This generation of kids truly are digital natives because they know this shit so well that it's second nature to them.euuuurghh
Also, nothing prevents libraries/community centers/ from lending out cheap e-devices that patrons fill with literature.Well, except budget cuts that take away the money to buy e-readers and e-books. It's really difficult for me to wrap my head around exactly what kind of fantasy land you live in, to be honest.
Are they closing libraries, or not funding interlibrary loan programs? The article seems to imply the former...They're cutting all state funds. In big cities, state funds are used for things like interlibrary loan and adult literacy programs but not for operating budgets. They may have to cut some programs, but it won't be the end of the world. The libraries that will really suffer are the rural ones. They don't have as much of a tax base, so they rely on state funding for basic operating expenses. And ILL is a much more important thing at small libraries that can't afford to buy a lot of books. So basically I think it's a hassle for urban libraries and a really big problem for rural ones. At least, that's the impression I got from the first article.
Maybe it's pointless for me to talk about what California libraries should do and not do when my thoughts are heavily colored by living in Sweden and by me being a techie.No offense, but I think your thoughts are heavily colored by not having the tiniest clue what you're talking about. But I'm relieved to hear that you live in Sweden, because at least you've got an excuse for not knowing what you're talking about!
By the same logic, only a small percentage of people use buses, compared to owning a car. Surely our societal resources would be best dedicated to the idea of 'transport for everyone' by shutting off all funding to public transport, and instead subsidising luxury SUVs?I think that's an excellent analogy, and the answer is, yes, the people who want to de-fund libraries typically also want to de-fund public transit. And in both instances, it's a vicious cycle, because the less funds those public goods have, the less appealing they are to people who have other choices. And when people with power don't use the library or ride the bus, it's easier for them to assume buses and libraries are irrelevant and further cut their funds.
It's slightly dated, but do you honestly think that in 5 years we've had a sudden amazing turn around in the economic situation of the very poor?
Analysis of the data from the 2007 survey pointed to an emerging trend that raised serious concerns for public libraries — patron and community needs for Internet access, training, and services were quickly outpacing the ability of libraries to meet those needs (Bertot, et al., 2008a, 2008b; McClure, et al., 2007). This situation was the result of a confluence of major factors such as public libraries being the only source of free public Internet access in three–quarters of communities;
I think we just envision the role of libraries differently. You seem to see them as service providers, supplying information that would be better off digitized and delivered through private networks. I see them as not only supplying a lot of material not amenable to that treatment but also supplying and even fostering a whole ecosystem of experiences and relationships vital to a community, especially in a democracy.And to expand on 'material not amenable to that treatment', I'd like to point out that first not everything can be filtered through google. It takes skill and focus sometimes to search out appropriate data and information, and a general purpose search engine can only go so far. Many libraries pay for patron access to specialized databases in a number of focused areas like medicine and small business. Add to that back archives in magazines and newspapers. These are things that individuals could certainly pay access fees for, but they would have to discover them first, and then decide if the price was worth it.
Tablet PCs are down to $35 and in fifteen years will cost less than your lunch. Meanwhile, mobile broadband is increasing exponentially. So even in very poor neighborhoods we can project that it will be easier to provide universal digital access than to maintain brick-and-mortar repositories for print media.In the flier for Senior Tech Zone days at my local library, one of the things they offer to do is teach patrons how to use Google. We are talking about people who need lessons to use search engines, never mind more complicated computer tasks. The only place where they can get those lessons is at the library. So when you say we should abolish libraries and give everyone tablets and broadband, who exactly are you envisioning will show people how to use their tablets? The phantom librarians and other library staff who you've just fired?
The social aspect of libraries is important, and replacements should be developedIn what ways will these replacements improve on what we've already got?
It doesn't make sense to maintain buildings and staff for the purpose of training people to use the tablet PCs that eliminate the original need for those buildings and staff.I'm truly trying to figure out our disconnect here. I think maybe it's that you think the function of a library is to house books? The main function of a library is provide information. Some of that comes from books, and some of it comes from other other sources. So if a library were to provide tablets and teach people how to use them, that would be within "the original function" of the library. And providing people with tablets would eliminate the need for a space that provides information, because people do not instinctively know how to use technology.
That is a not what the word "library" originally meant and never has been.You're linking to an etymology dictionary to provide a modern definition of what a library does? If that's the right way to think about the question, we need to abolish all the hospitals, because the online etymology dictionary tells us that a hospital was originally a guest house or an inn. We've already got hotels, so I think we need to shut the hospitals down and reopen some sort of place for sick people to get treatment.
I suspect that state budgeteers disagree with that statement. Those who set library budgets define the library functions, not some anonymous user of an obscure web forum.When the budgeteers in my state explain their decision to shut down all the unemployment offices and have everyone file for unemployment online, they like to point out that everyone in the state should have internet access through the public library. So I think they've got the memo, whether or not you have.
But somewhere along the line, some misguided dolts decided that Californians shouldn't pay taxes, they made it insanely difficult for the state government to actually levy taxes, and boom - the whole place has been slowly crumbling ever since.But state and local tax revenues in California don't seem to be that low? Higher than average, anyway (12th highest, on that chart).
Our property tax - the one that's a steady source of revenue is limited thanks to Prop 13, which allows assessed home value to increase no more than 2% except in the case of a change of ownership or new construction.I see that to some extent, but it looks like California's per capita revenue from state and local property taxes was still in the top third, at least in 2008. Where California does seem to lag is the property tax burden as a percentage of home value. But it's not clear to what connection home value has to needed expenditures.
running order squabble fest: If I was a poor Californian kid, I would become an expert at Google Scholar.I'm pretty sure that was a joking reference to a particularly embarrassing Forbes column that made the rounds a few months back.
And that would get you -- what? A few abstracts?
7) The understanding that by downloading the file, even if it exists, it is a most likely a crime, depending on the situation and that the person downloading and whoever owns the computer can be held responsible for that action.Do you actually think that authors get paid when people check out their books from the library? There's no difference between checking out a book from the library and torrenting it, in terms of how much money the author gets.
8) The understanding that unless it is a file in the public domain, you have contributed to cheating someone out of part of their living by not purchasing or not using a copy of the intellectual property that was properly acquired.
California is in a permanent budget crisis, due to the previously mentioned Proposition 13. One of its other provisions requires a 2/3 super-majority to pass a budget bill or tax increase. It's the prototype for Grover Norquist's "starve the beast" strategy & makes it incredibly difficult to get the legislature to agree to spend any money at allIt only takes 50% of the vote to change the law via referendum.
Because, you know, poorly-paid police and firefighters with bad retirement and health options are a good thing for a city.There’s a substantial amount of daylight between “poorly paid” and what we’ve got now, which is total lunacy. I know of beat cops here in Oakland pulling north of $200K after overtime, and our twenty-two-unit apartment building is owned (and neglected) by an SF firefighter. These guys have strong unions and they absolutely refuse to back down from their unsupportable arrangements.
Delmoi, I don't know about the US But in some countries authors are compensated (only a small amount, it's true) based on loans.Well, that is definitely not true in the U.S. Which is where California is located.
There absolutely is a difference -- which is that the library had to buy the book in the first place. And if it's a popular book, they're going to buy a lot of copies.Someone had to buy the book to scan it and upload it as well. It's just more efficient.
In bad weather -- hot, cold, or wet -- most of the homeless have nowhere to go but public places. The local shelters push them out onto the streets at six in the morning and, even when the weather is good, they are already lining up by nine, when the library opens, because they want to sit down and recover from the chilly dawn or use the restrooms. Fast-food restaurants, hotel lobbies, office foyers, shopping malls, and other privately owned businesses and properties do not tolerate their presence for long. Public libraries, on the other hand, are open and accessible, tolerant, even inviting and entertaining places for them to seek refuge from a world that will not abide their often disheveled and odorous presentation, their odd and sometimes obnoxious behaviors, and the awkward challenges they present to those who encounter them.Indeed, as far as I know (and Jessamyn would know better) the American Library Association's Policy 61 is still current:
Concrete programs of training and development are needed to sensitize and prepare library staff to identify poor people’s needs and deliver relevant services. And within the American Library Association the coordinating mechanisms of programs and activities dealing with poor people in various divisions, offices, and units should be strengthened, and support for low-income liaison activities should be enhanced.posted by running order squabble fest at 7:31 AM on February 13, 2012 [1 favorite]
« Older Constitutions of Classic Cocktails... | A discussion of compensation f... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by jaduncan at 3:10 AM on February 12, 2012 [14 favorites]