[OPLINLIST] OPLINLIST Digest, Vol 164, Issue 19

[Pam Myers]

We use Jim's Upholstery on Center Ridge Rd in North Ridgeville.

*Pam Myers*
*Customer Service Manager*
Grafton-Midview Public Library
983 Main St.
Grafton, OH 44044
Ph: 440-926-3317  Fax: 440-926-3000





On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 12:00 PM <oplinlist-request at lists.oplin.org> wrote:

> Send OPLINLIST mailing list submissions to
>         oplinlist at lists.oplin.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         http://lists.oplin.org/mailman/listinfo/oplinlist
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         oplinlist-request at lists.oplin.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         oplinlist-owner at lists.oplin.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of OPLINLIST digest..."
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: Follow-up on Lynda.com and LinkedIn (Ed Liddle)
>    2. upholstery (Candy Baird)
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Ed Liddle <eliddle at marysvillelib.org>
> To: "oplinlist at lists.oplin.org" <oplinlist at lists.oplin.org>
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2019 20:47:09 +0000
> Subject: Re: [OPLINLIST] Follow-up on Lynda.com and LinkedIn
>
> This is an interesting event that has impacted Ohio libraries. I
> appreciate reading the information and opinions about it.
>
> It looks like microsoft's $26.2-billion acquisition of linked in in 2016
> is working out really well for them. in 2018  there seemed to be a focus
> about data mining or integrating linked in to other microsoft products to
> improve microsoft offerings for their customers.
> Here are some news stories about how well it has been working from Feb of
> 2018
>
> https://www.cbsnews.com/news/microsoft-linkedin-how-marriage-is-working-out/
>
> https://redmondmag.com/articles/2018/02/26/microsoft-and-linkedin-no-news.aspx
>
> In my opinion, It makes logical sense to be able to integrate linked in
> which my understanding is considered a "professional" social network
> highlighting its members' professional strengths, work experience, and
> allows businesses to find skilled people to hire they need to fulfill jobs.
> Lynda.com offers informal training to people needing to learn about new
> things or brush up their skill sets as needed. Lynda.com is more affordable
> than formal higher education, whether someone is degree seeking or not.
> This can be useful for professional growth and linked in is a platform
> where  members can list specific skills. From this perspective integrating
> linked in and lynda.com makes a lot of sense especially if they are ran
> by the same organization. There will be less reinventing the wheel when it
> comes to user authentication, tracking skill sets, etc. It will also I
> assume allow for a single sign on experience for both products, one less
> password to remember. I know the library staff at our library enjoy single
> sign-on when it comes to logging into the computers, ILS, and email
> accounts that Microsoft active directory provides.
>
> It is my understanding Microsoft windows and their other products are used
> a lot by professionals here in Ohio. I have to wonder if there are any
> plans to tie everyone's consumer/home microsoft online accounts/Student
> office 365 accounts to linked in and lynda.com perhaps at a future date.
> I could see where this would be useful feature for job seekers to make it
> easier to market themselves. It also would make it easier for people that
> are employed to keep their professional experiences current in case they
> become job seekers. This would also take single sign-on to another level
> for home/consumers.
>
> Microsoft offers a free version of office 365 that many libraries and
> institutions of higher education are using that includes a hosted version
> of exchange, the ability to use office 365 hosted apps like word, excel,
> sharepoint and some others. It also includes office 365 pro plus office
> suite that can be installed locally on a computer. This is tracked on a per
> user basis for activation. Each user can activate it on I think 5
> computers. Each user can go into their account and deactivate the license
> on unused computers which frees it up to use on another device. Microsoft
> also makes software donations to tech soup that libraries can use too. I am
> unsure what the underlying costs actually are for these but we as a library
> community are greatful for it and use it. Perhaps the linked in and
> lynda.com integration is one of those underlying costs in the big scheme
> of things.
>
> How deep could the rabbit hole go?
> Will Ohio libraries collaborate together in protest and start voting with
> their publicly funded wallets, using alternatives to the operating systems
> and software that microsoft owns to avoid the integration with linked in,
> like using apple OSX, Linux, LibreOffice, Firefox, Scribus, google apps,
> etc? That will be up to the library directors and what is in the best
> interest of the communities their library serve.
>
>
> -Ed Liddle
>
>
>
> On 6/12/19 2:41 PM, Nicholas Slone via OPLINLIST wrote:
>
> I would like to hopefully initiate a broader conversation about privacy
> and library ethics, not just with library leadership, but the entire public
> library community in Ohio. I'm having flashbacks of Mark Zuckerberg
> testifying in front of Congress, when it was painfully obvious that most
> legislators didn't have a clue what he was saying or what types of
> questions could/should be asked. I know we have many competent leaders in
> the library community, but also a vast wealth of knowledge in our other
> co-workers, particularly those with a high degree of tech skills. I also
> want to thank you, Don, for identifying this as a major problem and
> spreading the word. My words below are *bolded. *
>
> *Disclaimer #1: I've been using and loving Lynda.com. I've vastly improved
> my knowledge of music theory and various software. *
>
> *Disclaimer #2: I've been off of facebook for around 18 months, and I feel
> like my brain has finally been returned to me. I believe strongly that
> social media, in its current form, as well as the associated behavioral
> algorithms, the contents of which are mostly hidden from public view, are
> influencing us to be dumber, meaner, more likely to buy useless stuff,
> waste our time, and compromise our true values.*
>
> *Also, please correct me if you believe any of my comments are incorrect. *
>
> *These companies, including LinkedIn, are virtually unregulated and devoid
> of any meaningful set of ethics, other than pursuing growth and profit. As
> public companies, most of their corporate charters contain clauses which
> allow for the CEO to be sued, if they put anything above the pursuit of
> profit. Most of the venture capitalists that have supplied the startup
> funds for these companies are expecting a 100x return on investment, and
> they've reached a breaking point where they have to put up or shut
> up....monetize, monetize, monetize. Grow, grow, grow. The easiest way to
> monetize these services is by selling the data they collect from users. The
> data they collect from our patrons will be much more lucrative to them than
> even the value of our contract. There is currently a digital gold rush to
> get as much data as possible. In other words, they're operating from a very
> different set of motivations than public libraries. *
>
> *I have some questions and comments about the material from the transition
> link:*
>
> "While for-profit companies which provide library information services
> have, for years, been collecting and processing patron information (e.g.
> OverDrive, Hoopla, Demco’s line of library software), and in some cases
> linking to external social media accounts, never before has a social media
> account been required for use of library-paid resources. OPLIN staff raised
> our objections with Lynda/LinkedIn Learning representatives when we were
> informed in December of plans for this new requirement."
>
> *Restated, this points out that we're all already compromised, in some
> way. We've invested heavily in companies that are exploiting our users.
> This doesn't mean it's right or that we don't still need to watch these
> companies closely. Remember the sunk cost fallacy. I know of at least one
> attempt of Overdrive, which is now owned by a multi-national media
> conglomerate called Rakuten, approached the Ohio Digital Library with a
> proposal to integrate a service called "Viber," which is essentially
> Rakuten's version of WhatsApp. They billed it as a book discussion
> platform, which would be opt-in for patrons. Their privacy policy is
> problematic, and it contains a clause that basically says the policy can
> change if they're acquired by a third party. This plan was ultimately
> rejected, as far as I know. Is this what just happened with LinkedIn and
> Lynda?*
>
> "No threat on OPLIN's part Is likely to alter LinkedIn's course..."
>
> *Do they care about us renewing the contract at the end of the term? Would
> collected protest/action and negative publicity by a majority of Ohio
> librarians alter their course? Would pulling promotion of the product or
> spreading information about avoiding LinkedIn and their associated products
> make a difference? These are some of the options we should be considering.
> I would love to hear what other library leaders are considering/planning.
> After all, we're still the same group that resisted National Security
> Letters from the FBI, right? Does anyone know if ALA will be getting
> involved? *
>
> "In subsequent discussion, the Committee determined that while requiring a
> LinkedIn account was abhorrent, the value of the resource was such that
> OPLIN should maintain the subscription, particularly as those libraries
> which had previously provided Lynda.com could not, mid-year, pick up this
> relatively expensive subscription for themselves. The OPLIN Board of
> Trustees concurred."
>
> *So, is this another way of saying that money trumps values? Are we all
> selling out our patrons, now? Quick experiment, if you're interested: see
> if you can find a teenager that knows what "sellout" means. And, again, if
> anyone's interested in the definition of the sunk cost fallacy: *
>
> *https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/sunk-cost-fallacy
> <https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/sunk-cost-fallacy>*
>
> "LinkedIn has, in fact, been praised for its compliance with the European
> Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the plain-language
> clarity of its data privacy policies, and the tools LinkedIn provides its
> users for control over their personal information. Of course, effective
> usage of these tools requires a degree of information literacy that novice
> users have not developed. And without access to a working LinkedIn Learning
> for Libraries platform, no one has been able to begin developing guides to
> help librarians help their patrons."
>
> *It's not just that novice users haven't developed this level of
> information literacy. Virtually no one has. I have a LinkeIn account from
> years ago, so I logged in. It's true that if you dig into the settings, you
> have some control of what you share. But, typically, and displayed
> prominently on the dashboard, there are messages and banners and interfaces
> encouraging you to share more, telling the user that their profile is
> "incomplete," and that by giving up more information, the service will be
> so much better and improve their lives. The European law still doesn't go
> far enough, because it only covers "personally identifiable information."
> But, they don't need your name to push their products and influence your
> behavior. Some of the most lucrative sections of this new digital economy
> are comprised of "anonymized data," which is another way of saying
> "everything about you, besides your name/specific address," without your
> opt-in permission. Again, though, they will make it extremely attractive to
> opt-in and more painful to avoid opting in. *
> *And they and their partners can target you, without knowing your name,
> based on the other attributes you supply. *
>
> *Then, there's this from the FAQ:*
>
> "Will all the stats and information I currently have at Lynda Admin
> transfer over to LinkedIn Learning?
> Not all of it. After the change, libraries will no longer have access to
> some user learning activity (such as certificates earned) or personally
> identifiable information (such as email addresses). You will have access to
> basic use metrics: number of users, number of videos, etc. OPLIN has
> collected these basic usage statistics for all libraries since July 2019.
> If you want more detailed information or a longer history of stats, please
> visit the Lynda Reports Dashboard <https://www.lynda.com/ReportsDashboard> and
> download the reports you need."
>
>
>
> *If I'm not mistaken, this means that LinkedIn will automatically have
> MORE data about our patrons than WE do. If we select another product at the
> end of this contract, this would make it much more difficult to contact our
> Lynda users to notify them of the alternative. This also might mean we
> won't be able to see the most popular certificates our patrons are
> pursuing, so that we can use this info in selecting an alternative. While
> we're in this period of uncertainty, I would recommend getting a list of
> your patrons using the service, so that you can communicate with them on
> short notice. Will LinkedIn be using these email addresses to promote
> Premium subscriptions? Will they use it to maintain the user base, in the
> event we cancel the contract? *
>
> "I have concerns about the privacy of patron information that is to be
> shared with LinkedIn. Online privacy is important, and it is good for
> librarians to inform themselves and to help educate their patrons. In part,
> LinkedIn is moving the Lynda.com information within the LinkedIn
> environment to strengthen protections around user data, and to provide
> Lynda users with better tools for managing how their information may and
> may not be used."
>
> *When these tech startups, and even Apple, use language like "strengthen
> protections around user data" and "better tools for managing how their
> information may and may not be used," while simultaneously pushing a change
> that will require or encourage us to provide more information, it's
> important to read between the lines. In reality, this means more
> opportunities for each user to elect to share. If there are 25 toggles for
> different sharing options, it increases the possibility that many of those
> will be toggled "on" without the user having any real knowledge of the
> implications. *
>
> *My final question is this: what section of our contract with
> Lynda/LinkedIn gives them the justification for imposing this requirement
> on the library community? I think we should all see the exact language,
> since we routinely negotiate contracts with private entities. Who knows,
> maybe Sirsi-Dynix will soon require us all to have Instagrams, in order to
> use our library catalog. The longer our partnerships endure, the harder it
> will be to break away, if we don't adequately plan for alternatives. We've
> seen facebook's strategy of introducing distasteful changes in small
> increments, in order to limit backlash, and it's reasonable to assume
> others will employ the same strategy. What's our plan for keeping them as
> honest as possible? An open source and/or nonprofit alternative to as many
> of these services as possible would be wonderful, as well as pressuring
> legislators for more regulation. *
>
> *Suggested Podcast Episodes*
>
> *"Why Should We Care About Privacy?" - Crazy/Genius by The Atlantic*
>
> *https://pca.st/z49Q <https://pca.st/z49Q>*
>
> *"What Happened in Vegas" - Your Undivided Attention by The Center for
> Humane Technology*
>
> *https://pca.st/u0MD <https://pca.st/u0MD>*
>
> *Suggested Books*
>
> *The Age of Surveillance Capitalism by Shoshana Zuboff*
>
> *Team Human by Douglas Rushkoff*
>
>
> *Throwing Rocks at the Google Bus by Douglas Rushkoff *
>
> *Digital Minimalism by Cal Newport*
>
> *And the website for Center for Humane Technology, which is mostly
> comprised of former tech insiders and CEOs...with extremely guilty
> consciences:*
>
> *https://humanetech.com/ <https://humanetech.com/>*
>
> Sincerely,
> Nicholas Slone
> Executive Director
> Adams County Public Library
>
> On 6/8/2019 10:12 AM, Don Yarman via OPLINLIST wrote:
>
> There is a growing chorus of concern over Lynda.com becoming LinkedIn
> Learning, and the new requirement for library users to have LinkedIn
> accounts to continue using the resource. (Please see the announcement at
> https://oplin.ohio.gov/lynda-transition.) That is good—it is the duty of
> librarians to safeguard the information lives of their patrons. While
> for-profit companies which provide library information services have, for
> years, been collecting and processing patron information (e.g. OverDrive,
> Hoopla, Demco’s line of library software), and in some cases linking to
> external social media accounts, never before has a social media account
> been required for use of library-paid resources. OPLIN staff raised our
> objections with Lynda/LinkedIn Learning representatives when we were
> informed in December of plans for this new requirement.
>
> It was not until the end of March that the company delivered a
> presentation about LinkedIn Learning for Libraries. OPLIN’s Content
> Advisory Committee <https://oplin.ohio.gov/CAC> attended this webinar,
> and offered LinkedIn staff their suggestions and their frank opinions. In
> subsequent discussion, the Committee determined that while requiring a
> LinkedIn account was abhorrent, the value of the resource was such that
> OPLIN should maintain the subscription, particularly as those libraries
> which had previously provided Lynda.com could not, mid-year, pick up this
> relatively expensive subscription for themselves. The OPLIN Board of
> Trustees concurred.
>
> OPLIN and its peer organizations across North America continue to press
> LinkedIn for changes that will align more closely with library ethics
> concerning patron data. It is important to note two things:
>
>    1. LinkedIn’s practices are not illegal. State laws governing library
>    patron information address only the disclosure, by libraries, of *library
>    records*; they do not cover the personal information that users of
>    library services themselves provide to library vendors.
>    2. No threat on OPLIN’s part to end our agreement is likely to alter
>    LinkedIn’s course for the future of Lynda content access. (It is rather
>    more likely that LinkedIn would take legal action to hold OPLIN to its
>    original agreement to maintain the subscription through June 2021.)
>
> LinkedIn has, in fact, been praised for its compliance with the European
> Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the plain-language
> clarity of its data privacy policies, and the tools LinkedIn provides its
> users for control over their personal information. Of course, effective
> usage of these tools requires a degree of information literacy that novice
> users have not developed. And without access to a working LinkedIn Learning
> for Libraries platform, no one has been able to begin developing guides to
> help librarians help their patrons.
>
> OPLIN’s services are funded directly from public library money, and we
> strive to align those services with guidance we receive from the public
> library community. The guidance we have received so far indicates that
> library decision-makers are disturbed by this change, but saw a greater
> value in having OPLIN continue to provide statewide access to the content.
>
>                     Don Yarman
>                     Director, Ohio Public Library Information Network
>                     2323 W Fifth Ave Suite 130, Columbus OH 43204
>                     don at oplin.ohio.gov | 614.728.5250
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OPLINLIST mailing list -- OPLINLIST at lists.oplin.orghttp://lists.oplin.org/mailman/listinfo/oplinlist
>
> *** OPLIN now offers a Tier III-rated data center for libraries to use. Find out more:    https://www.oplin.ohio.gov/co-location-service ***
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OPLINLIST mailing list -- OPLINLIST at lists.oplin.orghttp://lists.oplin.org/mailman/listinfo/oplinlist
>
> *** OPLIN now offers a Tier III-rated data center for libraries to use. Find out more:    https://www.oplin.ohio.gov/co-location-service ***
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Candy Baird <bairdca at deltapubliclibrary.org>
> To: Oplinlist <oplinlist at lists.oplin.org>
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 10:55:00 -0400
> Subject: [OPLINLIST] upholstery
> Looking for someone to do upholstery work in the Northwest Ohio area. Does
> anyone have any recommendations.
>
> --
> Candy Baird
> Director
> Delta Public Library
> 402 Main Street
> Delta, Ohio 43515
> 419-822-3138 (office)
> 419-822-5310 (fax)
> _______________________________________________
> OPLINLIST mailing list
> OPLINLIST at lists.oplin.org
> http://lists.oplin.org/mailman/listinfo/oplinlist
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.oplin.org/pipermail/oplinlist/attachments/20190614/c9219cac/attachment.html>