Slashdot Mirror


Can Architects Save Libraries from the Internet?

theodp writes "Slate has an interesting photo essay exploring the question of how to build a public library in the age of Google, Wikipedia, and Kindle. The grand old reading rooms and stacks of past civic monuments are giving way to a new library-as-urban-hangout concept, as evidenced by Seattle's Starbucks-meets-mega-bookstore central library and Salt Lake City's shop-lined education mall. Without some dramatic changes, The Extinction Timeline predicts libraries will R.I.P. in 2019."

3 of 270 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Not holding breath by amccaf1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Libraries will be RIP when you can browse any book / periodical / reasearch paper etc online.

    And I mean any periodical, the microfilm of a 1972 NY times to a book thats been out of print for 20 years.


    To expand on your point, it's good to remember that just because something is available on the Internet, it does not necessarily follow that it is automatically better/easier to view than something that it available at your library.

    For example, most (if not all) of the New York Times archives are available on-line... but for a fee. The New York Times charges $3.95 for a single archive or $15.95 for a ten-pack of articles. Compare this to a archive of the newspaper in a bricks-n-mortar library which will allow you to look through their records for free as long as your willing to work the microfilm reader.

    If, for example, you're a sports writer who is researching contemporary coverage of the 1972 Mets, you'd end up paying quite a lot more to do your research over the Internet as things stand now.
    --
    "Flag on the moon. How did it get there?"
  2. Re:The better question is: should they? by mollymoo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Your argument seems to be that because you don't have much need for them they don't need to exist. Well, I hate to break it to you, but the world doesn't revolve around you and most people aren't in your situation.

    Like most people, I'm not at university (any more), so libraries are the only access I have to a wide range of textbooks, scientific journals etc. I do buy books and the odd journal, but I couldn't hope to afford a collection even remotely close to what is on offer even at the public library, let alone the local university libraries (which the public can enter for free and join for a modest fee).

    There are a hell of a lot of people for whom libraries are the only form of access to high-quality information. The internet hasn't changed that very much, because most of the best information still costs money.

    --
    Chernobyl 'not a wildlife haven' - BBC News
  3. Re:why not provide some improvements by SacredByte · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I agree on public libraries needing longer hours. The hours of my local library are as follows:

    Monday - Thursday 9:30 AM - 9:00 PM

    Friday 9:30 AM - 6:00 PM

    Saturday 9:30 AM- 5:00 PM

    Sunday 1:00 - 5:00 PM
    These hours absolutely suck for me. I don't generally go to the library at any time other than late evenings/weekends. I can fully understand not having all departments open at all times -- All I really need is to be able to check out books. That takes maybe (tops) five library staff members (paid or otherwise). I can fully understand not having sufficent funds to operate all departments at 100% at all hours, but this doesn't mean you can't operate some departments without operating other departments....

    Honestly, the library would be a much more practical place to study if they were open until 23:00 on Friday-Sunday. They don't need to staff the A/V department, they don't need to staff the reference department, they don't need to staff their computer center (they have public 802.11G) -- they just need to have a guard and a few people to handle checkouts.

    Just my $0.02 USD.