Archive for January, 2010

As always, the Top Tech Trends discussion was lively, and people contributed a lot of information to the live blog via links. Here is a compilation of links from the live chat in chronological order. In some cases, if it didn’t appear that the link went to the correct place, I tried to track down the site that I thought the user meant. I’ve also supplemented with a few links about the panelists.

 

To view the full live blog and Twitter coverage from top Tech Trends, visit the LITA blog.

 

Amanda Etches-Johnson

Blog without a Library

http://twitter.com/etches

 

Jason Griffey

Jason Griffey dot Net

Pattern Recognition

http://www.twitter.com/griffey

 

Joe Murphy

http://twitter.com/libraryfuture

 

Lauren Pressley

Lauren’s Library Blog

http://twitter.com/laurenpressley

 

David Walker

David Walker’s Website

 

LITA Blog

http://litablog.org/

 

Top Tech Trends Midwinter 2010 on Ustream

http://www.ustream.tv/channel/midwinter-2010-discussion-group

 

Baylor University – Library Resources for Mobile Devices

http://researchguides.baylor.edu/library_resources_mobile_devices

 

Usabilla

http://usabilla.com/

 

CrazyEgg

http://crazyegg.com/

 

Top Tech Trends Twitter Stream

http://search.twitter.com/search?q=%23alamwttt

 

FourSquare

http://foursquare.com/

 

Horizon Project

http://www.nmc.org/horizon

 

2010 Horizon Report – web

http://wp.nmc.org/horizon2010/

 

2010 Horizon Report – PDF

http://www.nmc.org/pdf/2010-Horizon-Report.pdf

 

Augmented Reality Example for Android

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b64_16K2e08

 

Harper County Public Library Mobile App

http://www.hcplonline.info/hcplmobile/

 

National Library of Medicine Mobile Apps

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/mobile/

 

Copia: a social, e-reading experience

http://www.thecopia.com/

 

LibraryThing iPhone App

http://www.librarything.com/blog/2010/01/local-books-iphone-application.php

 

Blio – free eReader software

http://blioreader.com/

 

Article: Singularity Proponent Ray Kurzweil Reinvents the Book, Again

http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/12/blio-ray-kurzweil-book/

 

Smell of Books

http://smellofbooks.com/

 

Article: The Strange Case of Academic Libraries and E-Books Nobody Reads

http://www.teleread.org/2010/01/07/the-strange-case-of-academic-libraries-and-e-books-nobody-reads/

 

Article: New Study Documents Epidemic of Online Book Piracy

http://www.publishers.org/main/PressCenter/Archicves/2010_January/EpidemicofOnlineBookPiracy.htm

 

Online Review Form for Top Tech Trends Session

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/F5R7W7V

 

Other Top Tech Trends writeups from around the net.

 

Library Journal: ALA 2010 Midwinter Meeting: Top Tech Trends Panel Focuses on End Users and Ebooks

 

Market Intelligence for Librarians: Top Tech Trends from ALA’s Midwinter Meeting

 

Library Journal: ALA 2010 Midwinter Meeting: LITA Reboots Top Tech Trends Panel

 

Krafty Librarian: LITA Top Technology Trends

Advertisements

This time around LITA’s Top Tech Trends featured an entirely new set of speakers who had never appeared on this panel before.

 

AMANDA ETCHES-JOHNSON

User Experience Librarian

McMaster University

 

JASON GRIFFEY

Head of Library Information Technology

University of Tennessee, Chattanooga

 

JOE MURPHY

Science Librarian

Yale University

 

LAUREN PRESSLEY

Instructional Design Librarian

Wake Forest University

 

DAVID WALKER

Web Services Librarian

California State University System

 

The discussion was moderated by Top Tech Trends chair, Gregg Silvis.

 

To view the live blog transcript from Top Tech Trends – ALA Midwinter 2010, visit

http://litablog.org/2010/01/alamwttt/.

 

David Walker

We need a mega-search that goes beyond Google Scholar and takes advantage of link resolvers – a sort of next-gen federated search.  – working to craft something that is unique to your library.

How do you give access to hundreds of databases that libraries subscribe to?

As more content is brought together, new systems will provide greater/better access.

Any tool that addresses a fundamental problem for libraries will  have great penetration.

Because data lives in silos, searching means going to silos. RSS feeds means going to silos. How do we get  a unified mobile interface?

Vendors are currently engaged in a numbers race. Who has the most journals? Who has the most content?

We need to be able to pull data out of vendor silos and bring it together in a single service. Once we do that, we can add services on top of a single data stream.

Why aren’t library consortia coming together to build their own discovery systems rather than leaving this to the vendors?

 

Are libraries giving up more control to the cloud?

 

Amanda Etches-Johnson – Some institutions don’t have federated search! What improvements will we see from it?

 

David Walker – Federated searches level the playing field. It creates a better search, allows faceted browsing.

 

Amanda Etches Johnson – 2009 buzzwords: user experience. One of the problems is that no one can agree on what it means.

In the user experience design world, people are talking about how it makes users feel.

Mobile interfaces are stripped down. You don’t have time, bandwidth, or real estate for fancy design.

Users are seeking out mobile interfaces – not just on mobile devices, but also on regular screens.  Need for speed!

What we do for mobile devices is really going to impact web design and what we do for large-screen formatting.

Automated usability testing is up and coming. Subscription-based options for doing usability, but this doesn’t replace usability professionals! Check out http://usabilla.com/.

Who is responsible for developing the user interface experience? Does the vendor do it? Does each institution do it?

 

An interesting thought emerged from discussions around the table and from audience-submitted comments. How exactly do we measure the user experience? User experience quality is hard to measure, but we still need to be having the conversations. It was noted that currently most user experience research is coming from outside libraries.

 

Lauren Pressley – Different types of groups expect different things from us.

 

Jason Griffey – Currently building a new library at UT Chattanooga. They’ve spent a lot of time thinking about physical usability and overall usability of the structure.

 

How do you pair this with online usability and user experience across services? Twitterer memclaughlin notes that website design should connect with physical library design.

 

Amanda – Literature talks about how to develop a more holistic approach. Be cognizant that there are other elements to consider.

 

Joe Murphy – We have recently seen near-universal mobile adoption from all patron groups.

The changes are coming from user expectations. Small downloadable apps for smartphones.

SMS is the oldest, strongest, and most flexible mobile app. It’s more than just a communication tool. It’s also a research tool.

Use of SMS for reference has really taken off, but just because it’s a new environment doesn’t mean that it changes core values of reference and libraries.

For some users, the only reason that print is relevant is when it’s not available electronically.

Mobile technology is changing our opinions about what is acceptable in libraries. Do our libraries even have the cell phone signal strength to support the technology?

Location-based gaming is up and coming. How do we manage it, and how do we leverage it? There can be rewards for using location-based services such as waiving fines or other, less traditional options.

Twitter became a standard in 2009. Now that it’s a standard libraries are reacting to it in a different way. It’s a platform for services. Some user groups may never use Twitter, but that shouldn’t stop us from using it to engage other groups.

The ability to be continually flexible is very demanding!

Mobile technology does not change the soul of libraries.

 

David Walker – What do smaller libraries do? What should they be focusing on?

Joe Murphy – If we spend more time prepping for technologies and services, what suffers? How do we balance serving our multiple constituencies?

We have to figure out the priorities for future relevance. We have to be ready for the next couple of years in addition to maintaining traditional strengths.

 

Lauren Pressley – Augmented reality  – blending virtual data with the real world

Augmented reality combines real and virtual data in a way that happens in real time with a 3d nature.

The extra data helps people gather more meaning from what they’re seeing.

As an example, consider the instant replay of a hockey game. You can see a virtual line that indicates the path that the puck traveled. You don’t actually see the line, but it helps you better understand what happened during play.

 

Greater potential for augmented reality games?

2010 Horizon Report predicts impact of augmented reality in education.

Augmented reality helps organizations/individuals embed contextual information.

Check out WolfWalk from NCSU for an example using historical pictures from digital collections.

 

Library applications? Imagine a tool for the periodicals section – tutorials pop up to help users at point of need. Or how about a pop-up that helps users visualize and maybe even narrow in on call numbers when they’re searching the stacks?

And a suggestion from Twitterer jaimebc: When you walk into the library an augmented reality app could give you information on award winners and best sellers.

 

David W. – Do you see libraries taking ownership of that? Does the public library take ownership of the city?

 

Ideally – an application that allows users to plug their own data into it. Crowdsourcing again.

 

By layering groups of historical photos, users could walk down Main Street and see what it looked like in the 1850s, 1870s, 1900s, 1920s, etc.

 

Jason G. – The unique integration of archival materials. Libraries have an opportunity to use archives as teaching/training tools as well as interesting tools for the community.

 

David W. – As you browse the stacks, people miss part of the collection if it’s back on a server or in archives. Augmented reality could fill in those gaps.

 

Jason Griffey – 2009 was the year of the iPhone App Store.

App store opened in 2008. By January 2009, 500,000,000 apps had been downloaded. App downloads are now into the billions.

The growth has been unlike anything the computer world has ever seen.

Given the popularity of the app store, pretty much every other cell phone manufacture is getting on the bandwagon.

With all of these apps though, there are only a handful that are library-specific.

 

Jason predicts that 2010 will be the year the app dies because of HTML 5 and CSS 3.

HTML5 allows for offline storage. You can store locally using just HTML 5. Native audio and video support can reduce the need for Flash. It supports Canvas – online drawing.

If you’re thinking about writing an app, think about writing it in web standards.

Jason notes that about 95-96 % of what he currently does can be done in a browser.

New standards will bring really rich app-like experiences inside a browser.

 

A couple of Twitterers pointed out the need to develop on platforms besides just the iPhone. Perhaps these new web standards are the way to level the playing field on development.

 

Group topic – The Reinvention of the Book

Moderator Gregg Silvis brought out a 10-year old Rocket e-book and an Amazon Kindle. Form factor is surprisingly similar. In fact, several Twitterers noted that the two devices are "frighteningly" similar.

 

Jason – Thinks that the e-book as a hardware device is dying. Sites like Copia, Blio, and multifunction devices such as the (upcoming) Apple tablet may contribute to this. Copia will allow users to interact in ways such as social annotation. Blio allows instructors to embed quizzes in the text.

 

Lauren – The issue of ownership with e-books is different. For many people, reading is a solitary experience that individuals share with the author.

The concept of ownership with e-books is different.

How much will publishers move to a format that libraries feel comfortable with?

 

Joe – I don’t see e-book devices having a place in a library. The focus should be on content.

I can’t get books from the library on my iPhone. I’m buying it through the Kindle app on my iPhone.

For some of us, our iPhone can be our everything device.

The Twitter world has really changed my expectations of reading.

 

I want to be able to interact with the text.

 

Amanda – Devices are not the future. We have a lot of subscriptions that are read on computer screens.

 

David – Undergrads are going to very specific online journals because it’s easy and convenient. Sometimes they would actually be better served by going to the catalog and finding a book with a more general treatment of the topic.

E-book licensing isn’t friendly to smaller institutions.

If e-books were as accessible as journal articles, would that change undergraduate research behavior?

 

Jason – Publishers should pay attention to the recording industry and learn that DRM only hurt music sales. No consumer likes DRM.

 

Audience  and Twitter comments – A lot of users just don’t have access to laptops and mobile devices. Perhaps they can’t afford them. Perhaps their network infrastructure can’t support them. Where do libraries come into play? Over the years, libraries have been among the first to place technology in the hands of users. Do libraries have a role to play with e-book readers?

 

Another online commenter pointed out that even when people cannot afford some things, they often have cell phones, Playstations, Wiis, etc.

 

Other Top Tech Trends writeups from around the net.

 

Library Journal: ALA 2010 Midwinter Meeting: Top Tech Trends Panel Focuses on End Users and Ebooks

 

Market Intelligence for Librarians: Top Tech Trends from ALA’s Midwinter Meeting

 

Library Journal: ALA 2010 Midwinter Meeting: LITA Reboots Top Tech Trends Panel

 

Krafty Librarian: LITA Top Technology Trends

This session examined the experiences of three different schools in maintaining and marketing their institutional repositories.

 

Michelle Harper

OCLC Moderator

Director of Special Collections

 

Sarah L. Shreeves

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Coordinator for the Illinois Digital Environment for Access to Learning and Scholarship (IDEALS)

http://www.ideals.illinois.edu/

 

The library manages the front-end and services portions of the project. Campus IT handles the infrastructure. This project has always had strong administrative support. This is a DSpace-based repository, and it houses content from departments across campus. There have been 1.2 million downloads from the repository.

 

They are shifting their thinking from a repository-centered focus to a services-centered focus. The idea of just filling a box with stuff is a dead end. They think in terms of both services and collections. This is a substantial shift in thinking which is something of a trend in this field.

 

IDEALS is leading the way in the library’s other digital preservation efforts. Existing policies and procedures can be applied where applicable. Technical reports and occasional papers are added to IDEALS. It’s becoming more fully integrated into campus workflows.

 

They have tried to eliminate bureaucracy and enable departments to add content on their own. When collections are set up for departments, the departments are given free reign to develop their own policies and procedures. The managers have tried to help weave it into the fabric of the university.

 

They are also looking at serving non-traditional users and special missions of the university.

 

They try to think about the roles of their repository: access, dissemination, and long-term preservation.

 

MacKenzie Smith

MIT Libraries

Associate Director for Technology

http://dspace.mit.edu/

 

The managers of MIT’s project think of the institutional repository as part of the library’s mission of preserving university-generated content.

 

The repository has 40-50 thousand documents of high-quality content.

The success of a repository depends on how well you define, use, and market the repository.

 

If you look at it simply as a piece of infrastructure, it’s cheaper than your link resolver. If you look at it as a suite of services that are critical to the future of your organization, it has to be sustainable.

 

Conflating the institutional repository with things like open access is a mistake. You cannot pin the success of one on the success of another. Just because one is (or is not) successful, that doesn’t necessarily apply to the other.

 

How are we going to define success in terms of financial sustainability?

Are libraries comfortable with the blurring of the lines between libraries, museums, and archives?

What are the added value services?

Is it realistic for libraries to be in charge of their own technology fate?

Is it even useful to talk about institutional repositories outside of the context of libraries in general?

 

People don’t visit IRs just to see what an institution produced recently. They come because of a subject or because of types of content.

 

Catherine Mitchell

Directory, Publishing Services

California Digital Library

http://www.cdlib.org/

 

What might a sustainable IR look like?

Viable financial model

Interoperable design

Relevant

 

Even within one’s own infrastructure, the IR should be able to connect to other infrastructures.

 

We have to understand the nature of value in relation to academic research.

Who are the users and what do they need? It’s not enough to just build a place for stuff.

 

The managers realized that they weren’t engaging with their users. The IR only had 30,000 total documents while the university was producing more than 26,000 documents per year.

 

Ideological and practical irrelevance

Few on campus understood the term open access

Fewer seemed to understand or feel comfortable with the term repository

Virtually no one had heard of eScholarship (the brand name of this institution’s repository)

 

There was a need for support for:

Campus-based journal and monographic publishing programs

Multimedia publications

Data sets

Conferences

Non-traditional publications

 

In other words . . . Needs=value.

 

A rebranding initiative was conducted with a new focus on:

Providing a targeted and compelling publishing services infrastructure

Integrating those services into the scholarly research lifecycle

 

IR Deposit is a natural by-product of services rendered, rather than an end in itself.

 

Reinventing the IR as open access publisher

 

eScholarship Site Redesign

Emphasize services, not policy

Contextualization of content: engaging with problems of authority and legitimacy

Enhance research tools and publication display

Remain true to our development philosophy of simplicity, generalizability, and scalability

 

Enhanced publishing services

Journals, books, conference papers, seminars

 

Marketing: What’s in it for the faculty?

Keep your copyright

Reach more readers

Publish when you want to

Protect your work’s future

 

Value Propositions

To enable scholars to have direct control over the creation and dissemination of the full range of their work.

To provide solutions for current and emerging scholarly publishing needs within UC that aren’t met by traditional publishing models.

Toa coordinate with UC Press to provide a sustainable publishing model that extends the University’s capacity to disseminate its creative output to the world.

 

Questions about formats for archiving and data migration

IDEALS offers three tiers of preservation support. Under the highest level of preservation support, there is an effort to maintain the viability, renderability, understandability, and functionality of the original digital object. For more information, see the IDEALS Digital Preservation Support Policy.

    The midwinter IUG usually features a mixture of user presentations and Innovative updates. Read on for this year’s menu of goodies.

    Single Sign-On
    Jennifer Fritz
    Dartmouth College

    The Single Sign-On product requires an additional server that runs its own instance of Millennium. This implementation involves changing the hostname of the production server. Patrons point to the SSO server. Affiliated users without associated login credentials have to use the new server name.

    Server information has to be changed in in a number of locations:

    III manual URL
    Web Management Reports URL
    Self-check units
    Millennium client
    SSH client
    Anzio spine label printing
    Z39.50 connections
    URLs in the OPAC and library website had to be updated
    Blackboard

    Innopac functionality is absent on the SSO server.

    Sites cannot self-upgrade
    Sites cannot place the certificate on the server without assistance from III

    Some people do not want to be logged in as staff by default.

    This site is software-only, so their implementation required collaboration between the library, campus IT, and Innovative Interfaces.

    Implementing Encore at UNLV
    Kristen Costello
    University of Nevada, Las Vegas

    UNLV has a main branch as well as Architecture, Curriculum Materials, and Music branch libraries.

    The Innovative system is shared with UNLV, UNLV Law Library, College of Southern Nevada, and the Desert Research Institute.

    For a number of years UNLV bought essentially all III products when they became available. Encore was one of those purchases although they were not able to deploy it immediately.

    Encore is now the default search across the library website.

    Encore 3.0 includes hold pickup and due date alerts.

    Patron usability results

    Patrons used the search box like Google
    Facets weren’t obvious
    Email was fine, but text to phone was preferred
    Not clear how to return to Encore home page
    Intermingled shared institutions holdings confusing

    Encore Staff Survey Results

    Not overly enthusiastic – prefer classic catalog
    Problem finding specific items
    Want advanced search options
    Like facets

    Suggested improvements

    Allow or provide Javascripting add-ons
    Advanced search option
    View MARC display

    Statistics from facets are available through Google Analytics.

    Innovative Update
    Betsy Graham

    Release 2009B – 16 sites
    Release 2009A – 474 sites
    Release 2007 – 579 sites
    Release 2006 – 155 sites

    2009B will be a full Millennium release for many modules, but it won’t be available for another couple of months yet.

    Encore: integration, context, relevance
    Rice Majors

    Rice noted that he wanted to use the theme of "deep integration" as a common thread for his Encore presentation. He’ll be touching on several areas:

    Article integration
    Millennium integration
    Local content via harvesting
    Community engagement
    Widgets and more

    Deep Article Integration

    Article results now appear inline with other search results.
    There are new article facets for "limit to full text" or "limit to peer reviewed" – if this data is passed from the vendor.

    Deep Millennium Integration

    Leverage local MARC and Millennium ILS data for new kinds of searching and refining.

    Subject headings rendered as tag clouds make LCSH much more accessible to patron.

    New facets – course or professor if search results include course reserves.

    Integration of ERM so that patrons can see the various ways to access e-content.

    "Availability" facet will be available – example uses DVDs listed in the catalog. Patron may want to view only those items that are currently available for checkout.

    "Did you mean" suggestions appear. Example used – "Hary Poter and the Wizard’s Rock" yields a suggestion for Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone.

    Authority records appear in result content as well. Following the authority records yields a very clean result set for things such as scores, sound recordings, etc.

    Patron Record Integration

    Patron alerts appear for logged in users. Patrons can see indicators about upcoming due dates or hold shelf pickup alerts.

    Integrate local databases with Encore Harvesting Services

    Puts resources in the information flow of the users

    Lets patrons easily discover locally held content

    Data can be shared via harvesting by OAI-compliant aggregators

    Harvested records are interfiled with catalog results

    With Encore, the user doesn’t have to consider:

    What kinds of resources they prefer

    What kinds of resources the library may own or have access to

    How the library may organize its resources

    For example, Encore can search the Millennium server, CONTENTdm, institutional repository, and other servers simultaneously.

    Community participation: tags and tagging

    Flickr, del.icio.us, Amazon, etc.

    Added by users = folksonomy

    Encore lets users tag bibliographic and harvested records

    Encore uses subject headings to seed the tag pool

    This seed pool lets patrons complement the work done by librarians while still leaving authoritative tags created by experts

    Library of Congress & Flickr Commons

    Tagging projects build public engagement with the library

    Tags can add value by bridging formal and informal vocabularies. This also helps invest the community directly in the collection.

    September 2009

    59 Encore libraries are using ratings
    395,410 ratings so far – approximately 5,900 per library
    30 libraries with 1,000+ ratings

    22 Encore libraries using reviews
    12,342 reviews so far – approximately 411 per library
    6 libraries with 500+ reviews

    109 libraries using tags
    73,855 tags so far – approximately 486 per library
    16 libraries with 1,000+ tags

    January 2010

    65 Encore libraries are using ratings
    540,368 ratings so far – approximately 7,243 per library
    37 libraries with 1,000+ ratings

    22 Encore libraries using reviews
    12,734 reviews so far – approximately 411 per library
    6 libraries with 500+ reviews

    113 libraries using tags
    101,399 tags so far – approximately 646 per library
    20 libraries with 1,000+ tags

    In just a few months there were significant increases in the number of ratings and reviews in Encore libraries.

    Coming in Encore 4.0 – User Comments

    This idea grew out of the historical photograph collections where users can add value and context by telling a story about a record. This isn’t really a rating, review, or tag. It’s a true comment.

    Encore 4.0 will also have a passthrough search to WorldCat. This can be customized according to local preferences.

    Google Books integration will added in Encore 4.0 allowing patrons to search within the content of Google books.

    A Meebo chat widget will be available in Encore.

    In Encore 4.0, selected staff can promote specific titles to get higher rankings in search results. For example, a title search for Chemistry which retrieves 1950s textbooks shouldn’t necessarily put all of those at the top of the list. Librarians can promote certain titles so that they can receive higher rankings.

    These widgets (Meebo, Google books, etc.) will not automatically be added to the webpac because libraries can already do this for themselves. As a result, these are not targeted for webpac integration.

    Implementing Research Pro
    Richard Guajardo
    University of Houston, Texas

    Research Pro was rolled out in conjunction with the Encore release at University of Houston.

    When returning search results, Research Pro starts with the first resource to finish.

    Users can create custom lists of databases within their patron accounts.

    Libraries can choose five databases to be pulled into Encore search results.

    Digitization Projects on a Shoestring
    Aimee Fifarek

    Scottsdale Public Library, Arizona

    Scottsdale will use a photo of the week to solicit user comments to help further develop the metadata on their images.

    A lot of their digital library work has been funded by grant money. Much of the work has been done by volunteers.

    Scottsdale is using Content Pro as their digital library platform.

As a general rule, I don’t like my data in the cloud. Let me go ahead and get that out there so my prejudices are fully disclosed. I use it because I must, but I don’t like it. The primary reason I don’t like it is a practical one: data in the cloud means that you have to be able to connect to the cloud, and far too often, I can’t. Living and traveling in a largely rural area, network coverage is far from ubiquitous. And no network coverage sometimes translates into no data. Setting aside security concerns and the additional hook into my devices that each application seems to want, connectivity is my main concern.

Until recently, that is. Several months ago, a friend recommended Evernote. There are a lot of things I like about Evernote. I like the clipping feature, and I like the IDEA of being able to access my notes from many locations. Unfortunately, I recently lost a lot of data to Evernote. As in POOF – gone forever.

I was recently on vacation, and I started making some travel notes with Evernote. As luck would have it, my vacation area didn’t have great coverage, and Evernote had a lot of trouble every time it tried to sync with the Evernote server.  Initially the result was relatively benign but nevertheless annoying: sections of content would be duplicated several times throughout the document. I had to scroll up and down, find the old stuff, find the new stuff, delete the duplicate stuff, and save it again. Annoying, but doable.

Until the very last day. Over the course of my vacation I spent several hours making notes so that I could remember specific details about the trip. And then the last day everything disappeared. Well . . . almost everything. I still have a blank document with a title, but that’s all. Everything else – all of my CONTENT – is gone. It happened after one of those periods when my local application was trying to phone home. Apparently something went awry, it couldn’t connect properly to the Evernote server, and Evernote inexplicably thought that I wanted to delete all of my content. Grrrrr. Double-grrrrr even.

These were just vacation notes, true. It wasn’t critical work/medical/financial information. But the principle is the same. I relied on the cloud. The cloud ate my data. The cloud failed. The scary thing is that more and more companies are pushing data for mobile devices into the cloud. While the idea is a good one, the execution is everything. If you’re going to eat my data, I really can’t trust your service. Moreover, I can’t in good conscience recommend it to others.