I live in a suburb of Los Angeles and I occasionally do work at a local library branch. I overhear a lot of the patrons' conversations at the reference desk. It's astounding how much people still struggle to find quality information in "the information age". It's no surprise given the rise of poorly vetted articles spread on social media.
I realize how much of a role librarians can play in guiding people towards more reliable information sources. The key takeaway from the article shared is that libraries are still effective places for people to build self-reliance with regard to information seeking. It's an important skill that doesn't always get taught in schools for whatever reason.
I believe that the ability to filter out low quality is a symptom of the declining role that libraries play in our educational system. I was privileged enough to go to schools that had libraries and trained librarians attached. Part of our curriculum included a library class in which the librarians taught us to investigate the credibility of a piece by actually reading the sources cited.
Modern resources such as Wikipedia are a treasure, but are only valuable if examined with a critical eye.
Support your local libraries, especially their outreach programs.
I respect your opinion and the belief that library education continues.
I think a far greater cause is the lack of critical thinking taught in schools, the lack of engaged debate and encouraging people to think for themselves and gather their own information. We had to write persuastive papers, research topics from encyclopedias, etc. It seems kids don't do that in school these days. (get off my lawn)
> the lack of critical thinking taught in schools, the lack of engaged debate and encouraging people to think for themselves and gather their own information
I just said it was a symptom since the article was about libraries, not THE symptom or the only symptom :) Remember, this is a new problem. Growing up, I had channels 2, 4, 7, 50, and 62. If you didn't mind the static and repositioning the antenna, there were a few more channels :). National news was on for one hour a night, maybe more on Sundays and was presented by erudite news anchors in a time where good looks were not a factor in getting the job. If you wanted to comment on an issue, you had to write a letter by hand, giving you time to cool yourself down and not respond in a knee-jerk way.
I somewhat agree, but information used to be curated by gatekeepers well versed in the subject matter, not released in a torrential digital firehose with little or no curation. Has the level of critical thinking really declined or was it always this way? People from my father's generation may have had less critical thinking skills as they were much more trusting of authority. Those educated under No Child Left Behind aren't really old enough to be in charge yet.
Somewhat relevant story: I appreciated the education I received, but I remember when I questioned why fuck am I reciting the Pledge of Allegiance when the entirety of it is horseshit...especially the liberty and justice for all portion. So, instead of performing the pledge, I finished up some homework that was due in AP Calc. My math teacher was so incensed he threw me out of class and told me to report to the principal's office where I proceeded to say I didn't stand because I injured my foot so that I wasn't suspended.
FWIW the patrons I mentioned seem to skew older. Often they are convinced that the mainstream media or local government body x is stifling coverage of some news story they want to know more about. These are generally along the lines of the "pizzagate" story. One woman recently was convinced the government was blocking the AM radio broadcast of some political commentator.
I want to highlight that these are completely normal looking middle aged men and women that do not appear to be under the influence of drugs. These are not the (false) stereotypical backwoods conspiracy nuts. Again, this is suburban Los Angeles. I don't know what their educational levels are or where they attended school, but clearly (and stating the obvious) -- our educational system is failing to impart basic research and critical thinking skills to huge sections of our population.
I'm willing to bet that many younger people are skeptical of mainstream media nowadays, too. The collusion between media and the DNC to suppress Sanders from being the democratic nominee made me bitter at least, and I'm willing to bet it's made a lot of other people bitter, too. Then with the blatant clickbait claims that Pewdiepie is racist, white people cause all of our problems, and "8 [whatever] you just CAN'T live without" posts, I don't see my trust in media ever returning.
I've thought about that recently. The right type of skepticism came out of the election. I'm grouping all sides/factions together and, I may be wrong, but I don't see it as an increase in critical thinking. I just see it as an outright dismissal of the credibility of any information coming from the nebulous establishment or mainstream, accompanied by an acceptance of any conspiracy theory that paints the mainstream in a negative light. It's skepticism that discriminates based upon the messenger, not critical analysis of the content of the message.
I joke, but I also weep knowing that if there were an article that claimed that either candidate supported relaxing or increasing regulations on the chemical dihydrogen monoxide, a significant number of people would think it was a serious issue without actually researching it.
Just my 2c regarding PewDiePie: He may be a youtube star, but he not a comedian and not humorous IMO. Don't make jokes about touchy subjects if you aren't exceptionally funny or have a very thorough and intimate understanding of the subject. There's a reason Louis C.K. can do skits on controversial subjects without being pilloried, he's not a crass amateur. If no one laughs, at best it comes off as insensitive. Also, his fan base is primarily 12-15 yr olds, not exactly old enough to understand the subtleties of satire. Kramer's racist rant post-Seinfeld at least was aimed at adults.
Education isn't educated. Most people don't know who is Chris Hedges or Cornel West. Hollywood gossip, "social" apps and working 1-3 jobs too often displaces vital civic participation, resistance to corrupt authorities and self-enlightenment.
Sadly though, Trumps budget would completely eliminate the Institute of Museum and Library Services. This would be devastating for library services cross the country.
China, which happens to have >1 billion more people than the US, will be spending less than half of what the US is already spending (before the $50 billion increase) as soon as they double their defense spending.
I'm not arguing with that, simply stating that there is already an obscene amount of funding for our military. I don't believe for a second that it is necessary.
The US is, at the least to an equal extent, also where it is because of its excellent possibilities to have access to a free flow of information and stable not profit motivated institutions that allow that access. This includes libraries.
What they've oftentimes fought for since the birth of the country - powerful business interests sometimes masquerading under political campaign rhetoric of "freedom" or "justice." Whether it's over taxation or slavery, economic impetus is the seed for most conflicts in the US and in the 20th century evolved into ideological conflicts that harm US business interests.
According to some high-ranking North Korean defectors, they actually built it themselves with no direct assistant from China or Russia -- which explains why they are so crappy. Their nuclear program is still young and poorly funded.
That's why I mentioned intelligence. You need proxy wars, coups, espionage, state-funded terrorism, etc etc in other countries to maintain your power. The US excels at that.
> completely eliminate the Institute of Museum and Library Services.
The IMLS was established in 1996 with an annual budget of merely $200 million. As a comparison, the funding for libraries in tiny Arlington County, Virginia with a population of only ~200,000 is 13 million dollars[1]. This department may be doing meaningful work, but it is hardly work that could not be undertaken by local governments coordinating for the betterment of their own residents.
As a broader argument, libraries are primarily supported at the local level with state oversight. There's no real need for an entire Federal department to further oversea and attempt to control the practices of local bodies.
I am a great fan of government, and government funding of the arts and education but I believe it should be done at the local level where citizens can meaningfully affect the government which is doing the work.
Federal funds, if given, should be given gratis to states without any mandates or provisions the most general sense.
>This department may be doing meaningful work, but it is hardly work that could not be undertaken by local governments coordinating for the betterment of their own residents.
This assumes that what should happen will happen in the absence of federal funding. Can you provide an historical example of when this has been the case?
I volunteered at my local library and they were struggling at times in terms of man power. I think they had too much responsibility but the budget of someone who handles books only.
Books, Internet, Movies and music, Free lunch for kids under 18, Some computer classes occasionally, Meeting areas for adults, Club activities for kids, Occasionally local cops organized "Pokemon Go with an Officer", magazines, subscription to many newspapers, etc etc.
Most people don't think of volunteering in libraries either. They were back logged with shelving out the books that hadn't been checked out in a while. Without doing this, they can't really keep getting new books. Trying to manage the CD/DVD is also more hassle than you think. You have to regularly clean it and get rid of the ones thats too damaged.
My college library is decent too. Nothing like the public one. Especially considering the college one probably is better funded.
A lot of people from a lot of different age group depend on the library for the internet though.
If you haven't been near your public library's internet area for a while, you should go--it is an eye opener to see not only that they are full to capacity, but also that there is often a wait list involved.
European libraries are really nothing like American ones, at least the few I've been to. They are still very much in the "books and only books" mindset that American libraries were at 50 years ago. It's funny, too, because libraries are such an American institution that you'd think the power of tradition would be fairly strong here. Perhaps the constant fight for funding and relevance has propelled their evolution.
The last time I went to a library was in Sweden, and it was a fantastic library. They had all the multimedia stuff you could want - wifi, internet computers, a "media lab" for audio/video/music editing/XCode, digital media rentals, plenty of study areas in a gorgeous area with panoramic windows onto a park https://1001libraries.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/malmocityl...
The computer/wifi access does require a library card, but that doesn't seem to onerous to me.
Libraries are alive and well. The problem as exhibited by threads like this is that America has been infected by selfishness and cynicism.
Since having my son I really have had my eyes open to the value of libraries. As a resource for learning, community, and programming, they are immensely valuable. You look around in my urban branch library and you see people of all ages, backgrounds. They are reading, playing, socializing, working. That's what America is supposed to be about.
Libraries in London are very much like libraries in the U.S. My local library (in London) has many internet computers, which are always full as the OP described. Library has wifi too but the quality is not so great. It's sort of ironic, because it's the library in Tim Berners Lee's hometown, and even has a big WWW plaque outside it. You'd expect it to have the best internet ever :).
I haven't been here long enough to really judge (I've only checked the libraries in Clapham Junction and Clapham Common), but I can see a contradiction here:
> Libraries in London are very much like libraries in the U.S.
> Library has wifi too but the quality is not so great
When I was living in Canada, libraries would be open 24/7 during exams. That was just... incredible. In France you're lucky if you have restrooms in the library.
> one had a really bad internet you would activate by asking for a coupon, it would then be limited to 500MB
While 500MB is low for this day and age, I assume they did this to dissuade people from using the internet for recreational purposes instead of research.
> the other one had no internet if you did not have a library card
In the States, a lot of public services are judged on their utilisation. If a library cannot demonstrate a lot of residents are frequenting it, the government might cut its budget the next time around.
I was in Boston last week on business, and I took a meeting at the Boston Public Library downtown in Copley. I had the exact same thought walking through that area on a Saturday morning. It was packed (although not quite to capacity). I casually observed what was on screens, and it was everything from Facebook, to games, to Wikipedia.
I suppose I haven't been to many large main branch libraries, but the BPL main branch is amazing to me. The building itself is incredible but the services they provide are top notch.
It hosts great scheduled talks/discussions (for instance on Tuesday Neil Gaiman will be there for an on-stage interview).
The quiet workspaces are great places to get work done, and something about the architecture/interior/history really helps keep one motivated while there.
Maybe this is normal for every state but any resident of MA is eligible to get a library card. It's worth it for the digital rentals alone.
They also host free tours of the building, which I haven't done yet but have been meaning to.
So long as we're showering love on libraries, the Boston Public Library was the first municipal public library in the United States, established in 1848.
On a vaguely related note, in looking up information on production and copyright of books within the US a few months back, I dug through the history of the Library of Congress, and specifically the Librarian's annual report to Congress on the state and status of the library, dating to about 1860. It's quite the trip.
The Library, Internet Archive, and Hathi Trust have most of the reports, in scanned PDFs.
Used to remember when my public library would kick you out if you did anything that wasn't research-related. Now I see people playing Minecraft and browsing FB on library computers...
My local library is the same. Absolutely packed in the afternoon/evening until close. Lots of teenagers. Many just doing fun internet stuff (games, social media, etc.) - but also getting pulled aside for homework help and tutoring.
Anecdote: My cousin lives in a rural area and is enrolled in college while working. His only internet at home is satellite, so to do his online homework he has to drive to the library to use the wifi.
Ironically we go to the library much less now that its easy to borrow ebooks with kindle and reading apps. overdrive is great. I was starting to see a future without libraries.
The libraries here seem to have transitioned heavily to services and tech.
The computers have not only internet, but MS Office and Adobe products, and I see everything from playing games and social media to job hunting and learning being done on them. (There's even a special bank of computers with resources for job hunting downtown.)
Pretty much every day, the library holds some kind of starting a business, learning to use tech, ESL, or other kind of class.
Then there's the cultural shows (opera, movies, story readings) and free tax prep services at the central branch downtown.
The library also provides desks to work at, which are used by students (HS and college), professionals, the homeless, etc. The value of a workspace in the city is itself fairly large. I made frequent use of it when working as a freelancer. Cheaper than coworking space, cafe on site, reliable internet, etc.
And of course, the library is still a library. Their ebook collection is nowhere near the size and scope of their physical book collection. Not just the normal stuff of modern books, but fairly large archives of things like financial reports, magazine editions, etc stretching back nearly 100 years (longer in a few cases), a rare book collection, specialty archives, a collection of official government documents, and probably more Im forgetting.
That isn't stuff I need every day, most of my borrowing is (or could be) ebook/audiobook, but I think the city would be poorer without a publicly owned archive of history, even if there were digital copies available. There's something about reading a book older than your great grandparents that digital copies don't replace.
People have a hard time realizing libraries are so much more than books these days. I'm a former library employee, and it was always interesting seeing how the library adapted to interests and needs of the community.
My local library now has as big of a movie rental library (for free!) as any Blockbuster back in the day, has 3D printers available for use, and office areas meant for use by startups needing some space to work.
The library has an extensive DVD collection (TV, movies, etc), CD collection (music, etc), script collection (plays and other theater), sheet music collection, music practice rooms, and of course, a foreign language collection for all the kinds of media.
Oh! And a collection of maps, covering both a large geographic area and over time so you can see the evolution of local cities. (Actually, 3 map collections -- US government Dept of Interior/USGS, other broad scale ones, and then a special collection for local ones.)
Im pretty sure I'm still forgetting things. The library system is actually kind of awe-inspiring in what they manage to collect and archive. Once you consider their relationships with local university archives, other cities, and county level systems, their total system is staggering.
I could never say enough good things about the library, and it's one of the best civic investments we make because it does so many things at once.
In a surprisingly large number of families where one family member earns a lot and the other much less, the cost of daycare can match or even occasionally outstrip the money brought into the family by the lower-wage earner. My wife recently started working at an early learning center, and during the summer, her salary is nearly entirely devoted to paying for the day camp for our school-age kids. If she had wanted to work full-time before they had started school, we'd most likely have been in the red.
The physical space is a big one, I think. There are many ways a library could be "replaced": Wikipedia, content piracy, cheaper home Internet and so on. But simply having a physical place is something Google cannot give you. That's why library architecture is such a huge part of the literature, I think.
But based on our numbers and the community research we've done over the years, I think it's still physical materials the drive the bus. People like stuff, real stuff.
People with large book collections never _needed_ the library, it was always the people who had no budget from books that benefited the most. I think that will continue to be the case, maybe more so if they take on the mantle of internet access.
Here, in Toronto, you can borrow ebooks from the public library without physically being at the library. You will not find the latest edition but it is suffice for most patrons. The Reference Library at downtown is decent (good atmosphere) but WiFi is intermittent at times.
On paper, Overdrive is everything I want, but every time I try to use the damn Android app it makes me want to just drive to the library instead. How many times should I need to enter my library card # to check out an ebook?
Just a heads up, but the most recent update really helped with that. It keeps you logged in longer. That was a major frustration, I think I probably had about 50 comments on it.
I'd love for libraries to get involved more in tech. I think they are really the ideal public sponsored unit to move quickly and break things in a way that school's aren't.
I have a nephew who is 2.5 with 2 uncles involved in tech and his dad writes some code part time. We've already talked about getting him into programming and electronics.
As technical skills become more and more important I worry that the school system just isn't fast enough to adapt and there is going to be a massive inequality between kids who have relative/parents who encourage the development of these skills and those who don't.
My local library has 250mbs of fiber going to it. Nothing amazing in the days of gigabit but it's by far the best free internet access you can get. However, they have it locked down to just web traffic. You can't use GitHub, download any software, SSH into a server...
Please don't post to HN like you've done in this thread. It takes discussions off-topic (as clearly seen below) and into flamewar territory. This breaks the site guidelines. We're hoping for more thoughtful conversation.
Ok. But I wish you would have flagged the parent poster as well. He brought up the IMLS, which is a huge waste of money, and further called its planned budget cuts "devastating". Not sure how a loss of 600k in funding to libraries in Houston is devastating when we are the only city in the world that paid for TWO stadiums with convertible roofs.
Further, the IMLS that he referenced supports over 150,000 libraries and museums, averaging about $1,000 each. Not sure how that's "devastating".
So I get that you don't like my tone, and I'll pay more attention to that, but the parent's post was a huge exaggeration, which is why I took that tone. And yes, I should have written it better.
I always find it odd when people say 'tone' when it seems obvious that the problem is about content, but thank you kindly for the good will.
Your point about library funding far exceeds my library funding expertise (a.k.a. zero), but you can always post another reply to the original comment, as long it's factual and civil.
IMLS was formed by combining two extant organizations which date back to 1976 and 1956.
Carnegie funded 1689 libraries in the US. Today there are nearly 17,000 public libraries, and about 120,000 libraries of all types. His library donations are worth about $2 billion in today's money, while IMLS's budget is over $200 million each year.
Carnegie's philanthropy was amazing and is to be admired, but I think your statement is a little off, not to mention rather rude.
I meant to be blunt, not rude. The reason is that we have a lot of crap that is spent and controlled by a small group of people well outside our control in Washington (regardless of political party).
With $20 trillion in debt, we need to start cutting things and giving control back to the states and cities. If we don't start now, then as interest rates rise, the interest payments on the debt will crowd out things we need. I'd rather
There's ton's of other crap to cut out of the budget, and I'm not trying to take a political stance here, but just because the government gives me cheese doesn't mean that's the best way.
Looking at the location in the article (Lower Peach Tree, AL) is poor as it gets (and is unincorporated). But somewhere along the line, the people of that state of Alabama decided that supporting the Crimson tide was more important than internet connectivity. Why should someone in NYC or LA, or anywhere outside of AL have to pay for that decision?
I live in Houston, where we have horrible roads (seriously, ask anyone who's ever been here). But when you ask people if they'd like to raise taxes to have better roads, the answer is no (I'd pay more, but clearly I'm in the minority). Should I make you pay for our roads because we don't want to?
My understanding of "blunt" would have been a straight statement of facts. Statements like "I think we'll survive" and "maybe you can search for him" ain't it.
Making sarcastic and condescending comments is not the same as being “blunt”. Your original post was basically the textual version of an eye-roll emoji.
Some unsolicited advice: if you assume that your interlocutors are reasonable and intelligent adults who disagree with you because they come from a different background and have a different perspective rather than because they are idiots, you’ll get much more value out of conversations.
I like your emoji analogy. That being said, I was reacting to the parent's use of the word "devastating". Not sure how $1,000 per library is devastating.
I believe people on HN are reasonable, but the term "devastating" was hyperbole at best.
Clearly I'll spend more time on composing next time as I obviously hit a nerve, unintentionally.
The same Carnegie who, with his wealthy pals, bought a damn, turned it into a private sporting club, and failed to maintain it, causing a flood that killed 2200 people.
However, I would like to point out the the taxpayers funded over $600,000 for Houston libraries. Nice to know we can pay for two convertible roof stadiums while the taxpayers pay for our libraries.
And that's the issue. If we in houston had to pay for our choices, we'd make better ones or suffer the consequences. So, to me, the IMLS is wasting a ton of money. (It's hard for me to think we are the only ones benefiting from this largesse. )
The club was actually a corporation responsible for maintaining the dam, of which Carnegie was a part owner. The other members were largely executives in or with ties to Carnegie businesses:
From that link, he wasn't an original charter member, which means he didn't "bought a damn, turned it into a private sporting club", he just joined the club later on. And the club had 50 very wealthy people, of course they had ties with him.
I have no problem finding him legally responsible, since I like giving shareholders skin in the game, but your accusation is factually unsupported and highly misleading.
Actually, it not. If you want the full account, you can read David McCullough's book about the Johnstown Flood
Frick was essentially Carnegie's right-hand man, having been appointed to run Carnegie's businesses after he withdrew from their day to day operations to enjoy his wealth. The club was explicitly set up as a retreat for executives from Carnegie businesses or those with ties to them (it was informally known as "The Bosses Club"). Carnegie not being a charter member is immaterial, as it's simply an artifact of his slight remove from the day-to-day operations. He was certainly caught up in the suit that, were liability laws the same as they were today, Carnegie's business' would have been dragged down with him.
The fact that you're able to spend time leisurely on sites like HN implicitly groups you into a higher income bracket. If you couldn't afford a personal computer, your comment might be a little less snarky when the library was your primary resource.
Or maybe I just don't think the government trying to support 158,00 libraries and museums at an average of $1,000 is worth it.
If kids need broadband, then raise the local taxes to pay for it. Or solicit local donations. Frankly, I don't think it would take much to raise $1,000 for a library.
For example, if the local population is too stupid to fund it because they just raised $60 million for a new high school football stadium, then that's their problem, and I don't think I (or you) should have to pay for their ignorance. (I'm referencing a town in Texas that built a massive high school football stadium because they think it's more important that their education investment.)
TL;DR - just because something exists, doesn't mean it should. There are more efficient ways of doing things.
The $1,000/library is a bit misleading. Larger systems in wealthier and urban areas do not take much funding, since taxes are enough to support the services. Libraries tend to scale pretty well.
It's small libraries in rural areas that really need this support. Many communities cannot afford to support even the fixed costs of a library (a building and staff person), to say nothing of a collection or broadband. These largely rely on grants and support from the state and federal government.
If an area is in the income bracket where the majority of the population would need a library to access the internet, raising taxes in the area is only going to burden that community even more.
> Or maybe I just don't think the government trying to support 158,00 libraries and museums at an average of $1,000 is worth it.
We both look at the number and shake our heads, only you think it's far to high and I far to low.
>For example, if the local population is too stupid to fund it because they just raised $60 million for a new high school football stadium, then that's their problem, and I don't think I (or you) should have to pay for their ignorance. (I'm referencing a town in Texas that built a massive high school football stadium because they think it's more important that their education investment.
Just like with the "die poor, don't have kids you can't afford" argument, it may make you feel morally superior, but it actually makes you a short sighted dick.
The kids who will suffer because of it didn't decide to build that stadium or neglect the education infrastructure, they just get disadvantaged by it.
tl;dr - sometimes you just need to suck it up and pay for things you don't want to like an adult because it's better in the long run.
You are 100% right. I've worked for Uncle Sugar since 1981 as an AF officer and a contractor, and after seeing the way money gets spent, you're better off burying it in a fruit jar in your backyard than giving it to the government.
When one area has 100x the waste of the other and isn't nearly as easily auditable, it's a question of priorities. Going for this instead of defense procurement which is actually hard to cut is like DHS going after little old protesting ladies and patting themselves on the back.
The fact that you're able to spend time leisurely on sites like HN implicitly groups you into a higher income bracket
That's somewhat prejudiced. You can browse HN just fine with a cheap Android and any open wifi, which isn't hard to find in a city. Even the homeless have smartphones nowadays, for the most part.
Have fun buying scientific articles at 40$ a piece every time you need higher quality information than is found in pleb dumps like lifehacker or random medium blogs.
I realize how much of a role librarians can play in guiding people towards more reliable information sources. The key takeaway from the article shared is that libraries are still effective places for people to build self-reliance with regard to information seeking. It's an important skill that doesn't always get taught in schools for whatever reason.