A happy place for all the sarcastic displaced kiwi's of the world.
Monday, December 17, 2007
del.icio.us ReduxSome time back I discussed how the social bookmarking site del.icio.us has proven to be the best way to remember stuff found online. Saving a site is as easy as clicking on a "save to del.icio.us" toolbar link. Up pops a little window with the current website URL and after adding a few tags relevant to the particular content, the address is saved to your del.icio.us account. Finding it again is as easy as connecting to your del.icio.us account and searching for one of the tags.
The beauty of this approach is that all your saved bookmarks are freed from your computer and accessible anywhere you happen to be, along with being fully searchable. A huge additional side-benefit is that sharing "favourite sites" with friends and colleagues is as simple as including their del.icio.us username as a tag. The next time they visit del.icio.us they will see your recommendations and they get the opportunity to add them to their own account. Believe me, this approach is much easier than copying the address to an e-mail, composing a message and sending it out several times each day.
Online data guru Jon Udell shares some insights into why he thinks del.icio.us has (so far) failed to find a broader audience despite its purchase by Yahoo in late 2006.
The Firefox browser has integrated del.icio.us functionality directly into the browser. This allows saved del.icio.us bookmarks to be accessed as easily as if they had been saved as traditional bookmarks. A Facebook addon application allows your "public" bookmarks to automagically be included in your Facebook Profile. Because new additions and updates are reflected as well, you never have to worry about maintaining shared lists.
If you aren't using del.icio.us already, you should consider doing so.
Share on Facebook
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Onward and Upward with the Arts: Digitization and its discontentsI have a personal dream, that is, to digitize my life. Words, images and audio video of everything surrounding myself and my family. At first glance it seems doable, I have copies of almost every letter I've written and received. Copies of over 28 years of writing, fanzines, articles, books, pithy little letters of comment to other publications are all filed away in semi-archival states. Photos and videos I've taken and those of my parents are faithfully stored away and are close to being digitally scanned. I think I crossed the 50% mark recently. I also have kept cassette and video tapes of nearly every appearance I have made on the radio or on TV. Lots of embarrassing moments preserved for all posterity. Finding film and video remnants of the rest of my family is proving more difficult. Apparently I'm the only person (so far) interested in preserving this stuff.
A few years back I started cataloguing and sorting all my father's and late mother's possessions prior to him moving into a retirement home. This provided a clear insight into where I had acquired my habits from. My mother and father had kept over 50 years worth of family correspondence, including their letters of courtship and my father's professional letters of reference from the mid-nineteen 30's. Combined with my deceased grandparents saved letters from our family I had both sides of a 25 year conversation after my parents immigrated from London in the mid 60's to distant New Zealand.
This veritable treasure trove of detail into the smallest details of my family's life is invaluable in supplementing my patchy (and growing patchier) memory. And there's the rub of this digital desire, is it better to recollect the past through direct memories? Or to replace and layer on top the actual as-it-happened detail from these easily accessed digital records? As the onset of my late father's Alzheimer's made painfully clear, a memory backup is always useful.
In an exhaustive review of the history of libraries and the rise of aids to quickly locating items stored within them, the New Yorker tackles the issue of the joys of handling (and smelling) original books versus - some would say, the sterile environment of an always reachable digital library containing everything ever published.
Putting aside the obvious benefits of bringing literacy and knowledge to the poorest parts of the world without access to libraries, there's some merit to the argument of maybe rethinking some parts of say Google's desire to scan and digitize the world's knowledge. However on balance I say scan, scan, scan and sort out the aesthetics of interacting with digital materials later. There's always scratch and sniff technology still to be embedded into printed-on-demand 500 year old books right?
Share on Facebook
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 License.