Sept. 9 Required Readings: Computer Basics, Digitization

1. 1)  Vaughan, J. (2005). Lied Library @ four years: technology never stands
   still. Library Hi Tech, 23(1), 34-49.
   
        This article was a case study of the technology changes and up-keep in an academic library. I was impressed by how efficient the library and staff were at planning and executing swapping out every computer in what seemed to be a very busy library. But what really caught my attention was that 10% of computer time was used by the community- which I think it's great to allow the community access to the library resources but, in the case study, it became a problem for students when computer terminals would fill up.
        I wonder how the community members could use the computers? Wouldn't access require a log-in ID and password? And wouldn't such a log-in only be given to students and faculty. I understand that space and funds are limited- but if the library is going to allow community members access, then shouldn't there be an effort to provide enough computers so that users are not asked to sign off? If community members can use the computers then they should not be the first to be asked to sign off (as the case study explained). I don't think the library should allow access to "everyone" if "everyone" cannot be equally accommodated.
   
   2)  Doreen Carvajal. European libraries face problems in digitalizing. New York Times. October 28, 2007
   http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/28/technology/28iht-LIBRARY29.1.8079170.html 
   
      
        This was an interesting article that explained the ongoing attempts of many European countries combined and individual European libraries and museum to some-what follow in Googles footsteps by digitizing collections. The goal is to preserve the cultural heritage without  violating any copyright laws (as Google did). The governments of these countries have put a lot of money towards this project, but more is needed to accomplish the goal. These libraries and museums are now looking to private companies, like Google, to help fund the digitization project.
      When the goal is to preserve the heritage of an entire culture, who is responsible to pay the large amount of money to make it happen? Is digitization really the same thing as preservation? Should private companies be allowed to pay in to try to make a profit off a culture?
   
   3)  A Few Thoughts on the Google Books Library Project http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/few-thoughts-google-books- library-project
   
       I found the authors argument about how Google does not make books obsolete, but helps to preserve books. And of course Google is giving a second life to many books that have been out of print or would have otherwise been very difficult to gain access to. Google can make very strong arguments about all the good the Google Books project is doing for people, culture, and books. But is digitization really preserving anything? Technologies are always changing. What if Google goes out of business? All the books could be lost. And if someone finds away to ensure permanent online access and preservation to the Google books, are they really preserved when Google cannot properly catalog or index the books in an intelligent manner?