Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Seattle Public Library is reducing maximum digital holds

shelftalkblog.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 159 posts

Re: The Seattle Public Library is reducing maximum digital holds

#51

Post by gerad »

yareal wrote: post #13
blcknight wrote: post #3

I find the limits at ny libraries to be exceptionally high. Why does anyone need 25 digital books checked out at a time? That’d probably help with waitlists too. I love Libby, I want to see it survive.

People read for reasons beyond pleasure. I might be doing a study or comparing authors, I might be reporting on history or researching someone. I might be doing a comparative analysis. Ten checkouts seems low enough that it's likely to get regularly cause problems. 100 checkouts seems too high. So start bisecting. 50? Almost certainly too high. 25 maybe reasonable. They also might have p90 checkout rates and found th…

Also, if you have kids then you check out tons of books at a time.

Re: The Seattle Public Library is reducing maximum digital holds

#52

Post by Animats »

AlbertCory wrote: post #42
lotsofpulp wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The much, much simpler, cheaper, and broad solution is to reduce copyright length to 10 years. Or even 15 years.

> much, much simpler, cheaper, and broad you left out "politically doable." There's a good reason why copyright law is as f&cked up as it is: it's the major holders of copyrights now.

It might be do-able now. Today, distributors of content (Google, Facebook, etc) have more political clout than copyright holders.

Go for, say 25 years with no formalities. For 25 to 50 years, you have to file a copyright registration with the Library of Congress and pay a modest fee. For 50 to 100 years, you have to pay a huge fee (millions), just so a few classic movies people will still pay for can have coverage, and some famous music that still generates revenue can be covered.

Re: The Seattle Public Library is reducing maximum digital holds

#53

Post by eiiot »

koolba wrote: post #10
teeray wrote: post #6

> While there are many types of licenses, the most common license needs to be purchased and then re-purchased every year. Forcing libraries to repurchase their entire collection every year should be illegal. I would also settle for a loophole that would allow the library to OCR a physical copy they own and then own the resulting digital copy.

> Forcing libraries to repurchase their entire collection every year should be illegal. We could have public libraries be entirely outside the copyright system. I doubt it’d have a material effect on production of new books. If as a society we have a problem that our libraries are too popular, then that’s probably a good thing. > I would also settle for a loophole that would allow the library to OCR a physical copy t…

> We could have public libraries be entirely outside the copyright system.

Where is the line between this and something along the lines of libgen? I’ve been using distributed libraries for years and haven’t paid for a textbook once…

Re: The Seattle Public Library is reducing maximum digital holds

#55

Post by brewdad »

gostsamo wrote: post #24
dmbche wrote: post #8

"What do holds have to do with the cost of digital books? This may seem surprising, but patron holds are the single biggest factor in rising costs. To maintain reasonable wait times, the Library buys additional licenses of a digital title when patrons place more holds on it. That means that when hundreds of patrons place holds on a single New York Times bestseller, the costs of “buying down the holds” can quickly bec…

> It feels like how electric cars add artifical engine sounds. A side note, there is some sense in the artificial sounds of the ev engines. I'm blind and if not for them, I might be dead in five years, together with many no so attentive people.

No doubt the external artificial noises serve a valuable purpose for both the blind and the sometimes inattentive. The artificial sounds pumped into the cabin to simulate a naturally aspirated V8 are nonsensical.

Re: The Seattle Public Library is reducing maximum digital holds

#56

Post by brewdad »

LeafItAlone wrote: post #36
kazinator wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's beyond odd; it's simply idiotic. You would not "buy down" holds for physical books, or not to a ridiculous degree. If there are 100 holds for some book, you're not going to go out and buy 75 or whatever. Why do it for e-books? Cause, wee, they don't take up shelf space in the stacks? If a book is popular, let the patrons "buy down" their own copy, or else wait behind 90 other people. There is always bittorrent a…

> It's beyond odd; it's simply idiotic. You would not "buy down" holds for physical books, or not to a ridiculous degree. If there are 100 holds for some book, you're not going to go out and buy 75 or whatever. Libraries certainly do this. Might not be at (your suggested) 75/100 rates, but if a physical book is popular, library systems do purchase more copies.

Those same libraries can then resell their excess copies a few years later at a Friends of the Library sale and recoup a few dollars. This isn’t possible with e-books currently.

Re: The Seattle Public Library is reducing maximum digital holds

#57

Post by brewdad »

jldugger wrote: post #34

I don't live in Seattle and I don't use that many digital holds; for me most are just video games. But recently my county library added a limit for physical holds. "Wait times" seem to be one of those Goodhart's law metrics: by capping holds, you haven't really reduced wait times, just moved most of it out of sight of the reporting API. But there's also kind of a mismatch of incentives at play here. As a patron, I re…

When a new book comes out the I know I want to read but do not wish to own for various reasons, I will generally put a hold on both physical and digital copies. Sometimes the audiobook too though that’s my least preferred way of consuming the content. Whichever comes available first is the one I will read. My library does have a holds limit but it is something like 75 items so I rarely have to think about it.

Re: The Seattle Public Library is reducing maximum digital holds

#58

Post by UncleOxidant »

LeafItAlone wrote: post #36
kazinator wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's beyond odd; it's simply idiotic. You would not "buy down" holds for physical books, or not to a ridiculous degree. If there are 100 holds for some book, you're not going to go out and buy 75 or whatever. Why do it for e-books? Cause, wee, they don't take up shelf space in the stacks? If a book is popular, let the patrons "buy down" their own copy, or else wait behind 90 other people. There is always bittorrent a…

> It's beyond odd; it's simply idiotic. You would not "buy down" holds for physical books, or not to a ridiculous degree. If there are 100 holds for some book, you're not going to go out and buy 75 or whatever. Libraries certainly do this. Might not be at (your suggested) 75/100 rates, but if a physical book is popular, library systems do purchase more copies.

Then why aren't they reducing the maximum number of non-digital holds? (or did they already have that limit?)

Re: The Seattle Public Library is reducing maximum digital holds

#59

Post by brewdad »

knappe wrote: post #45
yareal wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People read for reasons beyond pleasure. I might be doing a study or comparing authors, I might be reporting on history or researching someone. I might be doing a comparative analysis. Ten checkouts seems low enough that it's likely to get regularly cause problems. 100 checkouts seems too high. So start bisecting. 50? Almost certainly too high. 25 maybe reasonable. They also might have p90 checkout rates and found th…

I suppose this is true, but feels like the exceptional case. And why not have a reasonable policy that allows someone to appeal their hold limit and have it subjectively approved. I am a fairly prolific reader and I only have 7 holds spread out across 3 libraries. I seriously doubt 25 is the p90 here.

You’ve never been behind a parent and two kids at the automated book return? I have seen kids with 30+ books each. Usually the parent has a bunch too. I’ve also seen people with dozens of videos too. Usually older folks who may not be able to enjoy reading as much anymore or maybe enjoy the background noise in an empty home.

Re: The Seattle Public Library is reducing maximum digital holds

#60

Post by irjustin »

> As a consumer, when you buy an e-book or e-audiobook, it costs about the same or sometimes even less than the print book version. But for libraries, the e-book or e-audiobook version of a title actually costs up to three times or more than the print version.

> This is because publishers use a licensing model for selling e-books to libraries. Each copy of a digital book title requires a purchase of a license. While there are many types of licenses, the most common license needs to be purchased and then re-purchased every year.

Something went very wrong in negotiations here. That's all I can say. Who allowed this deal to be penned in its exact fashion? The first publisher to set the pattern probably got a huge payday that should have never existed. LTV of the library should be cheaper vs the individual buyer because volume, but >3x!???!!

I love public libraries. I grew up in them as a safe place to hang out after school waiting for my working parents to be able to get me.

It makes the funding pie shift materially from other things like facilities, staffing, etc. If you're unfamiliar with the Seattle area, the Public Library covers a number less privileged neighborhoods where a safe place is very much needed. This actually makes me angry.

Post reply on HN