Personal perspectives on information science, the evolving Internet, delivery of public services online, Web 2.0, the Web of Data, the Semantic Web, communities, folksonomies and more. With an emphasis upon convergence between some or all of the above, and a UK slant.
One of the most frustrating things about podcasts, especially thelongones, is that it's hard to capture or cite interesting things that people say.
Listening, as I tend to, in the car just makes it worse. I'll listen to several podcasts in the two hour (3-4 if you hit the motorway at the wrong time) journey to and from work. With most of them, that's fine. They're vaguely interesting, and some ideas lodge in my brain that may pop back up later.
For some, though, I really want to grab numbers, or an exact quote, and end up having to remember which podcast the quotable snippet was in, so that I can listen again when I'm not driving in order to capture it.
In these cases, it would besouseful to have a searchable transcript.
“I asked [Steve] if he thought there was a business to be built around transcribing podcasts for publishers. The transcribing can be outsourced for about $10 an hour and can be turned around quite quickly. With an appropriate markup, it would still be quite reasonable to publishers.
His answer 'Why would I transcribe my podcasts? People would stop listening.' I disagreed, arguing that he would increase his audience many times. His retort 'But they wouldn’t be listening to my podcast.' I thought about it for a while. And as often is the case with Mr. Gillmor, I realized that in a round about way, he’s right. If podcasters just wanted to maximize their audience, they’d be writing, not talking.
I still think there is a business there. But Steve won’t be a customer.”
I agree with Michael. Thereisa business. I don't want to sit andreadpodcasts, though. I do, however, want to be able to find the gems that I heard peoplesayin them, and transcription may be part of the answer to that.
We're looking at various solutions forTalking with Talis. The whole point of the conversations we're podcasting is that they're of a calibre that you'd often travel a very long way to hear at an expensive conference. If we're capturing thought and dialogue of that quality, we need to find ways to unlock it from the 20-40 minute audio stream.
As you've probably worked out by now, I think that theGoogle Libraryproject is A Good Thing on the whole, and my non-legal view would be to suggest that those bringing the recent lawsuits don't have much basis for their suit. And if they do, the law is just plain wrong.
How, exactly, can someone with an interest in more than just maintaining thestatus quoconsider it a bad thing to have the hidden content of often obscure books found, and to have the finder directed to either borrow the book from a library or buy it from a book seller before they can see any more than the immediate area in which their search term occurs?
I've been following various discussions on both sides of this issue, but foundthe recent postby Intellectual Property lawyerDenise Howellcomprehensive, balanced, and informative.
Check it out, and be pleased that it makes sense without a law degree.
Oh, and if anyone has acompellingexplanation as to why these litigious dinosaurs might have a point, I reallywouldlove to hear it.
Our new community-supporting activity,Talking with Talis,went live today, and if the interest I've been seeing from potential speakers is anything to go by, it's going to build into a great resource.
Our first conversation, withsxip Identity's Founder and CEO, Dick Hardt, is a good one, and explores some of theIdentity 2.0 themesthat went down so well at the recentWeb 2.0conference in a little more detail.
Have a listen, online or after downloading, feed your commentsback to meand come back in a fortnight for Cliff Lynch, then each fortnight thereafter for more of the same.
...and thengoes on to announceways in which RLG are engaging. This isexactlythe sort of thing that should be done with our big databases of bibliographic data; open them up, and use them to empower the efforts of others.
“The main means of access [to the Internet] was via a desktop computer (93 per cent) followed by a laptop (31 per cent) andmobile phone(15 per cent).” [my emphasis]
15% of UK adults use a mobile phone to get online? A year ago, theCIEhadfiguresfromMORIto suggest that 8% used mobile devices such as phones, and that 3% considered such a device to be their preferred means of access. At the time I said that would rise, but I don't think even I would have foreseen a doubling in the numbers in just twelve months.
Again, then, what does this mean for our clunky Virtual Learning Environments and library interfaces? If you haven't done so, find someone with a suitably equipped mobile phone and take a look.
“Of those adults who had ever used the Internet, 91 per cent had used a search engine to find information, 81 per cent sent an email with an attachment, 23 per cent posted a message in a chat room or newsgroup, 17 per cent had used peer to peer file sharing, such as exchanging music and films and 13 per cent had created a web page.”
Likefiguresfrom thePewmore than a year ago, this clearly shows the rise ofparticipativerather thanpassiveuse of the Internet.
Writingin hisblog,IBM's Irving Wladawsky-Berger draws my attention to an important step they are taking today to support innovation and development in the fields of Health and Education.
“This week IBM is taking a major step toward ameliorating those IP concerns in the areas of health care and education by helping industry organizations in both areas develop the needed open standards and collaborative platforms. We are pledging open access to our entire present and future patent portfolio for specific standards initiatives around web services, open documents and electronic forms in the healthcare and education industries.”
Bob Sutor, VP of Standards and Open Source, has moredetails, and IBM's official page on all this ishere, along with lists of the included standards.
Flockis based upon the popularFirefoxbrowser, but adds a number of capabilities often mentioned in any discussion of 'Web 2.0'.
For example, it offers a basic blogging tool, integration with theFlickrphoto sharing service, and adel.icio.us-driven method of storing and sharing favourite sites that effectively replaces the standard browser's bookmark function.
These are all incremental improvements on the better browsers currently available, such as Firefox andSafari. I'm not sure it's a radical move forward (yet), though, and whilst it might replace my occasional uses of Firefox, I think I'll be sticking with Safari as my browser of choice for now.
For blogging,ectomeetsmyneeds better right now, and I still can't get comfortable with del.icio.us.
I'm not sure that the 'social' aspect of Web 2.0 isreallyadvanced by simply bolting these capabilities on top of a browser. To enable the conversation, something more fundamental is required, but I'm not yet sure what it will look like.
Still, Flock is a useful step forward, so take a look.
The extension, developed by staff atVirginia Tech'sNewman Library, gives members of acompatible librarythe ability to look up items associated with standard reference codes (such as ISBN's), locate the 'appropriate copy' of items returned byGoogle Scholar, and more, and seems to offer an alternative solution to some of the problems that we're also tackling at Talis.