One of the cool things about librariness is that one can connect just about any topic to it. Take for example, this article from Wired Newsabout the uses of technology in baseball. As much as I am interested in technology, I am wary of gratuitous uses of such. I think the Wired article touches a nerve for me because knowing what technology will make our sport better is difficult. Are federated searches like computerized strike zones? In making accessing resources easier, are we taking away some of the individual choices that can differentiate one research paper from another? Of course, the trade off is that we also rescue those who might be making poor choices. Of course, there are no easy answers and I am actually a supported of federated searches, but as more and more technology comes our way, making the decision as to which adopt becomes more difficult. Bus as long as Bud Selig isn't president of ALA, I think we're safe.
And as The Industrial Librarian entertainingly points out, there's seems to be an unprecedented emphasis in recent years on understanding our patrons:
…and now for my tongue-in-cheek bitter rant:
Millenials, Millenials, Millenials….it seems to be up there with Library 2.0, blogs, wikis and Google as one the top 5 topics of this conference. Nothing wrong with trying to better understand your patrons (granted, I've still got a few years before they start hitting the workforce), but here's my question: Did librarians 20 years ago ever meet at conferences and discuss how to better meet the needs of us Gen Xers? I have my doubts, because if they did, the idea of introducing gaming in libraries would not be a radically new idea in 2006. Remember, it was our generation that grew up on Pong, Space Invaders and Donkey Kong. Where were the game nights when I was that age?
As a fellow Gen Xer, I've wondered the same thing.
