4 ms·

You are thoroughly missing the point, although, to be fair, the author obfuscates it with the rant about shitty UI. The actual enshittification here is that re

You are thoroughly missing the point, although, to be fair, the author obfuscates it with the rant about shitty UI. The actual enshittification here is that readers used to be able to tell libraries what they wanted for free, and now this data is apparently an Advantage Plus(tm) premium feature that libraries need to pay for, so OverDrive can make more money.

vel0city 3y ago
Yeah but I can't really trust the rest of their deep analysis when they didn't even know the extremely basic fact libbyapp.com exists. Like, if they're missing that extremely basic thing, how can I trust they're not also missing big parts of the rest of the story? If I write a blog post with deep analysis about NASA but start off with a rant about how they faked the moon landing and the moon is made of cheese you probably wouldn't trust the rest of my writing right?
- mcdonje 3y ago
  They missed one thing that's mostly irrelevant to their point, so I can't trust anything they say, even when they back it up with expert commentary!
  - vel0city 3y ago
    How can I trust they even bothered to actually track down real experts when they didn't bother figuring out basic facts? And they act like Overdrive was free while Libby is charging, but Overdrive wasn't free before. There's no actual breakdown of the total costs of these two platforms, just some vague trust us its more expensive. Which I can't really trust a blog post of rumors without hard facts when the things I can check as hard facts are downright wrong!
    - shkkmo 3y ago
      Perhaps if you re-read the article you'd catch more of the facts. Overdrive and Libby are two apps from the same company. That company, Overdrive, has a monopoly and makes money charging libraries money to provide a service to that library's patrons for free.
      - vel0city 3y ago
        Your comment isn't sharing anything I didn't already know. The author is asking me to trust them about their research they did about some pricing change related to moving towards the Libby platform. They mention new subscriptions for libraries without actually sharing any of the actual pricing. Overdrive is going away, so whatever they were paying for Overdrive will go to $0. These numbers are entirely made up and not in line with whatever they were paying, just showing an example of how this whole argument of a new subscription doesn't necessarily mean things are radically more expensive. So say Overdrive cost the library $100. Now there's this new platform Libby, which while in development and not feature-complete with Overdrive was just tacked on free or whatever. Now the Overdrive platform is being deprecated and will cease soon, so they announce the pricing structures for Libby, $75. Oh no, what used to be $100 is now $175, what an increase! Oh wait, we forgot, Overdrive is going away, so in the end the costs are actually only $75. When the author can't track down the full story that Libby is available as a website it really reduces the trust I have that they actually figured out what the pricing models are as Overdrive goes away and Libby replaces it. I question if the author and their sources were even fully aware that Overdrive is fully going away soon, as that was only announced a few months ago. They never once actually shared "This was what the costs were with Overdrive, here is what the costs will be when its just Libby." Maybe the overall costs are going up! I don't know either way. I definitely don't have deep insights on exactly how the pricing models worked in the past nor in the future as I have never worked for a library. It wouldn't surprise me that costs would go up in a period with somewhat high inflation. It would almost be news if the price didn't go up. In the end though, I can't really trust someone who didn't bother researching the first basic and easily verifiable facts they bring up in their writing. Once again, if someone writes a post talking about specifics about NASA but starts off talking about how the moon landing was faked, would you trust the rest of their "trust me" writing?
        shkkmo 3y ago
        What you've done it taken a small, irrelevant detail and used it to ignore the entire rest of the article, including interviews with librarians who talk about how much worse the new request system is. You don't engage at all with the deeper underlying issue: we have a monopoly, owned by a notoriously unscrupulous private equity firm that holds control over the future of libraries. Do you see how stupid it is to nitpick the article for not having access to pricing data, when the real concern here should be that the pricing is not publicly available? The author freely admits they are not a professional journalist and what you are doing is gatekeeping that seems to serve no other purpose than to suppress a story that should be getting far more attention than it is. If you're concerned that other facts in this essay are off, (and they may well be, this is a solo essayist, not a professional journalist with a fact checker) then give them and hand, check other facts and send the author the information they missed.
- beej71 3y ago
  Most people feel this way, but I think it's a mistake. There's always something to learn, even if a basic thing is missed.
  - vel0city 3y ago
    So if I write an article about astrophysics but start off with the idea that we're all on a flat earth on the back of a giant turtle you'll continue trusting the rest of the document? The whole round earth thing is just a basic thing I missed!
    - beej71 3y ago
      I don't really trust anything to start so it's not that. But so many people say "I stopped reading at X", which means they're betting they will not be improved by anything at all that follows in the article. Flat Earthers aren't wrong about everything, after all.
BeetleB 3y ago
I see that Overdrive is taking away a nice feature. What the author is missing is the comparison with physical books, which never had this feature. You want to recommend the library get a book? You fill out the form they have. That process still works regardless of the format. Overdrive gave them something better than what they ever had, and then took it away. The libraries aren't left off worse than before. Personally, I always search using the library catalog's web site, so this whole article is about a feature I never saw. I would encourage everyone search that way instead of directly on Overdrive. I haven't looked up the numbers recently, but after a spike in ebook usage several years ago, the percentage dropped and I suspect continues to do so. Most people are over the hype and have returned to physical book usage.
- vel0city 3y ago
  > Overdrive gave them something better than what they ever had, and then took it away But the feature still exists, so this is just untrue.
- paulclinger 3y ago
  > What the author is missing is the comparison with physical books, which never had this feature. You want to recommend the library get a book? You fill out the form they have. That process still works regardless of the format. It doesn't. I used to be able to submit a request for printed and digital books, but my library stopped accepting those requests for digital books and (just as I commented elsewhere in this thread) now refers me to the Notify Me feature and Overdrive catalog (and if it's not in the catalog, I can't request it do be added).
  - vel0city 3y ago
    > and if it's not in the catalog, I can't request it do be added If its not in the catalog requesting it from the library isn't really doing anything for you but give you false hope of it appearing. Wouldn't you rather know your request isn't going to be fruitful ahead of time instead of thinking your request is doing something when its just going straight into the bin? And, can you really blame the library from not wanting to have to maintain two lists of digital requests, especially since those digital requests will probably be delivered through Libby and requesting through Libby will actually notify you when its available, and let you know if its an actually requestable title? Imagine going to a restaurant where they didn't have a menu you just asked the server for food and maybe eventually they'll show up sometime with food for you without ever telling you if they could even serve that dish. Somehow you'd prefer this model!
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

vel0city 3y ago

Yeah but I can't really trust the rest of their deep analysis when they didn't even know the extremely basic fact libbyapp.com exists. Like, if they're missing that extremely basic thing, how can I trust they're not also missing big parts of the rest of the story? If I write a blog post with deep analysis about NASA but start off with a rant about how they faked the moon landing and the moon is made of cheese you probably wouldn't trust the rest of my writing right?

mcdonje 3y ago
They missed one thing that's mostly irrelevant to their point, so I can't trust anything they say, even when they back it up with expert commentary!
- vel0city 3y ago
  How can I trust they even bothered to actually track down real experts when they didn't bother figuring out basic facts? And they act like Overdrive was free while Libby is charging, but Overdrive wasn't free before. There's no actual breakdown of the total costs of these two platforms, just some vague trust us its more expensive. Which I can't really trust a blog post of rumors without hard facts when the things I can check as hard facts are downright wrong!
  - shkkmo 3y ago
    Perhaps if you re-read the article you'd catch more of the facts. Overdrive and Libby are two apps from the same company. That company, Overdrive, has a monopoly and makes money charging libraries money to provide a service to that library's patrons for free.
    - vel0city 3y ago
      Your comment isn't sharing anything I didn't already know. The author is asking me to trust them about their research they did about some pricing change related to moving towards the Libby platform. They mention new subscriptions for libraries without actually sharing any of the actual pricing. Overdrive is going away, so whatever they were paying for Overdrive will go to $0. These numbers are entirely made up and not in line with whatever they were paying, just showing an example of how this whole argument of a new subscription doesn't necessarily mean things are radically more expensive. So say Overdrive cost the library $100. Now there's this new platform Libby, which while in development and not feature-complete with Overdrive was just tacked on free or whatever. Now the Overdrive platform is being deprecated and will cease soon, so they announce the pricing structures for Libby, $75. Oh no, what used to be $100 is now $175, what an increase! Oh wait, we forgot, Overdrive is going away, so in the end the costs are actually only $75. When the author can't track down the full story that Libby is available as a website it really reduces the trust I have that they actually figured out what the pricing models are as Overdrive goes away and Libby replaces it. I question if the author and their sources were even fully aware that Overdrive is fully going away soon, as that was only announced a few months ago. They never once actually shared "This was what the costs were with Overdrive, here is what the costs will be when its just Libby." Maybe the overall costs are going up! I don't know either way. I definitely don't have deep insights on exactly how the pricing models worked in the past nor in the future as I have never worked for a library. It wouldn't surprise me that costs would go up in a period with somewhat high inflation. It would almost be news if the price didn't go up. In the end though, I can't really trust someone who didn't bother researching the first basic and easily verifiable facts they bring up in their writing. Once again, if someone writes a post talking about specifics about NASA but starts off talking about how the moon landing was faked, would you trust the rest of their "trust me" writing?
      - shkkmo 3y ago
        What you've done it taken a small, irrelevant detail and used it to ignore the entire rest of the article, including interviews with librarians who talk about how much worse the new request system is. You don't engage at all with the deeper underlying issue: we have a monopoly, owned by a notoriously unscrupulous private equity firm that holds control over the future of libraries. Do you see how stupid it is to nitpick the article for not having access to pricing data, when the real concern here should be that the pricing is not publicly available? The author freely admits they are not a professional journalist and what you are doing is gatekeeping that seems to serve no other purpose than to suppress a story that should be getting far more attention than it is. If you're concerned that other facts in this essay are off, (and they may well be, this is a solo essayist, not a professional journalist with a fact checker) then give them and hand, check other facts and send the author the information they missed.
beej71 3y ago
Most people feel this way, but I think it's a mistake. There's always something to learn, even if a basic thing is missed.
- vel0city 3y ago
  So if I write an article about astrophysics but start off with the idea that we're all on a flat earth on the back of a giant turtle you'll continue trusting the rest of the document? The whole round earth thing is just a basic thing I missed!
  - beej71 3y ago
    I don't really trust anything to start so it's not that. But so many people say "I stopped reading at X", which means they're betting they will not be improved by anything at all that follows in the article. Flat Earthers aren't wrong about everything, after all.

BeetleB 3y ago

I see that Overdrive is taking away a nice feature. What the author is missing is the comparison with physical books, which never had this feature. You want to recommend the library get a book? You fill out the form they have. That process still works regardless of the format. Overdrive gave them something better than what they ever had, and then took it away. The libraries aren't left off worse than before. Personally, I always search using the library catalog's web site, so this whole article is about a feature I never saw. I would encourage everyone search that way instead of directly on Overdrive. I haven't looked up the numbers recently, but after a spike in ebook usage several years ago, the percentage dropped and I suspect continues to do so. Most people are over the hype and have returned to physical book usage.

vel0city 3y ago
> Overdrive gave them something better than what they ever had, and then took it away But the feature still exists, so this is just untrue.
paulclinger 3y ago
> What the author is missing is the comparison with physical books, which never had this feature. You want to recommend the library get a book? You fill out the form they have. That process still works regardless of the format. It doesn't. I used to be able to submit a request for printed and digital books, but my library stopped accepting those requests for digital books and (just as I commented elsewhere in this thread) now refers me to the Notify Me feature and Overdrive catalog (and if it's not in the catalog, I can't request it do be added).
- vel0city 3y ago
  > and if it's not in the catalog, I can't request it do be added If its not in the catalog requesting it from the library isn't really doing anything for you but give you false hope of it appearing. Wouldn't you rather know your request isn't going to be fruitful ahead of time instead of thinking your request is doing something when its just going straight into the bin? And, can you really blame the library from not wanting to have to maintain two lists of digital requests, especially since those digital requests will probably be delivered through Libby and requesting through Libby will actually notify you when its available, and let you know if its an actually requestable title? Imagine going to a restaurant where they didn't have a menu you just asked the server for food and maybe eventually they'll show up sometime with food for you without ever telling you if they could even serve that dish. Somehow you'd prefer this model!

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]