Google Scholar

so, google scholar has been released. it's a new service from google that crawls academic literature. apparently it even crawls subscription databases for citations. i've done a few cursory searches and it is indeed impressive. i searched for "blood pressure" and got articles from the nih as well as from pubmed. when i searched for "poetry" i got a list of books and a link to worldcat so i could find the books in a library near me.

the library world is atwitter with news of this resource... but i don't think they've decided on positive or negative twitter. of course, there are the rampant rumors of google replacing librarians (again). i think that's not likely to happen, at least in academic libraries, because i know from experience that students wouldn't know good research material if it bit them in the ass (even if google sicced it on them) so they're always gonna need us to parse the wide world of information for them. but there are some major drawbacks. once again, google won't say how big their database is, and they won't explain how the decide what constitutes "scholarly" material.

i'll be interested to see how this all pans out.

back to business

i've finally gotten our blog here at the library into fighting shape. now, as soon as IT makes it universally accessible (and yes that does include making it accessible from the wireless network, guys...) we can start publicizing it.

more politics, sorry

last night i managed to catch on cnn (despite my desperate attempts never ever to watch news or "news" shows) an interview by paula zahn of bob kerrey. he made the most enlightened statement about homosexuality that i think i have ever heard a politician make. she was goading him about the opinions held by the religious right and he said that according to his religion heterosexuality and homosexuality are both natural states. i thought paula was going to swallow her teeth. he didn't equivocate
or make excuses about loving the sinner or any of that crap. good for him!

i think it's time for the lefties to stop being defensive and start believing in the legitimacy of *our* morality! why do the morals of the fire and brimstone folks automatically get to be more important than anyone else's? they have us convinced, those of us who dare to disagree with them, that we are immoral because they are moral. that's fuzzy logic. i'm an atheist and a moral person and i think that is *not* a contradiction. i have actually been thinking that maybe this whole shrub situation will turn out for the best if "we" (however you want to define the vast swaths of humanity that disagree with shrub on just about everything) can start standing up for our ideals without feeling guilty about having them in the first place.

activism

yesterday i was positively despondent. it seems a bit extreme, but i've been under a lot of stress lately and the election just sort of pushed me over the edge. as i mentioned earlier i am seeing a bit more clearly today, but i did realize in the midst of my distress that i have become significantly less "shit-starting" and "upheaval-inducing" that i have been in the past. the evidence is in this blog. it became obvious to me as i was sitting at the desk staring into space that i have lost my focus. but i think the results of this election have brought it back to me, which is a small favor.

i don't have any idea what i'm going to do with this realization, but i suppose it's good to develop a purpose. it's either that or end up in a rubber room.

ok, i feel slightly less hysterical today

this morning i am beginning to be able to put this political travesty into some semblance of perspective. i'm not happy by any means, but i'm over my shock.

i think this post makes a very good point. blame is pointless in general, but blaming gay marriage is just insulting.

how could you do this to us?

in the midst of my horror and shock, this is my question to middle america:

how could you do this to us?