or have I missed something important?
(, Thu 28 Feb 2008, 3:24, archived)
or adding networking.
for example, sms+cheesestring = twitter
and facebook
(, Thu 28 Feb 2008, 3:26, archived)
the problem with that kind of thing is there's just TOO MANY numpties out there you wouldn't even want to talk to online, let alone meet
(, Thu 28 Feb 2008, 3:45, archived)
though I'm only guessing because I avoid facebook etc. like the plague
(, Thu 28 Feb 2008, 4:11, archived)
(, Thu 28 Feb 2008, 3:26, archived)
simple static pages to pages that can be updated in part without refreshing the lot.
I too am skeptical as to whether it's really 2.0 or just the 'ongoing evolution of web tech'.
(, Thu 28 Feb 2008, 3:30, archived)
it's just shameless marketing by and to idiots.
AND DO NOT GET ME STARTED ON LIBRARY 2.0, OH FUCK
(, Thu 28 Feb 2008, 3:40, archived)
I've 1/64th royal Maori blood m'self.
Now show some f'n ruspict or U'll get me bros and come fill you en.
(, Thu 28 Feb 2008, 4:49, archived)
and you can't have a fraction of a person.. unless we're talking dissection
(, Thu 28 Feb 2008, 4:51, archived)
also having participated in designing staff training in web two point fucking oh (libraries are prone to bandwagonning just about any stupid trendy idea) I found the most satisfying commentary came from similarly cynical and disaffected bodies.
effinglibrarian.blogspot.com/search/label/library%202.0
I was however sadly unable to include the gloss "THIS IS A BLOG. IT IS FOR BLOG" in our course design
(, Thu 28 Feb 2008, 4:03, archived)



