Why are libraries destroying books? (2002) • Hacker News Board

Re: Why are libraries destroying books? (2002)

#41

Post by cimmanom » Mon, Jul 30, 2018, 5:52 PM UTC

394549 wrote: post #16

jdietrich wrote: post #11

One of my local libraries recently threw out a dumpster full of books. There was a minor public outcry at the desecration of literature. The books in the dumpster had all been on sale for the last year, priced at 10p (13 cents) each. Most of them hadn't been checked out for over a decade and some hadn't been checked out since the 1970s. Sending books to be pulped is always sad, but the truth is that there are just to…

> Sending books to be pulped is always sad, but the truth is that there are just too many books. Often it's not obsolete books that are destroyed, where there might be 1,000 other copies out there, but one-of-a-kind archival records: >> The core of the book recounts Baker's attempt, in 1999, to persuade the British Library not to junk more than 2,000 bound volumes of American newspapers - the last remaining copies in…

To what degree is preservation the responsibility of a local lending library? (As opposed to an archive; a museum; the Library of Congress; county courthouses; etc?)

Re: Why are libraries destroying books? (2002)

#42

Post by pschon » Mon, Jul 30, 2018, 5:57 PM UTC

I let the used bookstore throw away my books. There are lots of categories they say they won't accept (like computers) but I bring them all. I tell them to just give me a total price. They don't give me back any books. I really do not like throwing away books.

Re: Why are libraries destroying books? (2002)

#43

Post by sevensor » Mon, Jul 30, 2018, 6:02 PM UTC

sanpan wrote: post #32

kaybe wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any chance you could find that link again?

Not a librarian, but I like finding things https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12002419

Thanks for finding that! I thought it was fascinating at the time and clearly it stuck with me.

Re: Why are libraries destroying books? (2002)

#44

Post by fipple » Mon, Jul 30, 2018, 6:04 PM UTC

I also have an emotional reaction to seeing books destroyed but the bottom line is that many products in this world see demand reduce precipitously, rendering them obsolete. There simply aren’t many ways to use a computer monitor from 1985 or a book about the immune system from 1937.

Re: Why are libraries destroying books? (2002)

#45

Post by FiatLuxDave » Mon, Jul 30, 2018, 6:11 PM UTC

ryanmercer wrote: post #4

chris_mc wrote: post #2

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 ol…

>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 ha…

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!

Re: Why are libraries destroying books? (2002)

#46

Post by Symbiote » Mon, Jul 30, 2018, 6:12 PM UTC

lizknope wrote: post #15

tranchms wrote: post #10

They should’ve been donating the books to less fortunate libraries or education institutions.

This post is literally from yesterday. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17634079 https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/07/micro... "Microfilm machines haven’t been mined for their decontextualized parts, and they are not yet truly obsolete. The devices are still in widespread use, and their mechanical simplicity could help them last longer than any of the current electronic technologies."

I like the bit in one of Asimov's Foundation novels, where they find a derelict planet, essentially dead for several millenia, yet quickly find the library and repair the microfilm machine.

Re: Why are libraries destroying books? (2002)

#47

Post by TeMPOraL » Mon, Jul 30, 2018, 6:18 PM UTC

c4h8o3del wrote: post #40

TeMPOraL wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ironically, out of these two, it's iTunes that's more harebrained. Considering that digital storage is almost free, and it's wasteful to transfer bits across half the planet each time you want to listen to a particular song again, streaming is a... pretty suboptimal solution. Especially that you essentially relinquish ownership of your own media, being instead at the mercy of a service provider. Alas, this was the wa…

> Alas, this was the way to work around the huge mess that is IP laws. Or, and I realize this is a long shot, we could come to the realization that "intellectual property" is an oxymoron. Small hope, I know.

I would love that too.

Re: Why are libraries destroying books? (2002)

#48

Post by 394549 » Mon, Jul 30, 2018, 6:31 PM UTC

cimmanom wrote: post #41

394549 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sending books to be pulped is always sad, but the truth is that there are just too many books. Often it's not obsolete books that are destroyed, where there might be 1,000 other copies out there, but one-of-a-kind archival records: >> The core of the book recounts Baker's attempt, in 1999, to persuade the British Library not to junk more than 2,000 bound volumes of American newspapers - the last remaining copies in…

To what degree is preservation the responsibility of a local lending library? (As opposed to an archive; a museum; the Library of Congress; county courthouses; etc?)

> To what degree is preservation the responsibility of a local lending library? (As opposed to an archive; a museum; the Library of Congress; county courthouses; etc?)

Personally, I would say even local lending libraries have a part to play in preservation. They may have copies of local periodicals that exist nowhere else. They should at least do some due diligence with other, more common, items to make sure they don't discard anything that's potentially now unique or rare (e.g. a collection of unfashionable midcentury children's books that all libraries decided to purge around the same time). Stuff like that should be kept in an out of the way warehouse or something.

A local lending library shouldn't have to keep seldom used books in easily accessible circulation, but I feel there should be other options besides that, pulping, and digitization.

Re: Why are libraries destroying books? (2002)

#49

Post by cimmanom » Mon, Jul 30, 2018, 6:38 PM UTC

394549 wrote: post #48

cimmanom wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To what degree is preservation the responsibility of a local lending library? (As opposed to an archive; a museum; the Library of Congress; county courthouses; etc?)

> To what degree is preservation the responsibility of a local lending library? (As opposed to an archive; a museum; the Library of Congress; county courthouses; etc?) Personally, I would say even local lending libraries have a part to play in preservation. They may have copies of local periodicals that exist nowhere else. They should at least do some due diligence with other, more common, items to make sure they don…

Still not sure the local library should be responsible for the actual preservation, but I like your idea on principle -- maybe having a more central organization or archive handle the preservation and coordinate determining what needs preserving (e.g. how is that local library to know that every other library in the country pulped that particular children's book 10 years ago?)

Re: Why are libraries destroying books? (2002)

#50

Post by asdfman123 » Mon, Jul 30, 2018, 6:49 PM UTC

394549 wrote: post #16

jdietrich wrote: post #11

One of my local libraries recently threw out a dumpster full of books. There was a minor public outcry at the desecration of literature. The books in the dumpster had all been on sale for the last year, priced at 10p (13 cents) each. Most of them hadn't been checked out for over a decade and some hadn't been checked out since the 1970s. Sending books to be pulped is always sad, but the truth is that there are just to…

> Sending books to be pulped is always sad, but the truth is that there are just too many books. Often it's not obsolete books that are destroyed, where there might be 1,000 other copies out there, but one-of-a-kind archival records: >> The core of the book recounts Baker's attempt, in 1999, to persuade the British Library not to junk more than 2,000 bound volumes of American newspapers - the last remaining copies in…

Maintaining digital records would probably require some man hours to watch them over the years, and you'd probably need to hire some tech labor to migrate the data every so often. That long-term maintenance cost can't be ignored.

But also don't neglect the long term costs of setting aside thousands of square feet, usually in an expensive metropolis, for storage.

I mean, I know as a programmer it wouldn't be a ton of effort to store a few terabytes on a local machine, make offsite backups, and write a program every 10 years to re-jigger the technology. Renting out an extra bedroom which I would fill with library shelves would be far more expensive.