5 ms·

Libraries throw away tons of books and stuff. If a man-made object is degraded to the point where it's garbage, why not? Sure, some of these tomes may have been

Libraries throw away tons of books and stuff. If a man-made object is degraded to the point where it's garbage, why not? Sure, some of these tomes may have been recoverable, but if they aren't historically valuable for some reason, why save it? Same thing with any "historical" object, do you imagine that we'll want to save a copy of "Getting done in my butt by my butt" when it's old and yellowing just because it's old? Of course, that's not the point of the article, the article's point is that they recorded it on microfilm and now that's going bad, too. The headline here is awful, as any library worker will tell you libraries destroy books all the time for really good reasons.

ryanmercer 8y ago
>If a man-made object is degraded to the point where it's garbage, why not? Sure, some of these tomes may have been recoverable Or hasn't been checked out in years, or is grossly outdated then why waste physical space to preserve it. Sure, some patrons might find novelty in there being a book that mentions all 48 states of the U.S. bbbbuutttt there's 50 now. Or 'hey we've got 12 copies of The Da Vinci Code, no one has checked it out in 3 months... perhaps we should get rid of 11 of them'. In a private collection, sure. In a library, ehhhhh a public library's mission isn't to preserve a given work in perpetuity. Also in my experience libraries will attempt to sell the books first at fairly regular sales (I used to horde allowance and paper route money to go buy tons of science fiction and fantasy paperbacks when I was a kid for 10-50 cents a pop, it's how I discovered Stephen R. Donaldson and the Thomas Covenant books, I thought the paperback cover of Lord Foul's Bane looked evil and creepy. How I discovered Heinlein too) then only throw away what is truly damaged or didn't sell to make space for newer texts.
- FiatLuxDave 8y ago
  Not all books that are read are checked out. I think that some kinds of books should have a sheet or something so each person who reads it in the library can leave a mark. I'm still angry about the Dirac library moving a beautiful 1890's book on steam engineering to storage because "no one was checking it out". Of course no one was checking it out, it was a reference work!
  - dredmorbius 8y ago
    Some libraries do run reshelving carts through circ to note internal circulation. Even if only occasionally (sampling).
msabalau 8y ago
At public library where I worked as a youth we also end up getting rid of most of the "donations", keeping the occasional worthwhile book that seemed like it might actually fetch a buck at the annual book sale.
oftenwrong 8y ago
>Sure, some of these tomes may have been recoverable, but if they aren't historically valuable for some reason, why save it? Future historical value is hard to predict. Good example: >Worse is the implication is that if something is not "sufficiently interesting", if it's not part of the story a society wants to tell about itself, it's worthless. The future disagrees about what is and is not important, and why. That's the defining characteristic of the future. No one today cares what the Rosetta Stone actually says [4], yet it is more important to us (as the key to hieroglyphics) than it was to the society that made it. from http://carlos.bueno.org/2008/08/save-web.html http://carlos.bueno.org/2008/08/save-web.html
- shittyadmin 8y ago
  So store it digitally where it takes up less space. No need to keep a physical copy around.
  - 394549 8y ago
    > So store it digitally where it takes up less space. No need to keep a physical copy around. That's a glib answer that ignores the complexity of digital preservation. When you preserve something, you want it to last long term--decades to centuries. Storing things digitally entails choosing software, file formats, and storage media; and the long-term commitment to continuously copy and recopy, convert and reconvert, and test and retest as the technology you choose becomes obsolete. Plus, with digitization, you have the added risk of correctable scanning errors becoming permanent, once the originals are destroyed. Digital works are some of the most ephemeral ever created, to the point where future historians may experience our era as a kind of dark age: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_dark_age https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_dark_age
    - shittyadmin 8y ago
      Don't bullshit me, copying files and applying error correction is trivial compared to maintaining paper copies of books which degrade and burn. We write emulators for just about every popular old computer system, so even if you have to use a dated reader to extract the info, should be possible. We have whole organizations dedicated to digital preservation that would have no issue doing this for millions of books.

ryanmercer 8y ago

>If a man-made object is degraded to the point where it's garbage, why not? Sure, some of these tomes may have been recoverable Or hasn't been checked out in years, or is grossly outdated then why waste physical space to preserve it. Sure, some patrons might find novelty in there being a book that mentions all 48 states of the U.S. bbbbuutttt there's 50 now. Or 'hey we've got 12 copies of The Da Vinci Code, no one has checked it out in 3 months... perhaps we should get rid of 11 of them'. In a private collection, sure. In a library, ehhhhh a public library's mission isn't to preserve a given work in perpetuity. Also in my experience libraries will attempt to sell the books first at fairly regular sales (I used to horde allowance and paper route money to go buy tons of science fiction and fantasy paperbacks when I was a kid for 10-50 cents a pop, it's how I discovered Stephen R. Donaldson and the Thomas Covenant books, I thought the paperback cover of Lord Foul's Bane looked evil and creepy. How I discovered Heinlein too) then only throw away what is truly damaged or didn't sell to make space for newer texts.

FiatLuxDave 8y ago
Not all books that are read are checked out. I think that some kinds of books should have a sheet or something so each person who reads it in the library can leave a mark. I'm still angry about the Dirac library moving a beautiful 1890's book on steam engineering to storage because "no one was checking it out". Of course no one was checking it out, it was a reference work!
- dredmorbius 8y ago
  Some libraries do run reshelving carts through circ to note internal circulation. Even if only occasionally (sampling).

msabalau 8y ago

At public library where I worked as a youth we also end up getting rid of most of the "donations", keeping the occasional worthwhile book that seemed like it might actually fetch a buck at the annual book sale.

oftenwrong 8y ago

>Sure, some of these tomes may have been recoverable, but if they aren't historically valuable for some reason, why save it? Future historical value is hard to predict. Good example: >Worse is the implication is that if something is not "sufficiently interesting", if it's not part of the story a society wants to tell about itself, it's worthless. The future disagrees about what is and is not important, and why. That's the defining characteristic of the future. No one today cares what the Rosetta Stone actually says [4], yet it is more important to us (as the key to hieroglyphics) than it was to the society that made it. from http://carlos.bueno.org/2008/08/save-web.html http://carlos.bueno.org/2008/08/save-web.html

shittyadmin 8y ago
So store it digitally where it takes up less space. No need to keep a physical copy around.
- 394549 8y ago
  > So store it digitally where it takes up less space. No need to keep a physical copy around. That's a glib answer that ignores the complexity of digital preservation. When you preserve something, you want it to last long term--decades to centuries. Storing things digitally entails choosing software, file formats, and storage media; and the long-term commitment to continuously copy and recopy, convert and reconvert, and test and retest as the technology you choose becomes obsolete. Plus, with digitization, you have the added risk of correctable scanning errors becoming permanent, once the originals are destroyed. Digital works are some of the most ephemeral ever created, to the point where future historians may experience our era as a kind of dark age: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_dark_age https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_dark_age
  - shittyadmin 8y ago
    Don't bullshit me, copying files and applying error correction is trivial compared to maintaining paper copies of books which degrade and burn. We write emulators for just about every popular old computer system, so even if you have to use a dated reader to extract the info, should be possible. We have whole organizations dedicated to digital preservation that would have no issue doing this for millions of books.