Both academic and public librarians just need to understand where and how the provide value to their customers:
Travel Agents: They once thought their only value was to enable access to the back-end ticketing and booking systems for air, hotel and car rental. Wrong.
Real Estate Agents: Once thought that their only value was providing access to listing databases to help clients search for homes that are on the market. Wrong.
Librarians: Need to think hard about where they can continue to provide value in a world where the access costs to books and other media is shrinking. A librarian who thinks that their only role is providing access to expensive books, they are on a path to extinction.
Services like children's reading programs, puppet shows, and yes - free internet access for low income users - are all part of that value chain. The migration path librarians is all about focusing on where they add real value.
I'm sure there are some smarties in that bunch who'll figure it out.
If you want to gauge just how obsolete libraries have become in your community, try this experiment:
Show up at the next city council meeting and demand that all library funding be withheld on the grounds that they have been rendered obsolete. Just remember to wear a bullet-proof vest when you do.
Although people like me and you may not have set foot in a library since we were children, they are still seen as very useful and cost-effective (in terms of return on educational investment over the long term) resources in many communities.
You may not care, but there are certain aspects to the content available on the WSJ.com that are either mildly scarce or at least hard to find from other sources. That is why WSJ.com is one of the rare news sites that has a reasonably sized subscriber base.
For people who live/breath within the financial and investment communities, the WSJ.com does have unique value. It is the casual WSJ.com visitors (you, me) who are not part of the close-knit community that Murdoch is apparently willing to lose.
When you state that "the lending is pretty limited", in what sense did you mean that?
From what I can tell, their lending implementation is better than what can be done in the world of paper-books in at least one aspect: When you lend the book to a friend, you still retain a copy that you're able to read. Hard to do with a paper-book.
Demanding that the devices and the BN.com bookstore be completely DRM-free sounds to me like a totally unreasonable demand. DRM is not, be definition, pure evil IMO. The support for ePub means millions of public domain books from multiple sources can be read, which is really quite amazing, IMO.
In general, this looks like a strong step in a good direction. I'm still a big user of audio books/audible.com, but if and when I do return to the printed word, it will most likely be in eBook form.
Although I will admit that the flow is not yet a flood, the sales figures cited by Amazon for the Kindle do support the claim that there are people out there that are very convinced.
I predict that it is largely a matter of time and refinement before paper-based books eventually fade away. It may take 2-3 decades, but the advantages are clear albeit not very cost competitive at this moment in time. But costs of the devices will start to drop sharply as competition increases (already seeing this) and usage increases (already seeing this too).
I think this is the third time you've raved about this one (if you include Twitter) - so I figured it just had to be the most amazing thing since sliced bread.
Heck yeah! Being smart and careful is just as effective as an AV package in most cases, and has a much smaller memory and performance impact on your PC.
Spent 10 days in and around the Paris city center, and in all that time managed to only find a single free (with password, obtained from staff, and only if you knew to ask for it) Wi-Fi network. Everything else was pay-only and locked down.
And interestingly, the % of Parisians at coffee shops with their laptops was at least an order of magnitude lower vs. the US. Laptopping over coffee is just not part of the culture, which probably keeps demand for free Wi-Fi below the threshold of most business owners.
This feels to me a bit like a tragedy of the commons situation: As long as reasonable quality investigative journalism is available for free, most people will avail themselves of that free resource. If that business model is in fact unsustainable, the providers of it will eventually fold. Over time, that unlimited free resource will become limited, thereby forcing the free-loaders to either:
1. Pay for the product they once obtained for free.
2. Find a new source that is still free
3. Go without the product
My feeling is that the market for investigative journalism needs another 3-5 years to reach a new level of homeostasis. In that time, we'll see plenty of death and rebirth.
The right bet to make would be that by then end of their year of charging, they will either have reverted to free or declared bankruptcy.
And I hope to see others take the Google challenge: Put up the Robots.txt blockade, and just see what happens. That should be good for some laughs too.
It appears as though Microsoft has acknowledged that in matters of software, using IP to prevent competition (or even mimicry) is a losing proposition. So they went ahead and changed their license agreement to specifically allow free and open-source implementations of their CLI and C# development tools.
But in other parts of the industry, threats of lawsuits against open source projects have been occurring for the last 4-5 years, IIRC.
This was a surprise indeed. CA needs all the business-friendly policies it can get right now, and this is a good step in that direction.
Heck, the combination of Amazon Prime (essentially free shipping) and no physical presence in the state (no sales tax) is what makes Amazon.com such an amazingly good deal for CA shoppers.
There is certainly some of that in every crowd. One solution that I like and have seen implemented elsewhere:
Charge reasonable fees for the ability to participate in the conversation, making it a premium service.
It can still be pseudo-anonymous (site visitors may not know who you are, while site operators do), but by charging a fee for what the users value - the feeling that they are interacting with the author n a meaningful way - you only get comments from people who are willing to put their money where there opinions lie.
RSS
Twitter
Re: Brilliant (as Jason Buberel)
Both academic and public librarians just need to understand where and how the provide value to their customers:
Travel Agents: They once thought their only value was to enable access to the back-end ticketing and booking systems for air, hotel and car rental. Wrong.
Real Estate Agents: Once thought that their only value was providing access to listing databases to help clients search for homes that are on the market. Wrong.
Librarians: Need to think hard about where they can continue to provide value in a world where the access costs to books and other media is shrinking. A librarian who thinks that their only role is providing access to expensive books, they are on a path to extinction.
Services like children's reading programs, puppet shows, and yes - free internet access for low income users - are all part of that value chain. The migration path librarians is all about focusing on where they add real value.
I'm sure there are some smarties in that bunch who'll figure it out.
Re: Re: Re: libraries obsolete = librarians obsolete (as Jason Buberel)
Lisa,
If you want to gauge just how obsolete libraries have become in your community, try this experiment:
Show up at the next city council meeting and demand that all library funding be withheld on the grounds that they have been rendered obsolete. Just remember to wear a bullet-proof vest when you do.
Although people like me and you may not have set foot in a library since we were children, they are still seen as very useful and cost-effective (in terms of return on educational investment over the long term) resources in many communities.
Re: You may not... (as Jason Buberel)
Overcast-
You may not care, but there are certain aspects to the content available on the WSJ.com that are either mildly scarce or at least hard to find from other sources. That is why WSJ.com is one of the rare news sites that has a reasonably sized subscriber base.
For people who live/breath within the financial and investment communities, the WSJ.com does have unique value. It is the casual WSJ.com visitors (you, me) who are not part of the close-knit community that Murdoch is apparently willing to lose.
I for one can't wait until he makes his move.
Is the lending really all that "limited"? (as Jason Buberel)
When you state that "the lending is pretty limited", in what sense did you mean that?
From what I can tell, their lending implementation is better than what can be done in the world of paper-books in at least one aspect: When you lend the book to a friend, you still retain a copy that you're able to read. Hard to do with a paper-book.
Demanding that the devices and the BN.com bookstore be completely DRM-free sounds to me like a totally unreasonable demand. DRM is not, be definition, pure evil IMO. The support for ePub means millions of public domain books from multiple sources can be read, which is really quite amazing, IMO.
In general, this looks like a strong step in a good direction. I'm still a big user of audio books/audible.com, but if and when I do return to the printed word, it will most likely be in eBook form.
Re: well, there are those who do... (as Jason Buberel)
Although I will admit that the flow is not yet a flood, the sales figures cited by Amazon for the Kindle do support the claim that there are people out there that are very convinced.
I predict that it is largely a matter of time and refinement before paper-based books eventually fade away. It may take 2-3 decades, but the advantages are clear albeit not very cost competitive at this moment in time. But costs of the devices will start to drop sharply as competition increases (already seeing this) and usage increases (already seeing this too).
Enough already - just bought my tix for Oct 10th matinee (as Jason Buberel)
I think this is the third time you've raved about this one (if you include Twitter) - so I figured it just had to be the most amazing thing since sliced bread.
I hope you're happy now!
Re: That would be copyright infringement.... (as Jason Buberel)
I would think that standard damages for copyright infringement would apply - regardless of whether the original content had been behind a paywall.
Another challenge I wish they would accept (as Jason Buberel)
A while back, in response to critics within the newspaper industry, Google threw down the gauntlet w.r.t. Google News:
Original Post on Google Blog: Google says use robots.txt
Use robots.txt to block the Google Crawler, and we promise to never refer traffic to you ever again! Has anyone taken the challenge? Dare they?
Re: Re: (as Jason Buberel)
Heck yeah! Being smart and careful is just as effective as an AV package in most cases, and has a much smaller memory and performance impact on your PC.
But Paris, France seems to be lagging (as Jason Buberel)
Spent 10 days in and around the Paris city center, and in all that time managed to only find a single free (with password, obtained from staff, and only if you knew to ask for it) Wi-Fi network. Everything else was pay-only and locked down.
And interestingly, the % of Parisians at coffee shops with their laptops was at least an order of magnitude lower vs. the US. Laptopping over coffee is just not part of the culture, which probably keeps demand for free Wi-Fi below the threshold of most business owners.
When the tragic commons is exhausted (as Jason Buberel)
This feels to me a bit like a tragedy of the commons situation: As long as reasonable quality investigative journalism is available for free, most people will avail themselves of that free resource. If that business model is in fact unsustainable, the providers of it will eventually fold. Over time, that unlimited free resource will become limited, thereby forcing the free-loaders to either:
1. Pay for the product they once obtained for free.
2. Find a new source that is still free
3. Go without the product
My feeling is that the market for investigative journalism needs another 3-5 years to reach a new level of homeostasis. In that time, we'll see plenty of death and rebirth.
Re: (as Jason Buberel)
The content partners are the people who signed the contracts that made Hulu possible. Get over it. Someone owns the content, Hulu just broadcasts it.
Re: (as Jason Buberel)
They are for-profit entities acting in their own self interest, which is what their executives are legally obligated to do.
Re: Good point (as Jason Buberel)
The right bet to make would be that by then end of their year of charging, they will either have reverted to free or declared bankruptcy.
And I hope to see others take the Google challenge: Put up the Robots.txt blockade, and just see what happens. That should be good for some laughs too.
Re: The new business model (as Jason Buberel)
It is funny that you should mention this possibility today:
http://www.itwire.com/content/view/26117/1090/
It appears as though Microsoft has acknowledged that in matters of software, using IP to prevent competition (or even mimicry) is a losing proposition. So they went ahead and changed their license agreement to specifically allow free and open-source implementations of their CLI and C# development tools.
But in other parts of the industry, threats of lawsuits against open source projects have been occurring for the last 4-5 years, IIRC.
Hurrah for CA! (as Jason Buberel)
This was a surprise indeed. CA needs all the business-friendly policies it can get right now, and this is a good step in that direction.
Heck, the combination of Amazon Prime (essentially free shipping) and no physical presence in the state (no sales tax) is what makes Amazon.com such an amazingly good deal for CA shoppers.
The next time somone makes this mistake... (as Jason Buberel)
...simply ask them how much they paid for their Google-related services last month.
Then ask them whether or not they think Google has a business model.
Re: Making it conversational (as Jason Buberel)
I agree that most news 'discussion' platforms do not do enough to make conversations:
1. Easy to follow.
2. Simple to participate in.
3. Structured enough to be coherent.
However, I do think that there are technical solutions to many of those problems. Features such as
- auto notify me of replies to this thread
- well designed conversation visualization tools
- real-time 'reply posted' notifications, as in Gmail
Tools such as these make it much more satisfying to actually engage in longer more fulfilling discussions.
Re: Moronic, stupid, ignorant (as Jason Buberel)
There is certainly some of that in every crowd. One solution that I like and have seen implemented elsewhere:
Charge reasonable fees for the ability to participate in the conversation, making it a premium service.
It can still be pseudo-anonymous (site visitors may not know who you are, while site operators do), but by charging a fee for what the users value - the feeling that they are interacting with the author n a meaningful way - you only get comments from people who are willing to put their money where there opinions lie.
For some background on the author (as Jason Buberel)
Here is his Stanford faculty page:
http://communication.stanford.edu/faculty/brinkley.html