Here is the Quicktime of my presentation from last night to the Chattanooga Area Library Association on Web 2.0 and Library 2.0. While a small crowd, they were very interested in what we’re doing at MPOW to try and move ourselves into a more 2.0 mindset and process.
Thanks to Jessamyn, from whom I borrowed the kitty scared image and the general “Don’t fear the user” concept. I briefly considered just using her slideshow and talking over it, because she puts things together so well.
Warning: this is the full-size QT, so be warned.
Computers in Libraries 2007
Next week I’ll be heading out to Crystal City, VA to attend CiL 2007. It’s the first conference in many moons that I don’t have a presentation or other formal commitment to attend. This means, of course, that I have completely overbooked my time in sessions, because there is so damn much good stuff. Plus, I’ll get to catch up with lots of good friends.
But, if you are attending, and you want to catch up with me, take your pick as to calendar format:
BoingBoing reported today that the US Treasury Department has begun circulating a 250 page list of names of people who MIGHT BE related in some way to terrorism. Not that they are, or have been convicted, or charged with a crime or any of the things that due process might bring. Just a list of thousands of names (1955 names of individuals, by my count, but many more businesses) that, according to BoingBoing:
If your name could conceivably be bent to fit that list, get ready to spend a long, hard time convincing some terrified bureaucrat that you’re not actually Saddam Hussein’s deposed lieutenant, snuck into America to buy a Toyota.
As the Washington Post describes:
Yet anyone who does business with a person or group on the list risks penalties of up to $10 million and 10 to 30 years in prison, a powerful incentive for businesses to comply. The law’s scope is so broad and guidance so limited that some businesses would rather deny a transaction than risk criminal penalties, the report finds.
“The law is ridiculous,” said Tom Hudson, a lawyer in Hanover, Md., who advises car dealers to use the list to avoid penalties. “It prohibits anyone from doing business with anyone who’s on the list. It does not have a minimum dollar amount. . . . The local deli, if it sells a sandwich to someone whose name appears on the list, has violated the law.”
Bruce Schneier, as always, chimes in with some reason:
This is the same problem as the no-fly list, only in a larger context. And it’s no way to combat terrorism. Thankfully, many businesses don’t know to check this list and people whose names are similar to suspected terrorists’ can still lead mostly normal lives. But the trend here is not good.
Thankfully, the Treasury has put the list (dubbed in typical government jargon-talk as the Specially Designated Nationals list) online in multiple formats. So I grabbed it, and started looking. The list of individual names seemed odd to me as I started reading them, so I decided to do what I always do when I want to visualize a text list…off to TagCrowd!
This cloud is just the top 100 names of individuals from the SDN list…take the names, do a frequency count, rank the top 100, and size them according to number of times they appear.
So what do we notice here? The first thing I noticed was the overwhelming number of Spanish/Hispanic/Latino names, as compared to, oh….Iraqi. You know, the people with whom we are at war.
Anyone have any guesses as to why there are so many Hispanic names listed? After initially being boggled and outraged at the way the list is being used, now I’m just confused by the contents of it.
Lupton Library Ads
The last part of my day was spent whipping up a couple of newspaper ads for the Student newspaper here on campus, the Echo. Since I’m pretty happy with them, I thought I’d share:
The survey is for faculty and students here on campus, so don’t go running trying to win the iPod, gang. đŸ™‚
Google Ranking
Forgive the metablog post, but I was looking at some trackbacks and such, which led me down the road of Technorati, and then back to the mothership: Google.
I’m not sure how, but I made the first page of results for “Pattern Recognition” on Google, at least for now. Given that it’s a phrase that is not only the title of a bestselling book by one of my favorite authors, but is an entire academic field of study, I didn’t expect to be there.
But there I am.
While flying back from Detroit on Monday, I snapped this picture of the TSA security gate. I would have used a better camera, but of course I had that packed away so I wouldn’t have to put it in a bin. The phone captured the moment, though:
If you can’t make it out, here’s a closeup:
Yep…that’s a windows memory error screen on a TSA monitor. The irony of this knows no bounds.
Data visualization
Talk about cool data visualization! I’m delighted by interesting ways to present data, and this one is just great…it’s a video of housing prices from 1890 to present, graphed, and then turned into a rollercoaster. Yes, a rollercoaster.
DMCA Notice
Huh.
So I noted yesterday that I had attended Wrestlemania 23. I took a bunch of photos and a handful of video at the event, as cameras were allowed at the venue. In order to share the videos (two of them) I uploaded them to YouTube. The two videos were < 30 seconds long, and were taken from my seat, faaaaar up on the second level of the arena.
Not 12 hours later, I recieved a DMCA takedown notice for them.
My question now is: are they actually a violation of copyright? I'm not certain...I checked the back of my ticket for a contract notice, and found this gem:
"By using this ticket, the ticket holder agrees that he or she will not directly or indirectly transmit or aid in transmitting any picture, account or description (whether text, data, or visual) in any media now or hereafter existing of all or any part of the football game or related events."
I didn't see a football game, nor any events related to one...but I suppose there is an argument that this is a general prohibition for "events at Ford Field." But that is not what it says. As well, as I read it, that agreement prohibits everything...even talking about the game afterwards with your friends. As I noted, cameras were allowed at Wrestlemania...they even sold cameras at the merch tables. So clearly that can't be the case for still pictures.
There is also the warning they broadcast inside the venue before the show...which I didn't see. We didn't arrive until a bit after the first match, so I missed it. However, there's a photo on flickr:
But that is the warning that is intended for the viewers-at-home so to speak…and again, they clearly allowed for photography within the arena.
So, copyright peeps: did YouTube (and thus Google) jump the gun on this? I think they did, and my inclination is to send a counter-notice to them. What say you all?
Firefox/OSX/Flash problem
Just a question for the intertubes: is anyone else having problems with Firefox and Flash on OSX? I’m having this REALLY weird issue where flash content (Youtube, blog badges, etc) doesn’t display except when it is near the top/bottom of the Firefox window. Yes, you read that right…if the content overlaps the bottom/top edge, it displays. Get off the edge, and it doesn’t display (the content just goes invisible, it doesn’t un-render or anything, just goes away/becomes invisible).
WTF?
Wrestlemania 23
I am so outing myself right now.
Hi…my name is Jason, and I watch professional wrestling.
Not only do I watch pro wrestling, but I have for years. I even do some work for a company that makes the WWE Collectible Card Game. I realize this ups my geek-score into the stratusphere, but I can no longer commit this lie of omission to you, my readers.
So, I spent this last weekend helping to run the 6th World Championship of Raw Deal, and then went to Wrestlemania 23 on Sunday, April 1. Had a phenomenal time, got to see a ton of friends I only see once or twice a year, but am now so far behind I can barely see the horizon.
If there’s radio silence the rest of the week, that’s why. In the meantime, enjoy this wonderful youtube video.