Feedmil is a search engine for RSS feeds. It does this specific task very, very well. Search for feeds relating to any keywords you wish, and modify your results using a set of slides that emphasize/de-emphasize words that show up in your results.
I wish they had a more detailed “about” page, especially information on how they determine popularity, authority, quality, and relevance.
found via RSS4Lib
Common Chemistry is a resource from Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) which allows one to search for chemical information using a variety of search terms, whether the terms be common names (aspirin, table salt), basic chemical names (acetylsalicylic acid, sodium chloride), or even the official CAS registration number (50-78-2, 7647-14-5).
Although this does not search the entire CAS database, it is an excellent starting point for most of the chemical information questions posed students and the general public.
Note the link to the Wikipedia entry (just above the disclaimer) for many, but not all, results; not many “authoritative” resources are confident enough in their users to connect them with resources developed and maintained by the crowd.
found via ResourceShelf
The Legal Technology blog on the Law.com website recently listed ten resources for free case law, detailing their respective strengths:
Get Your Free Case Law on the Web (link updated 2 Dec 2009)
found via ResourceShelf, crediting Law Librarian Blog
Eric Shonfeld at TechCrunch writes:
“Once again, the Internet is shifting before our eyes. Information is increasingly being distributed and presented in real-time streams instead of dedicated Web pages. The shift is palpable, even if it is only in its early stages.”
Twitter. RSS. Facebook. Digg. You-Name-It-Feed. It is becoming apparent that this is the next big shift in internet usage, and, as with the previous shifts, it is hard to guess what the effects will be, and who will be affected.
And this, like previous shifts, will not supplant previous internet use trends. HTML, or some form of it, will still be very dominant. Blogs and Wikis will continue to exist, and will be useful tools for certain types of communication and interaction. Integration will continue to be the norm, with the “now” infusing itself throughout. How will this change be considered dramatic?
“Traffic occurs in bursts, depending on what people are paying attention to at that second across a variety of services. Someone might notice an obscure blog post on Twitter, where it starts spreading, then it moves to FriendFeed and Facebook and desktop stream readers such as Tweetdeck or Seesmic desktop and before you know it, a hundred thousand people are reading that article. The stream creates a different form of syndication which cannot be licensed and cannot be controlled.”
This “cannot be licensed and cannot be controlled.” Think about this. How much of your web presence is based on control: control of layout, content, contributors, and most of all, control over the rate at which change occurs? For a library web site, how much of this control is able to be ceded before the concept of a library web site itself changes, without controls?
As with many future technology issues, now is the time to begin thinking, discussing, understanding all of this. We cannot begin the process of deciding or planning, because none of us can predict how this will play out. What will we have in place to deal with this, to anticipate this, to harness this? One benefit of this process will be the inevitable inspiration that some will have about the potential of streams; a future must-have library web site technology might come from this.
Start thinking!
Cory Doctorow has an interesting take on the differing attitude of copyright between those who wish to wish to honor a creative work and those who wish to diminish it. An excerpt:
“The upshot of this is that you’re on much more solid ground if you want to quote or otherwise reference a work for the purposes of rubbishing it than if you are doing so to celebrate it. This is one of the most perverse elements of copyright law: the reality that loving something doesn’t confer any right to make it a part of your creative life.”
An added bonus is a reference to a Firefly-based fan fiction that I hadn’t encountered before, titled My Own Kind of Freedom.
found via Library Link of the Day (16 May 2009)
Wolfram|Alpha is a new type of internet resource that has just gone “live”. Many are calling it a new type of “search engine”, which it technically is, but it isn’t a search engine in the way we are used to envisioning one. Others are calling it an “answer engine”, which isn’t a bad description. Wolfram takes the user’s query and builds a response from a variety of resources that resembles what one might get from an almanac or or encyclopedic resource. Wolfram’s own “about” page avoids any particular label.
Right now it has a relatively limited set of resources. It does well with towns, states, people, movies, word definitions and many scientific questions in the areas of mathematics and chemistry (which is understandable considering that it was built using Mathematica as the foundation. It doesn’t do well with music, books, television shows, and abstract concepts. Much of this has to do with the data sets and methodology that is in place, and I expect to see much greater depth and breadth represented as time goes on.
I have spent a bit of time last night and this afternoon playing with it, and am fairly impressed. Try a few queries, and be sure to view the “Source Information” link at the bottom of the results. This provides a fairly generic listing of the resources used for that type of query. Not all of the sources were necessarily used for your particluar query, but were the sources from which the data was extracted. One can see that with the addition of additional resources, Wolfram could become powerful first step for research.
Some sample queries:
and it doesn’t know quite how to handle leading articles, either:
This is going to be a great reference; it needs time to mature and for additional data sets to be included. This is certainly one place where the use of library cataloging information would be very, very beneficial. Imagine being able to connect the dots between books, authors, publication dates, settings/locales, etc. and other data sets.
There are many sources of data that are mostly silos waiting to be tapped, Infochimps.org being one example. How quickly and effectively they are able to incorporate useful data will partly determine how successful this resource becomes. Improving their context recognition (i.e. figuring out what a person wants to know based on their typed input) is the other, perhaps harder, challenge.
Other sources of commentary and information:
In closing, I like their nod to 2001, A Space Odyssey in their load exceeded error screen:
I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that...
Saw a post on TechCrunch that indicated that Amazon has opened their offerings of blog subscriptions for the Kindle reader to all blogs that sign up. So now Libology is available to readers of the Kindle… with two caveats:
So really, if you don’t feel the need to pay to read this stuff, don’t. Keep reading this stuff for free, though. And if you are philosophically inclined (or reclined) against my getting paid, then, again, don’t.
Seriously, if you are really into the Kindle, and find the blog-perusing experience to be great, then I am glad to provide Libology as an option, just as I have provided a mobile-browser friendly version. They do offer a 14-day trial if you want an excuse to try it out. Just don’t feel guilty about canceling… I understand, trust me!
6 Small Things You Can Do When You Lack Discipline is a post on the zenhabits blog which addresses the stress we go through as we try to accomplish projects and achieve goals.
I like that he stresses that discipline is an illusion; what we need to focus on instead is motivation.
The only thing I might add to this would be that we often times set ourselves up for failure in our projects and goals. Evaluating what we truly want, what can realistically achieve with the resources we have (time, money, energy, etc.), and what is actually worth doing can make all the difference.
found via Journey of a Kitten
The International Coalition of Library Consortia (ICOLC) has weighed in on OCLC’s proposed policy changes. Of note:
“The proposed policy appears to freeze OCLC’s role in the library community based on historical and current relationships. We share the concern, voiced by many, that the policy hinders rather than encourages innovation, and we urge the Review Board to carefully examine this issue. It is unclear that the policy has been constructed with a focus on an evolving role of OCLC in enhancing the missions of an international library community with diverse and complex interests.”
This may not seem like a strongly worded statement, but take a look at the list of consortia behind the statement (located at the bottom of the statement, linked above). Is your library, or geographic region, represented by one or more of these? Based on the consortia I recognize, this statement has thousands of libraries behind it.
“Speak softly and carry a big stick, you shall go far”, Theodore Roosevelt’s iconic statement, applies very well to this statement.
My own addition to the current state of events is that the broad-based library community needs to be strongly involved with the record use policy, especially now that OCLC has solidly entered the ILS arena with their new WorldCat functionality. If they are able to use access and use of the records as a way to encourage/coerce/retain customers, they likely someday will. It makes good business sense, even if it is lousy public relations.
Further reading:
Shane Fitzgerald, a Sociology student at University College in Dublin, Ireland (not Ohio), performed an experiment in March in which he placed several fake quotes about death in the Wikipedia entry for Maurice Jarre, who had just died, including this one:
“When I die there will be a final waltz playing in my head and that only I can hear.”
His intention was to see how the fake, but seemingly relevant, information would be used on the internet. He expected it to be picked up by blogs and social networks, and wanted to see how far it would go.
To his surprise, the quotes were picked up by the major media, and appeared in many publications considered far more authoritative than Wikipedia. Fitzgerald notified many of the media outlets of the experiment, and many have issued corrections, including the Guardian. To his additional surprise, however, many have not issued corrections.
For most library people, there is a healthy respect for Wikipedia. It is a powerful tool, one that can save time and effort in research, and can answer many questions for which we do not require a high level of authority. One does need to understand how far the information is to be trusted. We see quite a few people who scorn any reliance on Wikipedia, some even in the library world (who should know better). One would expect that journalists would have at least the same level of skepticism.
Today I present a modified version of a (hopefully properly remembered) Japanese saying. The original, which refers to Fugu, a delicacy made from a toxin-containing pufferfish, is, to my memory:
Those who eat fugu are stupid. But those who don’t eat fugo are also stupid.
My version of this quote is:
Those who rely on Wikipedia are foolish. But those who don’t rely on Wikipedia are also foolish.
found through ResourceShelf
Was the Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine incident an isolated case, or is it the first of several Elsevier journals that only appear to be legit?
Michael Hansen, CEO Of Elsevier’s Health Sciences Division, issued a statement today that suggests that a division of the company may have created the bogus journal without the knowledge of the top levels of the company:
It has recently come to my attention that from 2000 to 2005, our Australia office published a series of sponsored article compilation publications, on behalf of pharmaceutical clients, that were made to look like journals and lacked the proper disclosures. This was an unacceptable practice, and we regret that it took place.
We are currently conducting an internal review but believe this was an isolated practice from a past period in time. It does not reflect the way we operate today. The individuals involved in the project have long since left the company. I have affirmed our business practices as they relate to what defines a journal and the proper use of disclosure language with our employees to ensure this does not happen again.
Note that this statement uses the phrase “published a series of sponsored article compilation publications”. Some sleuthing by Jonathan Rochkind and Bill Hooker indicates that Excerpta Medica, a subsidiary of Elsevier, might have published quite a few of these sponsored-yet-unacknowledged journals.
My own poking around Excerpta Medica’s website with Google has produced an interesting Pdf titled Best practices for managing publications through a drug’s lifecycle and balancing scientific rigour and credibility with commercial goals. The document is a summary of a presentation given at by Hester Kuipers, who at the time was Program Director, Medical Communications for Exerpta Medica. Here is a brief quote:
Scientific publications in peer-reviewed medical journals are a valuable and credible vehicle to support a medical marketing strategy. Though part of most marketing plans, publications are not a promotional activity, but rather a medical one. The relationship between scientific publications and marketing messages can best be described as the first supporting the second rather than the second driving the first.
The presentation makes it clear that the research must have primacy over the promotion; hopefully the “series of sponsored article compilation publications” turns out to be the exception and not the rule for Exerpta Medica. Elsevier should investigate this thoroughly and publicly acknowledge the extent of the deception; the credibility of each and every one of their peer-reviewed journals is at stake.
some links found via ResourceShelf and through postings on the Cooperative Information Resources Managemnt (CIRM) list
Peter Murray has an incredibly good selection of links about the Google Book Search Settlement on the Disruptive Library Technology Jester blog. Really. Spend some time perusing them.
Ever hear of the Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine? Sounds official, as well as medically specific. Did you know it was published by Elsevier? That is is Peer Reviewed? And that it published an article on the effectiveness of Fosamax?
I worked in a pharmacy for eight years; I have seen first-hand the differences between the drug manufacturer’s publicity and the actual usefulness of medicines. I am not too surprised that someone at Merck did this (though not as surprised as I will be if the FDA doesn’t lift a finger to make it clear that this level of deception is unacceptable), but am a little surprised that Elsevier went along (though maybe not too surprised (here, too)).
This is a horrible situation, and library organizations should be demanding that Elsevier establish the bona fides of the journals we pay for, and that our patrons use for their research. Sure, we can probably trust that the big-name journals are what they say they are, but there are hundreds of obscure journals, with titles sounding just as official as the fake one, that we cannot know for sure who they represent, and how they conduct their research, without a great deal of research. Elsevier needs to salvage their credibility, and soon.
found via Bibliographic Wilderness
Freecycle is a site which organizes regional groups of people and organizations around the idea of reusing items rather than throwing them away. This idea is similar to the various discards listservs, as well as CraigsList’s free section.
When you sign up, you are actually joining a Yahoo Group in which people will post what they have for others to take and use, as well as post for wanted items. I am surprised that this has not been tried on such a large scale before; it is a natural use for social networking.
found via Walt at Random
This post will contain just a couple of links, but there is a wealth of information on the other end of each:
I suspect that Swine Flu is likely to be a common research question for reference departments around the world during the foreseeable future. I have had an interest in the 1918 influenza epidemic pandemic for several years, and have spent some time this weekend keeping an eye on various resources.
Several good places to start:
Recognize that there will be a great deal of information pouring through various media, much of it guesswork and possibly incorrect. Remember that the greatest strength of libraries is our offering not only unfettered access to information, but assisting users in using that information critically.
To illustrate this, I am also linking to one of the best articles I have read on the 1918 influenza pandemic, easily the worst outbreak in modern history: The Site of origin of the 1918 influenza pandemic and its public health implications. It details research into the origins of the outbreak, and makes a very strong case for the original location. Note, however, that even though this was published over five years ago, most histories (including the Wikipedia link earlier in this paragraph) either ignore it or continue with various misconceptions based on incomplete research.
The lesson: encourage thoroughness and critical thinking in research, and recognize that many can and do get it wrong (but many can and do get it right, as well).
A brief rant, if you will accomodate me for a moment:
I encountered a disclaimer in an e-mail that strikes me as extreme enough to mention:
This email, and any attachment, is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, copying, dissemination or other use of this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited.
This came as part of a response from a company I had asked about the availability of an item. Note that, by a strict interpretation of the statement, only the specific recipient of the message can use the information contained within. If the e-mail had been from the company’s legal department, or if it hadn’t been about a product with a great deal of publicity and interest, there might have been some justification.
I know that legal boilerplate such as this seems to go along with incorporation, and that many of the employees of this company must stifle a groan every time they send information on their products, but these statements can be worded in such a way that they don’t throw a giant blanket of silence over simple sale information. Or, perhaps, the statement can be reserved for those departments that handle legal, fiscal, and personnel matters, and a “lighter” disclaimer be used for general public communication.
This is something that falls into the same general category as Copyfraud, in that it attempts to place a much stronger restriction on something that doesn’t legally deserve it.
Or am I supposed to take the information about whether a particular item is available for sale to the grave?
My own disclaimer: I changed the language of the disclaimer a tad, even though a quick internet search revealed several companies using the same wording as the e-mail.
In its continuing examination of library blogs, HotStuff 2.0 has added a visualization of emotional content.
Here is the current visualization for Libology:
How to read the information, from HotStuff’s description:
- The overall scatter of words in the ANEW list are shown as small blue dots. This is shown simply as a guide to indicate the overall shape (as per the previous image that resembled the map of Australia).
- The average emotional content of each blog post is shown as a small green cross. This is a calculated by looking for all occurrences of ANEW words in the blog post. The average position is then calculated. Therefore, if a blog post contained lots of strongly negative content, you would expect the green cross to be towards the bottom-left.
- The average emotional content of all the blog posts is shown as a larger red cross. This is calculated as before, but is the average for all of the content on the blog. Therefore, if a blog contained lots of posts with strongly positive content, you would expect the red cross to be towards the bottom-right.
- Word usage frequency is indicated by the transparent circles. This gives an indication of the type of words being used on the blog. Larger circles indicate that words with the same pleasure & arousal values have been used more frequently.
The red X falls in the Neutral Pleasure, Medium Arousal section, but definitely far enough towards the right to suggest that there is Positive Pleasure at work as well. This seems about right, as I don’t tend to go negative all that often (and when I do I try to remain constructive), and my writing voice tends to be more formal, leading to a Neutral/Medium tone.
I haven’t seen anything on the HotStuff site that makes me feel that there is a grand truth in their categorization of various library blogs, but they are doing some really interesting experiments that provide glimpses of what is there. I recommend checking out their listings for the library blogs that you follow.
And the title of this post? Well, I had my Myers-Briggs Type – INFP – as my automobile’s license plate for several years, so this seemed to be the way to go.
found through Walt at Random
Publisher Confidential is a creation by the Unshelved crew that strives to convey to publishers what libraries wish they would know. It consists of brief statements illustrated with the familiar Mallville Public Library staff. The booklet is being distributed to the BookExpo America (BEA) mailing list, so a lot of publisher’s representative will see it and hopefully take heed.
Some of the selections I especially like upon first reading:
There are many more… and all are worth reading.
via the Unshelved Blog
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Libology Blog
Established July 2006
ISSN: 1946-1852
by Rick Mason
