6 ms·
As much as I love libraries, they are extremely inefficient considering their purpose.
by rorrr 15y ago
As much as I love libraries, they are extremely inefficient considering their purpose.
- pagekalisedown 15y agoMost libraries have moved beyond just renting out books a while ago.
- baddox 15y agoWhat do they do now? I know some provide desks, wifi, services like fax and copy machines (which they usually charge for), and public classes (reading clubs, basic computer classes, etc.).
- rorrr 15y agoMost US libraries have huge collections of videos (VHS, DVDs), most of them are entertainment, like regular crappy action movies, and there's no real good reason for them to be in the library. Many US libraries have audio (CDs, cassetes). Most of them are just as senseless.
- a_a_r_o_n 15y agoAre you saying that libraries should only have sensible holdings? Which ones are those? I once checked out le Carré's Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy. It was something of an action novel, and it was entertaining. Was that one OK?
- rorrr 15y agoI think libraries (as buildings) aren't really needed anymore. Switch the library model to digital, it would be orders of magnitude cheaper, and you only really need one large website instead of 120,000 buildings throughout the country. If you need to save money right now, ditch all videos.
- yummyfajitas 15y agoI think the point is that this is the sort of thing people should buy/rent for themselves, rather than demanding other people to rent it for them.
- softbuilder 15y agoExact same argument could be made for books. Why don't we rent books?
- yummyfajitas 15y agoGood question. Here in India this is exactly how it is done. (I'm told a few public libraries do exist, but I've never seen one.) Given that the private sector does seem fully capable of providing libraries to those who want them, why do we subsidize them?
- softbuilder 15y agoIf I'm too poor to rent a book, how do I get it?
- galadriel 15y agoIf it is India, you are probably too poor to be literate, or if literate, you have very little time to engage in privilege of reading books. So the answer is I guess, you don't. Pretty much like you don't get (decent) healthcare for poor in US.
- corin_ 15y agoThe private sector is equally capable of providing hospitals, policemen, firefighters, governments, roads... The question is rarely as simple as "could the private sector do it?"
- yummyfajitas 15y agoUm, the theory behind the government provisioning of police, firefighters and roads is that they are a public good. I.e., people will refuse to pay for police while enjoying not being murdered.
- derleth 15y ago> Are you saying that libraries should only have sensible holdings? Which ones are those? You're being facetious, but this is precisely the question libraries have always faced, through thin times and fat, regardless of the social and political winds. They have only so much shelf space and face the simple fact nobody will come to a location that doesn't offer them anything they want. There's a very old political debate at bottom: Should a government institution give the taxpayers what they want, or should it focus more on giving them what the better-educated types decide they need? Go the first way and you're competing with Wal-Mart and Barnes & Noble; go the second and you have a wonderful temple to Sanctioned Knowledge that, to a first approximation, nobody really cares about. So, yes, what are 'sensible' holdings? Do you have any answers?
- a_a_r_o_n 15y agoDemand mixed with a librarian's sense of worth/taste is one approach. There are many others. And libraries do have to choose due to shelf space and publisher agreements. My hackles rise whenever I hear someone tell me what's worthwhile and what's not. But I do recognize practical necessity. I don't believe there's anything magical about the book/text format over electronic/other formats, other than "that's how it's been" up until recently. I would be pleased to see "Fart Proudly" in any library's holdings, regardless of format. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fart_Proudly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fart_Proudly
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- beedogs 15y agoI agree! Libraries should only stock reference materials. To hell with this "popular culture" BS.
- softbuilder 15y agoHmm. I'd love to seem some hard stats on that. Don't forget that libraries host community events, children's books, story time, literacy programs, and give poor people access to computers, printers, and the internet.
- firefoxman1 15y agoA new trying-to-be-hip library just opened up in my city. They do a pretty good job of it too. The theme seems to be "How well can we copy Barnes and Noble?" Not only does it include a small coffee shop, but they have a dedicated children's section that looks a lot like Barnes and Noble's (the whole fairy-tail etc. style with elaborate decorations). They even had an opening night where they had the local hit-music radio station came and hosted dance party, complete with neon lights, glow sticks and pounding music (no old lady saying "SHHH" that night). They rent out conference rooms and have a large auditorium with a theater-sized movie screen. The last time I was there they were showing Kung-Fu Panda which attracted a decent crowd. It's one library that has changed with the times.
- Volpe 15y agoWhich purpose are you ascribing the inefficiency to?
- rorrr 15y agoSpreading information.
- bpodgursky 15y agoIt depends on whether you consider the purpose as technically enabling the spreading of information/books, or actually encouraging people to go and read and study. Sure people are able to go and buy or download each of the books in there, but IMO kids still gain a ton from wandering around the stacks until they find something interesting. It's also a good way to impress upon kids the huge amount of gathered knowledge out there, and how important it is to make use of it...
- rorrr 15y agoI think modern kids are online already, and are exposed to all kinds of information. No library in the world can even come close to Wikipedia + Google image search.
- tonyedgecombe 15y agoIn theory you are right, in reality most kids probably don't move off Facebook other than to cheat on their homework.
- learc83 15y agoJust like in reality most kids didn't go to the library unless forced, and spent half their time looking for dirty books.
- Cadsby 15y agoI strongly disagree. In New York you can walk into almost any library in the city in the middle of the afternoon, head to the children's/young adult section, and find a ton of kids/teens reading, browsing, engaging in local events, etc. I've found this to be especially true in poorer neighborhoods in the Bronx and Brooklyn, the kind of places where some people assume no one would interested in partaking of these resources. (I have family in these areas so I visit these neighborhoods a lot) Remember also, libraries are much more than storage buildings for lots of dead tree books. They provide important services to their communities - e.g. adult literacy assistance, job/resume services, basic internet access and a whole lot more. A lot of kids (and adults) get a great deal out of their local library. I still vividly remember the very first book that I picked up by chance while browsing the Sci-Fi section and couldn't put down until I fell asleep with it in my hands at 5am.
- ww520 15y agoLibraries are extremely valuable for their purposes.
- kiloaper 15y agoYou seem to have a very narrow view of what libraries provide. Libraries, at least where I'm from, are far more than book storage facilities. They're essential community centers which promote education, literacy and social interaction. They host events from kids competitions to senior citizens groups. You can't replicate that online.
- ams6110 15y agoMy local library is a hangout for the homeless who look at porn on the public computers and masturbate in the bathrooms. The library administration refuse to filter adult content as they consider it to be "censorship."