Slashdot Mirror
Canadian Government Trucking Generations of Scientific Data To the Dump
sandbagger writes "Canada's science documents are literally being taken to the dump. The northern nation's scientific community has been up in arms over the holidays as local scientific libraries and records offices were closed and their shelves — some of which contained century old data — emptied into dumpsters. Stephen Harper's Tory government is claiming that the documents have been digitized. The scientists say, 'The people who use this research don’t have any say in what is being saved or tossed aside.'"
No. Seriously.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbows_End
... is doomed to repeat it.
Does anyone else get the impression that we're on the downside of civilization?
Clearly there is a lot of smoke and hot air being generated, not sure if there is really much of a fire.
That’s no way to treat a library, scientists say
Their internationally renowned collections have been transferred to the two federal aquatic libraries that remain, in Sidney, B.C., and in Dartmouth, N.S. ...
Gail Shea, minister of fisheries and oceans, accuses critics of spreading “serious misinformation.” Her department insists there will be “no changes to the size or scope of the collection.”
In a statement emailed to the Star by her spokesperson, Shea said no more than a dozen nonemployees visited each library annually. And more than 95 per cent of documents provided to users were done so over the Internet.
“It’s not fair to taxpayers to make them pay for libraries that so few people actually used,” Shea says, explaining the government’s main reason for consolidating the collections. The closings will save $443,000 in 2014-2015, according to government estimates. .....
The research, Ayles argues, “is effectively lost because it’s no longer accessible. It’s like stuff in your grandfather’s basement.”
So the data hasn't disappeared, it's now in another library where it is less convenient to access.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
Harper's doing a great job of dumping anything related to science into the trash. It's a sad thing to see something so fundamental pushed aside like rotten food in favour of short term economic gains. So much power with less than 40% of the vote... how about some proportional representation up here, maybe? It seems somewhat disingenuous to ignore thousands of votes and still claim to be a healthy democracy.
Truth is a matter of perspective. Wear the other guy's shoes before you dismiss him.
Google could have archived all that data like no one else on the planet. Canadian universities and libraries should have called them in before the obviously incompetent people showed up (or maybe save places not visited yet). Reminds me of the phrase: "We are from the government and we are here to help you."
They've only said that they have. I realize that it's considered poor form around here to read the article before commenting but...
---- The above post was generated by the Turing Institute. Maybe.
I think they've already named all the spiders.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
There's a war on science in this country. It's a disaster. And it'll continue at least until the next election, which may be years away. I'm ashamed of what's happening to my country.
-- hendrik, a Canadian.
Stephen Harper's Tory government is claiming that the documents have been digitized
320x200 jpegs stored on 5 1/4" floppies is good enough for anyone!
Inaccessible? Because they suddenly don't have the Internet in Canada, which according to the article, is how 95% of the documents in that library were being requested anyway? Seems to me they've made it accessible not just to Canada's most populous areas, but to anyone anywhere in the world.
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it.
It does seem sad that digitizing books leads to destruction of physical copies. I hope they are earnestly being offered to other libraries beforehand.
The point here is that the books are _not_ being digitized, and it is the _only_ copies which are being destroyed. This isn't the public library getting rid of their extra copies of "Fifty Shades of Gray", it's decades of scientific data being sent to dumpsters or outright burned. In many cases the destruction has been done without any attempt at identifying or recording the books being destroyed, so we may not even be able to know exactly what has been affected.
not to mention the fact that a lot of this research was paid for by the tax payer. This is knowledge that Canadian citizens have a right to access
I'm god, but it's a bit of a drag really...
Don't believe Shea's claims about the usage numbers. Those stats reflect people who requested help in using the libraries - relatively rare with specialized research collections where a host of users just get to work in what used to be showpiece collections. Many of these users came from the DFO institutions but also from outside, including academics, people in industry and other government employees. The provision of materials over the internet? Largely had to be digitized from library collections. Now we'll have neither the collections nor the librarians to do so.
The hasty closures and haphazard deaccessioning of these collections that represent substantial investments of taxpayer money over decades? Entirely the opposite of what conservatives claim to value - careful custody of a nation's heritage and citizen investment. (Canada's federal government is in the control of the Progressive Conservative party, hard at work muzzling the scientists supported by our tax dollars.)
From The Tyee's December 23 story on the topic, "What Driving Chaotic Dismantling of Canada's Science Libraries": Moreover records on library usage were overtly biased and based on who asked for help, said Burton Ayles, a retired director general for DFO who lives in Winnipeg and has used the Freshwater Institute library frequently.
"Most people that come in to the library don't have to request help. They just use the material. Just look at any regular library."
ancarett, historian and zombie gamer
And we're all Taxed to the Max. At the risk of being modded troll I'll point out that this is what happens when "Fiscal Con conservatives" get in power. You didn't think they were going to cut their own pet projects, did you? As the saying goes, this is why we can't have nice things...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
It actually makes a whole lot of sense. The reason why this is happening is not only to make room and lower storage costs but mainly that those records and other data have the potential to undermine the findings of future research. That is why it is important to have everything in digital form. That way in future data can be corrected long after it has been obtained in cases where it does not aligh with research, or discarded altogether. Every morning you wake up to a brave new world.
Igloos are so last century. We live in quinzhees now.
Actually this is a BIG deal.
The purpose of these department of fisheries and oceans (DFO) libraries was not for the general public to access them - they were for government scientists in these research centres be able able to proper research and be able to do studies on climate/fish-habitat change over time, which includes looking up past materials and reports. For a "non-employee" to access, these government libraries actually requires a fairly lengthy application process.
In the past, governments have relied on these scientists to give them accurate reports on what is happening in the environment, so the government could make informed policy decisions based on facts. Without good research materials this is very hard to do. (or maybe that's the point...)
One of the greatest losses will be "grey materials" - reports that are hard to find because they were never "officially published", and may not exist in any other library. Or they may exist elsewhere, but it requires a lengthy wait to locate the materials and have them shipped assuming the other library will lend them out. Reports are now coming in that very few of the materials are actually being scanned, and most are just being thrown out.
The move is especially disappointing because the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans (a politician) is saying this move will save "$443,000" over one year. This is the same federal government that spent $9 million dollars last year on advertising to make people feel better about their cell phone bills.
And, yes I'm Canadian. It's not a good situation.
(name withheld)
95% of requests were over the Internet, rather than in person - no surprise there, it's more accessible. We have no idea how many of the documents were available to be accessed this way, though.
No wait, we do. FTFA:
In late December, as outrage over the library closings grew, her department posted answers to 19 questions online. It gave the total size of the print collection as 660,000 items. Some 30,000 departmental publications are available online and more documents are being digitized. But many books can’t be digitized due to copyright laws.
So only 4.5% of documents are available online (assuming departmental publications == print collection, which I'm not sure about). Too soon to start throwing out entire collections, it seems - if ever.
Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
The point here is that the books are _not_ being digitized,
Make them prove that it has been digitized, and/or that copies exist elsewhere. In the US, any Tom Dick or Harry can get a restraining order, I'm sure there must be similar capabilities in Canada.
But the point is we only have some hand wringing allegations from one source that claims they are not digitized. Lets sort that out factually before we get all maudlin about it.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
"Is trucking something to somewhere meant to be a pejorative because trucking useful goods is an vital part of our economy. This shouldn't be made fun of or disparaged just because it's what many people consider 'manual labor'... Who decided that on that language? It's very troublesome."
I agree, the idea of the summary titling is offensive. And not just to trucking! Notice the use of the "dumps"?
What is wrong with dumps? I take dumps all the time! Probably about one per day, but sometimes a bit more than that!
I find the summary offensie in a great many ways.
Priest: "Universe from nothing, no laws of physics, sped up time"+ huge discrepancies. Creationism? No. Big Bang Theory
There is a difference between "inaccessible" and "in a dump somewhere". The difference being it is retrievable if it's sitting in a dusty library somewhere but not if rotting in landfill. There have been many times where I have been searching for a long lost article where the only version of it is in hard copy in the library and there is no current study that would take its place. If you are desperate and far away you can call a colleague to find the paper but you cannot find lost papers in a tip.
Throwing out these old papers would only make a skerrick of sense, and I mean a only a skerrick, if it had been directly verified that there was a digital copy. I have found that digital copies exist mainly for new papers not for old ones such as these. There is a high risk that information will be and has been irretrievably lost because of actions such as these.
Dumping of historical studies and data on this scale saddens me, who knows what we have lost?
Maybe they don't want to be the next Canadian Hoarder? Save ALL the data!
Can't people file freedom of information requests for this data. That should lock it up legally.
Did you catch this:
"“The department may remove only content that is duplicated at one or more libraries and, in rare instances, materials which fall outside the subject disciplines pertinent to the department’s mandate,” says the DFO website, describing the material discarded from its collection."
Departmental mandates are revised to suit the political flavour of the day as part of strategic planning activities (mission, vision, values, etc.) and it happens every couple of years. This allows for some really pernicious and creative manipulation of public institutions that exist to regulate and monitor shared resources. Here is the mandate for DFO. In real terms, a high level deputy minister might instruct his senior management staff that, "it is not in our mandate to keep records of X because it is not required by the legislation that defines our work." It's a very prescriptive and disingenuous approach, but it works with career bureaucrats because they lack the expertise to form a cohesive argument against it. You can be sure they're digging in their heels, but they have to pick their battles very carefully. Federal agencies have been eviscerated in the last few years and management is trying to weather the storm in the hopes that the political climate will change soon.
This is reminiscent of the de-funding of the Experimental Lakes Area in 2012, which also involved the DFO. It was a project area that had existed for 45 years and produced 745 peer-reviewed scientific articles, 126 graduate theses, 102 book chapters and synthesis papers, 185 data reports, and several books. With respect to the destruction of data, I'm sure one could argue, "Since the ELA is no longer part of the DFO's mandate, that data can be destroyed."
What's noteworthy about this article is that the DFO has impressive, far-reaching regulatory power and this cost saving measure is part of an attempt to make the department more "effective" in conducting its regulatory duties. Ultimately, the hope is that industry projects can be approved in a more timely manner. I don't think it's an evil plot to destroy the environment, rather it is a misguided attempt to make a Canadian governmental agency better able to do its day-to-day job. Ultimately, it will impede the agency's ability to adapt and respond to changing client needs. A lot of people of a certain political ideology don't value research because it is hard to describe its utility in financial terms. This is self-evidently foolish, as continuous research is essential to improving the health of the population, effectively managing resources, and developing new technologies and techniques. Unfortunately, this reasoning really appeals to the masses of Canadians who "don't want their tax dollars wasted."
Stephen Harper's Tory government is claiming that the documents have been digitized.
Yeah, it's all ones and zeros now.
Harper - 1
Science - 0
What excuse does the Harper government have to burn first, ask "if" later?
Under transparency, there is no "if".
Great. While the US is using 1984 as reference, Canada settled on Fahrenheit 451. Why are governments so hell bent on using dystopian scenarios?
Personally I think the appalling beta is a ruse to make you think the current /. is actually good as anything next to that pile of poo looks exceptional.
Heh, angry much? Calm down, man. I couldn't even decipher your point, there was so much RAGE in the way.
Oh. My. God. They threw out the study that showed there was a difference between ham and backbacon down in the 7th or 8th decimal place of measurement.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Harper has GOT to go . He's not only a foe to science but an enemy of the People of Canada.
We can't have nice things. (Or facts, for that matter.)
DaveyJJ
what does this mean, "Trucking Generations of Scientific Data To the Dump" ?
Tricky. I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that it means that they're taking recorded scientific data, sticking it in a truck and then driving that truck to a dump. In truth they might actually be putting the data in a skip (or dumpster for you North Americans) then lifting the dumpster on to the back of a truck then driving that truck to the dump, rather than loading the data directly into the truck. The headline is admittedly unclear in this aspect.
Presumably after the trucking (with or without a skip) they then empty the truck/skip into the dump rather than return it to the depot full of data or simply park the truck (with or without a skip or possibly just the skip alone) at the dump in perpetuity. I admit that this part is implied but I feel it is not an unreasonable inference.
Is trucking something to somewhere meant to be a pejorative
Yes. It would be much more acceptable if the data was delivered to the dump by an army of bike couriers. Then there would be no complaints whatsoever.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
and the mistakes weren't picked up when they could be easily corrected either... no double checking was being done of the scanner settings or the operator feeding it in before the button was pressed to start scanning.... It wasn't until the digitised copies were being proof read against the hardcopy after having been OCR'd that the mistakes were being found... :(
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
If it's all just "alarmism", then why get rid of the evidence?
Here's the story:
a) "the people" insist the government to scale back on spending, so they do.
b) departments cannot get $$ to build additional storage and so have to scale back holdings
c) the task is passed to the librarians who themselves have been subject to staff cuts. Why? Because a scientific department will cut 'superfluous staff', like librarians, before they cut 'necessary' staff, like scientists.
d) the librarians left have to scan what they must (can't scan it all because of $$/time limits) and dispose of what is deemed valueless
e) the librarians SOLICIT GUIDANCE FROM THE SCIENTISTS as to what should stay and what should go
f) the MAJORITY of scientists PAY NO ATTENTION UNTIL AFTER THE FACT because they are 'too busy for such things as managing archival documents'. The attitude is: they are scientists, not librarians.
g) lacking guidance and under pressure to make room for new arrivals (govt scientists order books and papers like they were free), the librarians make best guesses; and
h) bear the brunt of the abuse when some scientist decides to make an issue of the cull.
Nothing prevented the scientists from particpating in the entire process. Nothing prevented the scientists from scanning the documents themselves and holding them locally. NOTHING except their own APATHY.
The government scientists in Canada are well paid making, within a few years, over $100K/year (see DS 3-4/SE-RES-2 levels which are attained in 5 yrs or on hire and look for ) and who are not held to the publishing demands of even a small university. As public servants, they enjoy the equivalent of tenure upon hiring (very difficult to fire a public servant even during govt cuts). These facts frequently lead to apathy and a sense of privilege. There are some exceptional scientists, and then there are some who play at politics and do little else. That's what this issue is about; it's not about facts, it's about partisanship.
"Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.
The dump is going to be where folks of the future mine to find out about our daily lives. Such information would be a virtual treasure-trove for posterity. We just need to properly wrap it to give it the best chance of survival.
It is not like folks today are using it.
Would be better if the data was actually online, though it isn't.
"Pretty soon you run out of spending other people's money" {sic}. Because the money is yours, not theirs, and they used guile and subterfuge to convince you otherwise...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
The only problem with digitizing is that eventually current modern formats will be obsalete, and unless they continuously spend millions of dollars to keep updating software and hardware formats, one day that data will be lost. This is a problem nasa and other big organizations have run into; the older formats that have important, relevant data can no longer be read as no-one makes the hardware to run the storage medium or has the necessary software to read the files. Paper storage is inefficient in a lot of ways, but it's also really the only format that has the potential to last centuries...and it has.
By that reckoning the Mona Lisa, black Maddonna and the shroud of Turin can all be trucked off to the dump. Why bother hiring teachers just give every kid a flash drive so they can down load the content. We don't need schools libraries or art galleries. Just reduce everything to digi form