Blog

As someone who has worked on community technology projects for nearly twenty years, it was always conventional wisdom that we had to reach people offline to bring them online.  In other words, we couldn't solely do outreach via the Internet when we were targeting people that were, often by definition, completely offline.  As librarians in an increasingly digital world approaching 2020, it can be frustrating to see low uptake of digital services or low participation rates in online programs, like summer reading. When studies show that Americans of all ages and economic groups go online in increasing numbers, why is the online use rate of our digital services not skyrocketing?

Remember earlier this summer when your email inbox and the headers of your favorite websites were chock full of notices about "Updated Privacy Policies?"  You may also remember that this flurry of privacy policy updates was due to a new European Union law going into effect that controlled how companies could collect data about European citizens.  Since many Internet services are global by nature, some Americans also benefit from these new data policies, although American companies serving American citizens obviously don't need to abide by the EU regulations.

As a librarian, you naturally want to ensure that your library is accessible to patrons of all ages and abilities?  We build ramps and elevators for people who use wheelchairs, scooters, and other mobility assistants to make sure they have access to every resource in our library.

Are you taking the same care to make sure that all of your patrons can access the resources on your website?

Ever been to a "hackathon" -- a gathering of technologists committed to working on a short-term project, usually a couple of days?  Imagine two dozen programmers, designers, and specialists locked in a room for 2 days with laptops, snacks, and caffeine, all focused on prototyping an innovative app for a good cause.  Learning, sharing, and pure geekery ensue!

My pals at ByWater Solutions invited me to talk about our open source summer reading software, Bookpoints. Jessamyn West has been working with us as we complete our 2017 version of the software so I invited her to join me so we could all have an open source love fest.  Listen to the podcast here:  https://bywatersolutions.com/podcast.

And if you've never heard of Bookpoints....well!  It's the summer reading program software we created in partnership with California Library Association and Library of Virginia.  It is inspired by the good work of Maricopa County's Great Reading Adventure (GRA). We are hosting around 25 libraries in California who will be using Bookpoints for the second year.  Library of Virginia hosting another cohort that has also been working with us since the early GRA days. Our project page is readingbydesign.org.

Thought I'd share this Q&A I had with someone via email in case you have the same question!  - Lori

Q: I am struggling to find data comparing the performances of  the 2" square tags vs. the 2"x 3" tags. Are you aware of any studies comparing the two?
I've heard anecdotal evidence from a nearby college that the 2x3 tags are significantly better [they abandoned using the squares altogether] but I'm not finding much on the topic.

Many thanks for any information your can share.

A:  The general rule of thumb is that the larger the antenna, the longer the range.  So the 2x3 is going to give you a bit better performance than the 2x2 since the antenna actually runs around the other edge of the tag. 

There are two reasons you might prefer a 2x2 tag despite the inferior performance:

1) they obscure less of the cover art 

2) with DVDs in cases where you want to pair the tag on the case and the full coverage tag on the disc (e.g. X-Range or Stingray tag). Because the disc tag is about the same size as the disc, it leaves little room to add a tag on the case without having the two tags overlapping (which causes interference).  So, using a square tag in the corner in combination with the full coverage disc tag works best. Tagging this way is recommended since you can use the RFID system to verify that the right disc is in the right case thereby reducing the need to open the case.

Today I have done a lot of reading and soul searching. Here's where I've landed so far:

This election had a large racist component and it was at least partially a backlash to President Obama.

This election was a flail on the part of rural Americans who feel no one cares about them and their concerns and that America doesn't understand nor respect the institutions that underpin their communities.

I've been writing the Technology Matters column for the online journal, Collaborative Librarianship, for the last few years.  It is a good way to force me to organize my thoughts. I try to post the columns here but they don't always make it so if you want to read them all, I encourage you to visit the groovy new website.  

A few years ago, I participated in the PLA Technology Commitee. They were contemplating the future of the PLA Tech Notes. I suggested that we should discontinue the PLA Tech Notes and instead update the Wikipedia entries on those topics that were of interest to libraries. That way we'd contribute valuable content to Wikipedia on technology if there wasn't anything useful there yet.  And if there was something there already, we could supplement the entry and describe the library application of that technology.  Seemed to me to be a great idea and much better than spending a bunch of money having someone right up an article that would then be hidden deep in the bowels of ALA/PLA website where the info would be hard to find, never updated, and where it would quickly become inaccurate (without anyone who happened to bump into it knowing the difference).

I've been participating in an interesting thread about self-check-out and someone asked me to state some Best Practices. So, here's one rendition of what I believe to be Best Practices for implementing self-service check-out. It's an evolving list.