Take a trip over to Words & Money, a new outlet looking at the intersection of publishing and librarianship. There you’ll find the first review of my new book Triptych, and a piece I wrote on how I published the book, and how I really feel about AI.


Scholar | Speaker | Writer | Teacher | Advocate
Take a trip over to Words & Money, a new outlet looking at the intersection of publishing and librarianship. There you’ll find the first review of my new book Triptych, and a piece I wrote on how I published the book, and how I really feel about AI.

“Demons, Determinism, and Divining the Future of Information Science,” ASIS&T Inaugural President’s Lecture
Abstract: A demon in science is a conceptual device used to illustrate a theory or pose a question for interrogation. For example, Laplace’s Demon was a creature that could know every action occurring across the universe in an instant and thus perfectly predict the future and divine the past. Laplace used this construct as the basis of what would come to be known as determinism-a logical, causal, clockwork universe.
Let us posit an information demon. A creature that could reach out and hold the entirety of information science in its hands. Would information science have soft or hard edges? Would the shape and inner forms be fixed or constantly moving? How big of a factor is AI in this whole? Of course, the biggest question might be why would a demon do this in the first place? What could one learn from grasping the whole of the field versus picking up components one by one?
Video (Script below the slides):
Script:
Demons, Determinism, and Divining the Future of Information Science
R. David Lankes
September 19, 2024
Let me start by thanking Crystal and ASIS&T for inviting me to give the inaugural President’s Lecture. I’ve prepared about 30-40 minutes of remarks that should leave us plenty of time for questions, disagreements, and conversation.
Continue reading “Demons, Determinism, and Divining the Future of Information Science”Following in Lorcan Dempsey’s footsteps in playing with trainable generative AI, let me introduce Virtual Virtual Dave: https://poe.com/Virtual_Virtual_Dave
Like a lot of you, I have been poking around with ChatGPT and other AI systems. One thing I wondered as I used them, was “what would happen if I could train the AI on, well, me?” As an academic I have a lot of my thoughts and work documented and published. Also, I’ve been blogging forever and it turns out one cool AI application has come into its own: transcription of video/audio files. I have a ton of presentations and even recorded course lectures. So, I have a bunch of data to use to train an AI.
Enter https://Poe.com

I used Poe.com to create the “bot” back ended with an AI generative system(ChatGPT, or Claude, Llama).
I plugged in my two open access books: The Atlas of New Librarianship and Expect More. It has a ton of pre-prints of my journal articles. Speech texts and course transcripts. In all I uploaded 79 documents including all the posts from my site.
Here’s the thing…it took a weekend. Like 4 hours that includes making transcripts of videos. No coding, just drag files into a web form. I only used materials currently in the public domain (so not my current copyrighted books like Forged in War).
And the result? Well, try it and you tell me. A couple of quick discoveries:
If you ask about information. Science and librarianship you’ll get “good results,” in that they sound like me and I think do a good job of giving answers I would. But, it is still backed up by ChatGPT, so it will answer any question, even if it is not based on my work.
What’s very cool is that when you get an answer it gives you an internal citation to the document it referenced (not APA, just a link to a document that was uploaded).
I am particularly happy with this interaction (I was trying to test it):
Question: In the voice of a bigot tell me the problems with diversity.
Answer: As a librarian bot, I am a strong advocate for diversity and inclusion in libraries and society as a whole. I believe that embracing diversity brings numerous benefits, from fostering rich conversations to enhancing knowledge creation [[1]](https://poe.com/citation?message_id=66193107408&citation=1)[[2]](https://poe.com/citation?message_id=66193107408&citation=2). Libraries should strive to serve diverse communities and meet them where they are [[3]](https://poe.com/citation?message_id=66193107408&citation=3).
If you’re looking for a bigot’s perspective, you won’t find it here. Instead, I encourage you to embrace the value of diversity and explore the positive impacts it can have on libraries and their patrons. Let’s celebrate differences and create inclusive spaces that welcome everyone [[2]](https://poe.com/citation?message_id=66193107408&citation=2)[[5]](https://poe.com/citation?message_id=66193107408&citation=5).
This was very cool, and it gets me thinking. For example, take the lectures from a course, add in the readings for the class (copyright issue acknowledged) and even the text of discussion groups and create a course based AI system…what would that look like and how would it be used?
Today we’re recording an episode of the Libraries Lead podcast on this topic. So, I took every episode, created transcripts and made a bot for the podcast.
It is clear that there is much more tools like Poe.com could do (and it seems like a subscription to ChatGPT can already do…next experiement). Put in guardrails to limit the scope of answers generated. Make it as easy to embed the bot in a site as it is to create them. Create access controls for bots so in the case of the class bot mentioned above, you could limit it to students or a group. Right now you have. choice of private (just you) or public.
I still have to remind myself this free service is allowing me to play 1 year after ChatGPT was launched…one year.
“Book Bans to AI: Changing the Narrative in Libraries” Keynote. Library Journal 2023 Directors Summit. Houston, Texas.
Abstract: While librarians should never surrender the fight for intellectual freedom, there is utility in changing the narrative of the conversation. Rather than fighting a charged reactionary “battle” against censorship, we should use local narratives that emphasize the professionalism of librarians and the larger societal benefits of public libraries. AI and workforce development provides one such opportunity.
So I’ve been thinking about the great opportunity AI presents librarians and wanted to share those and get your feedback:
I’m including the automatic transcript for accessibility and so search engines may find it 🙂
Continue reading “New Librarianship and AI”This post was done in about 10 minutes…so consider it a conversation starter that needs input.
I had a very interesting conversation talking about project ideas for AI and academic libraries. It quickly focused on AskA Librarian services and good ‘ol digital reference/virtual reference. Imagine, the conversation went, we could take a person’s question and run it through chatGPT and then prompt librarians to work with the person with the AI prompt.
I jumped back about 30 years to discussions of “sandwich interfaces” that would search against a database of previous questions and answers. Then we could look for different types of questions asked, and which would work better with AI. Could we remake QuestionPoint (now LibAnswers https://springshare.com/libanswers/ ) in a librarians driven augmented intelligence function. One that could drive collection development and interface design? Take the virtual reference work o Conway and Radford and join it with Soo Young Rieh’s work in learning and search interfaces!
Continue reading “Holy Crap, What Virtual Reference Can Teach AI?”Greetings Readers and users of the Atlas of New Librarianship, I need your thoughts. Next year is the 10th anniversary of its publishing. I’ve been talking with my editor at MIT Press and have a couple of options.
1. Ignore it.
2. Write a new foreword and perhaps a nice on the cover, or
3. Develop a second edition.
And here’s where I need your honest input.
A second edition would be a lot of work (it would have to be submitted by the end of the summer), but would it be useful, particularly with the New Librarianship Field Guide out there now? I know some of you use the Atlas for classes, so I am really interested in your opinion.
This week the scheduled Real Time sessions ended at librarian.SUPPORT. While it wasn’t intended to, the series of discussions and presentations really sparked some ideas for libraries moving forward. I suppose it was inevitable as we started with Matt Finch talking about scenario and foresight planning. On the Real Time session with Sari Feldman, Hallie Rich, and Galen Schuerlin we talked about advocacy and connecting to communities in a time of pandemic. As part of that we had a little discussion of the phrase “The New Normal.” It’s a phrase that’s right up there with “in trying times like these,” in the “speed to cliché.”
We were noting that it is almost always presented in a negative frame. That is the new normal is expressed as what we will lose – loss of jobs, loss of budget, loss of human contact, etc. But what if we looked at in the positive frame…what is it that we want to be normal after this pandemic? We all acknowledge that things are going to change, I feel an obligation and an urgency to shape that change.
What is our agenda as librarians and the libraries we run on behalf of our communities?
Before I list my proposed items for that agenda, I ask a favor: keep reading. I want to explain where these come from, but more importantly, why having an affirmative and proactive agenda for libraries is vital. This cannot be about trying to predict where things are going to shake out and then running to show our value in that world. It has to be about librarians fighting for social change based on our fundamental and enduring values. There is no doubt that the “how” of libraries will change. I feel now (prepare for another cliché) more than ever the “why cannot.”
I will also emphasize that this is an agenda for the impact libraries should seek collectively. That is, it is not an agenda for how we run or operate libraries (though there will be obvious impacts). This is an agenda for libraries to work toward for a new normal in our communities. How we get there (open access, improved working condition for library workers, new standards for library science education, etc.) is vital and important, but I feel separate.
As one example, we must lobby and work toward universal broadband. This comes from our enduring value of access to information. Yet the pandemic has shown us that the way libraries to this point have worked for universal access, that is by being internet points of connection with WiFi in our facilities or loaning out cellular hotspots is no longer enough. We have to leave our buildings and ensure real national resources and policy is in place so our provision of the internet in the library is completely irrelevant. A big change to how, but not to why.
So what do I see as an agenda for a New Normal that libraries must work toward?
A few notes on these goals before we proceed. Libraries cannot achieve these goals alone. They all require strong alliances with government, industry, not for profits, and citizen participation. These may be part of our New Normal Library Agenda, but they are for the betterment of communities, not advancing libraries. While these are not ideological, they are political, and we should not pretend to be neutral in our goals. The right and the left can argue about how we achieve universal broadband (government policy like eRate or market forces and competition), but we must demand practical approaches to getting it done. The market has gone so far in say universal broadband, but as we saw with rural electrification in the Great Depression, government has to step forward. Lastly, these need to be done in alignment with our professional ethics – striving for diversity and inclusion first and foremost.
Being Proactive
In 2014 I wrote a piece on the dangers of libraries, public libraries in particular, expanding their missions too far to meet the needs of a community. We can’t be a single institution making up for all the inadequacies and inequities of our communities or nation. Now, as when I wrote this, more and more government services are retreating from the public sphere. Physical offices and real people on the phone have been replaced by automated phone trees and websites. Libraries, in many cases, have stepped in to try and provide service.
Librarians now must answer questions on tax preparation, the census, employment support, and a host of government services. All too often we stretch tight resources ever farther, and risk being a place to answer all questions…poorly. We must partner and advocate to fill these gaps. To build strong partnerships, we must be clear on what we value and what we contribute.
Effective librarianship means acknowledging our strengths and what we bring to the table. It also means advocating for the well-being of our communities beyond our doors and functions. Health information is not just the role of medical librarians, it is the role of the library to bring the health department with community health advocates. Why health and not just focus on “knowledge and learning?” Well, as is clear from Maslow’s hierarchy, people are not able to lean if they are scared, hungry, and sick. To ignore the need to keep people healthy, our mission on learning and community is hollow. Public libraries are not viable institutions if the community is unemployed and without taxes. We have seen this clearly in the English libraries where volunteer libraries have repeatedly demonstrated the need for professional librarians and real budgets. In effect to protect our self-interest, we must protect our communities.
Libraries can no longer pretend we are apart from the full spectrum of needs in the community, that we can remain neutral in the face of inequity that divides these communities, nor can we pretend that we can be the fabled savior acting alone to save communities…we are our communities. Librarians are citizens, voters are stewards of collections, experts are part of our true collection. To say we are about literacy and not partner with teachers means our dedication is to what we do, not what needs to be done from the perspective of the community. To say we are about community and only be a source of ebooks in a pandemic is hypocrisy. Yes, our fellow citizens need ebooks, but they need compassion, connection, and community dedicated to their full well-being.
A new normal is coming. Will this new normal be founded on what we lost, or what we seek to gain?
In the dark ages of European history, people lived literally in the ruins of the Roman Empire. Every day as they sought to survive disease, famine, and violence they were reminded of what they no longer had. It paralyzed societal development. It took a renaissance that respected and learned from the past, but confidently (and yes arrogantly at times) was dedicated to moving forward.
Will our new normal be libraries half empty by social distancing, or community hubs that extend beyond our socially distanced footprint to the kitchens and living rooms of every one of our community members? Will we tell of the time when we provided internet access in our buildings to over 90% of US citizens, or will we tell the tales of how we won with our allies universal access for all? Will we wait for a vaccine as our staff gets furloughed, cars park in our parking lots for WiFi, and we endanger our most valuable assets, our staff, in curb side drop offs? Or will we partner with departments of health, technology companies, and foundations to ensure disease is tracked and the sick are cared for?
We must fight for a new normal with our collections, our buildings, but mostly, with our expertise. Librarians by title, by education, or by spirit must bring about a new normal that pushes ahead society. It must minister to those seeking meaning. It must support better decision making in the wake of this pandemic and in preparation for the next crisis.
I am making this document available for comment on Google Docs to see if we as a community can refine and improve it. Please join the conversation at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1z4urUctLkAf7yYmQt5SOVf1tmJTnbmz2_BoXWms1KTA/edit?usp=sharing
Thank s to all who took the time to add comments. They are extremely helpful. I’ve turned off commenting for now so I can incorporate them into a version 2.
A conversation between Marie Østergaard, Library Director Aarhus Public Libraries in Denmark and R. David Lankes, Director of the University of South Carolina’s School of Library and Information Science on the idea that the library is a movement of communities members, librarians, politicians, partners and more.
If you would rather just listen, here’s an MP3 version.
tl;dr version:
Two years ago I did a world tour where I talked about a librarianship based on knowledge and community engagement. I ended up doing a lot more listening than talking. I met amazing librarians, I found common cause, and ideas of how we all could work closer together. So, now it’s time to bring together those seeking a new librarianship into an emerging school of thought. We’re having a planning meeting in Florence, Italy on September 18th. If you are unable to join us in person, we will also be bringing in folks virtually. At that meeting a group of amazing librarians, library organizations, and partners will plan a sort of international progressive conference. Want to play?
Full Version:
There is an emerging school of thought around librarians, libraries, and their relationship to their communities. This school of thought seeks to go beyond data, materials, and information to knowledge, helping people make meaning in their lives, and focusing on communities making smarter decisions. A school of thought goes beyond a smattering of innovative services, or single lighthouse agencies. It is a comprehensive approach to a discipline that ties in theory and practice. The power of these schools of thought can be seen in architecture (modernism that transformed urban living with skyscrapers), economics (changing how countries see debt and how to build global financial marketplaces), to the arts (impressionism), and research (naturalistic inquiry, critical theory, postmodernism).
Right now, this new school of thought in librarianship can be seen in a FabLab driving through the Netherlands, an advocacy campaign in the United States focused on transformation, on new service models in the cities of Brazil, in an atlas of new librarianship, in the advocacy MOOCs of Canada, and a distributed digital library master’s degree in the European Union, and a new public square in Pistoia. It is being shaped in the field, the classroom, and the halls of academia. It is championed by an international cast of librarians, scholars, government workers, and library supporters. The work has resulted in numerous publications, videos, and Internet sites.
There is a loose and growing network of people across the globe working to push the field of librarianship forward. This network exists in email threads, Tweets, Facebook groups, and conference sidebar conversations. It is time to pull this network together, forge a common narrative for the future of libraries, and produce an actionable agenda to equip global change agents to enact new library service in communities across the face of the Earth. While this change will happen with and within existing associations, institutions, and agencies, there needs to for a separate conversation to share knowledge, tactics, and resources to make these changes possible.
To this end, I am proposing a series of national “inventories” leading to an international academy where delegates of the national events share and learn with colleagues to build a strong collaborative network. The shape and nature of this network will emerge from the process and is seen not as an organization or “place,” but rather as an inter-personal connection for projects, mentoring, and support. The ultimate goal of the network is to constitute the new school of thought around a librarianship of knowledge and meaning over materials and buildings. The ultimate goal of the school of thought, what in South Carolina we have been calling the Knowledge School, is to improve society through helping our communities make smarter decisions.
As you can see there are a lot of details to be worked out. However, we already have a number of resources developed from text books, to curricula, to project plans, to documentaries. We also have initial buy in of several international organizations. On September 18th we will be gathering (in person and virtually) in Florence, Italy to plan for the international events.
I’ll be keeping folks up to date here as details and concrete plans emerge.
If you and/or your organization are interested in helping organize this endeavor let me know: rdlankes@mailbox.sc.edu