 150pt triggers. I really like the idea that once something has reached a level of community interesting-ness — as manifest in points — you can grant Hacker News the ability to become a verb and reach out and tell YOU about it.
You can decide that anything that is of n interestesting-ness to a community is of interest to me.
The University of Michigan has made publicly available 684,597 of its bibliographic records. They’re published under a Creative Commons 0 license, which puts them in the public domain.
Why don’t we all do that? In part it’s because for many libraries, the provenance of the information in their bibliographic records cannot be known with certainty and may well include information received under licenses that forbid re-publication. It’s a knotty, irksome problem.
Doc Searls has a brief post about wandering his way around the world and across the decades thanks to librarians, archivists, and the good folks of New Zealand.
Btw, be sure to click on the link to what Doc calls his “favorite family photo of all time.”
Dan Gillmor has a good post at Salon about archiving the Net, spurred by meetings at the Library of Congress. I’m especially interested in his comments — pointing to a post by Dave Winer — about the role of long-lived institutions, including universities.
Have we all concluded at this point that there is no hope of keeping a full and accurate archive? The Net is too vast, too every-changing, too complexly linked. I can’t even keep a full archive of my own computer; the Mac’s TimeMachine makes hourly backups, but not minutely or secondly, and it only preserves daily backups over the long-ish haul. All records are broken to one degree or another, because records require choices about what’s worth recording and energy to do the recording. “Full record” is an oxymoron.
So the question is, what is the right periodicity and scope of the Internet record we want? Usually, questions about archives and records are relative to some use case. A general record of the Net is like a general record of life. So, we’ll just have to make some choices that inevitably will turn out to be wrong for some unanticipated uses. We’ll have to deal with it.
Personally, I’m heartened to see this discussion occurring at an institution with the gravitas of the Library of Congress, and that it includes people like Dan and Dave.
From the Disruptive Library Technology Jester, certain libraries are providing Google Books with anonymized circulation data to feed into their relevance ranking algorithm. I would love to know which libraries are providing this data. Anyone?
I’m not just carelessly using the Royal We when I say that we’re loving Dave Pattern’s blog. He’s the Library Systems Manager at University of Huddersfield, and he’s deep into slicing and dicing library usage metadata. For example, example, and another example. And don’t forget this Library 2.0 idea generator. (Thanks, Jeff, for the links.)
The Twitter hashtag #FailShare is accumulating instances of failed library projects, so that we can learn from them, and also, I imagine, to take the sting out of failure (on the grounds that sting-y failure makes for stingy ideas).
And, a brand new wiki page has gone up on the same topic.
From an email, for those who are going to be around Boston on October 29:
Boston University Libraries are pleased to announce the 2010 Fall Lecture on
WHO: Kathleen Fitzpatrick
Professor, Department of Media Studies, Pomona College
WHAT: Planned Obsolescence: Publishing, Technology, and the Future of the
WHEN: Friday, October 29, 2010, 3-5pm
WHERE: Photonics 206, 8 St. Mary Street, Boston, MA
In addition to her many fellowships, awards, articles and media projects,
Fitzpatrick is Co-coordinating Editor and Press Director of MediaCommons.
She is the author of The Anxiety of Obsolescence: The American Novel in the
Age of Television (Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press, 2006).
The book was named an łOutstanding Academic Title˛ by Choice by the
Association of College and Research Libraries, and selected as a łbook of
the month˛ by the Resource Center for Cyberculture Studies.
Fitzpatrick is currently working on a book-length project focusing on the
social and institutional changes necessary to developing the digital future
of scholarly publishing, under contract to New York University Press.
Manuscript completed; undergoing second-round review. Available for open
peer review online at
For more information, please see:
Apps are everywhere. E-books are shifting from e-readers to apps as the platform of choice. Google’s Android Market has surpassed 100,000 apps despite a problematic payment structure. And Apple, with its upcoming release of Mac OS X Lion, is moving apps from the device to the desktop.
Here in the lab, we’ve talked app development, but with little traction. Why no squealing tires, no fire? Why does spending even a little of our resources on app development feel so wrong? I don’t know. But, it takes only a mention of HTML5 to uncover bubbling excitement at the possibilities and to discover we’ve already begun expending resources.
Apps are not here. I wonder what we’re missing? Are apps a dead-end? of limited utility to academia? Is HTML the better technology for delivery to devices?
Android Market tops 100,000 applications, CNET, October 25, 2010.
App Makers Take Interest in Android, NY Times, October 24, 2010.
Apple Gives Sneak Peek of Mac OS X Lion, Apple.com, October 20, 2010.
Blurring the Line Between Apps and Books, NY Times, October 24, 2010.