Opportunities and challenges for cyberinfrastructure

"Difficult to decide on an abstract architecture when bottom-up tool development is moving (percolating) so quickly. What can facilitate quick and agile adoption of quickly developing tools." (Ex 1, 1c-C)

"One of possibilities w/ Bamboo is becoming big enough to create generalizable tools that community knows about." (Ex 1, 1d-B)

""middleware"; create a tool which brings existing tools to everyone on their own taxonomic terms. how do we apply that to "i'm a researcher; help!"" (Ex 1, 1d-C)

"tension between infrastructure and innovation; for 90% of digital humanities work can be put under basic categories and structures to remove duplication; need to allow duplication, Bamboo needs a competitor or else Bamboo will take over the garden and use up all the oxygen" (Ex 1, 1d-F)

"One concern of this group was the danger that Bamboo become just another platform for tools and not an organic, dynamic and creative space that allows humanities scholars to share a vision and engage in new practices." (Ex 2, 1b-D)

"Infrastructure for tracking and cutting across many tools. Danger that [a background tracking mechanism] will turn humanities academics against the project because of the idea that they'll be monitored. Any given humanities scholar would hopefully come down on both sides of the question. Good [for a scholar] to know [her/his] impact, while at the same time not wanting to feel "watched" or "tracked"" (Ex 3, 1c-B)

"While Bb is doing this it should however do become too rigid a structure. There should be a structural flexibility that would allow it to keep growing and changing and also allow it to include different models of scholarship, fringe scholars, etc. features like a sand box area for pure play." (Ex 4, 1b-D)

"Over- and under-promising in technology. A realistic expectation of Bamboo is to recognize that it's limited. Infrastructure systems do well when recognizing their best minimum cases, and providing means for experts to come in and adapt/adjust." (Ex 5, 1c-A)

"Wrong to see these things as built into a massive architecture that would then be used across the board. Ultimately looking at obsolence too quickly. Provide a resource center? Or a repository? For tools, software, etc. to be used. Funding opportunities for infrastructure to developing these tools. Every collection of tools will be outdated immediately. Full involvement of community to delay obsolence, and to avoid unnecessary expenditure of energy for something that might ultimately not be useful. More likelihood for people to be willing to invest in software that they've already used, and that they're familiar with. Obviously, open-source makes this more feasible." (Ex 5, 1c-B)

"Fear that what we develop will be outdated by the time we're done; maybe by then everyone will be in Second Life; How to create tools that take advantage of changing environment that we can plug into?" (Ex 1, 1c-E)

"We need to reduce barriers to entry with experiments and new ideas integrating tech, like repositories, etc. Sees need for utility services that can foster this. Concerned that humanities scholars will have no clue where to start with utilities services. They do not know what to do with these and how to write glue code. Sees a need for helping them to get started." (Ex 7, 1a-H)

"The Atlas is likely to be of immediate relevance to people in a support/implementation role. Faculty are trained to consult experts in other domains, not only in technology, but other areas of scholarship. Bamboo and the Atlas need to be careful of finding themselves in the role of "source of all knowledge" or being thought to strive for that role. Totalizing systems end up being fragile and vulnerable, the Atlas doesn't want to have those problems." (Shared Services working group, Program Document Sec 4 - Discussion Draft of 9 March 2009, Elli Mylonas, 3/16/10 comment)

"How can Bamboo help scholars and librarians do a better job managing the challenges of digital textuality? If Bamboo plays the proverbial role of the onion in the stew or the role of a skilful host who introduces guests and then gets out the way of their conversation, much good can come of it. If it develops a large agenda of its own and is very visibly there, it may spend a lot of money but do little good." (Tools & Content Partners working group, Analyzing Scholarly Narratives, Martin Mueller, 3/27/09)

"But we're in a state of transition, and needs/currencies are also transitory. Catalyst for changes is technology. Advances in tech (done to us, ones we've done). Have altered fundamentals of teaching/learning/research. How scholarship is generated/assimilated/preserved/interpreted/reused/etc are critical to academy/academic library. Blurred lines of responsibility; emergence of global info society relying on knowledge economy and sustainable infrastructure. Doesn't threaten assistance of libraries, but positioned libraries as key partners in addressing issues facing changing economies/modes of communication." (W4 Welcoming Remarks, Harriette Hemmasi)

"In 1985, as professor at Harvard, came down here to work on project on huge workstation. Brown has a long tradition of doing this since the 70's. This could've been someone else showing it with "advanced" systems 25 years ago. Still having the same conversation - this could've happened in 1985 (and did happen then). Linking contents. Opportunity of PB is to get us out of that lull so we're not treading water, and having the same kind of conversation. Getting the infrastructure that we need; accumulation of parts. Hopefully in 20 years, this won't have to be reinvented again and again." (W4 Welcome, Q&A)

"The proposal is about cyberinfrastructure where there's different points to span the bridge for different universities. PB doesn't work unless we can tie it back to the specific, for the difference PB can make. Trying to derive social relations between people in same/different field. Adding together some of the particulars. Focus on particular tools in particular disciplines, where people are ready to move ahead with the evolution there, too. Where are the opportunities? Way to move forward is to focus on representative projects in years 1-3? Hope that people across the world can take advantage of different content/tools." (W4, Overview of Program Document, David Greenbaum)

"Duraspace - Fedora and DSpace - building institutional repositories. Model where by banding together, they can use cloud-based storage services. Problem for how to support from digital library side. People are struggling forward, trying to figure out how to band together." (W4 Action Plan - 4.1 Services Atlas, discussion)

Bamboo tags: 

Add new comment