Slashdot Mirror


Canadian Health Scientists Resort To Sneaker Net After Funding Slashed

sandbagger writes "Health Canada scientists are so concerned about losing access to their research library that they're finding workarounds, with one squirreling away journals and books in his basement for colleagues to consult, says a report obtained by CBC News. The report said the number of in-house librarians went from 40 in 2007 to just six in April 2013. 'I look at it as an insidious plan to discourage people from using libraries' said Dr. Rudi Mueller, who left the department in 2012. 'If you want to justify closing a library, you make access difficult and then you say it is hardly used.' This is hardly new for Stephen Harper's Conservative government. Over the Christmas holidays, several scientific libraries were closed and their contents taken to the dump."

41 of 168 comments (clear)

  1. Not only in the US... by surfdaddy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...are we batshit crazy. What the FUCK ever happened to science? We are descending back into the dark ages...

    1. Re:Not only in the US... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Science involves education. Educated masses are not useful to political parties.

    2. Re:Not only in the US... by lgw · · Score: 2

      Wait, isn't the Canadian Library Association controversy the story we just read? Or was that some different CLA?

      (BTW, there was slow but steady technological and economic progress during the "dark ages", it led pretty smoothly into the Enlightenment)

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    3. Re:Not only in the US... by Slur · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's become something of a crusade of mine lately to promote reason, spurred on by stories like this, the rise of scientific illiteracy, and the destruction of culture through a dumbed-down commercial media. I'm not down with any specific ideology, in fact I promote rising above ideology to a more anthropological and phenomenological view of humanity and nature, and a faithful application of empiricism to all things we call "knowledge." Too many people invoke the chemical feeling of "belief" just to get high on it, and have no interest in the hard won truth which comes by skeptical inquiry. Too many of us are willing to swallow conspiracy theories that fit our overblown narratives of authoritarian control, as well, and in that manner also become stupid with time-wasting and untenable beliefs.

      I urge people to get into understanding things as they actually are, practicing their arts and exploring the sciences with enthusiasm, focusing on results rather than just pure jollies. Religion, ideology, and self-deception are insidious traps that can hold people for a lifetime, and are very hard to fight against because people are so inured. But fight we must.

      --
      -- thinkyhead software and media
    4. Re:Not only in the US... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Informative

      ...are we batshit crazy. What the FUCK ever happened to science? We are descending back into the dark ages...

      In the specific context of Canada, certain uppity scientists suggested that there might be unpleasant environmental side-effects to the plan to use tar sands to turn Canada into a dysfunctional petrostate.

      In a not-at-all-dysfunctional-petrostate move, the Harper regime decided to show those uppity scientists where they could shove their 'evidence'. (Probably not a library, anymore)

    5. Re:Not only in the US... by LifesABeach · · Score: 3, Funny

      One can say now that a trip to the dump could be "a truly educational experience."

      Who would benefit from the destruction of knowledge in Canada?

    6. Re:Not only in the US... by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Who would benefit from the destruction of knowledge in Canada?

      A government who refuses to make evidence-based decisions, and instead likes to believe their ideology defines reality.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    7. Re:Not only in the US... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The two major players would be tar sands development and (relatively distant second) fisheries lobbies who would rather fish their quarry into extinction and then go bankrupt, rather than suffer some sort of limits now in the service of having fish in the future.

      The fisheries guys are comparatively small-time (and have been around for decades, and also have a love/hate relationship with scientific fish experts, nobody likes being subject to quotas; but fishermen aren't dumb enough to think that the future of fishing is in having no fish, so they agree in principle, if not in yearly numbers and exact population estimates, with the science guys), so my money would be on the tar sands sector.

    8. Re:Not only in the US... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Things like this have been going on for some time in Canada. For example, world class science was being done at the Experimental Lakes Area, see section on it's defunding http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_Lakes_Area

      I'm from Buffalo NY (USA) and we recently spent a weekend with some scientist friends in Toronto -- they took us to a lecture about this major problem. One of the conclusions was that scientists (in Canada) aren't used to political action, so this government move has (to some extent) blindsided them.

    9. Re:Not only in the US... by rmdingler · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Conversely, religion involves indoctrination.

      Consolidated masses are very useful to political parties.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    10. Re:Not only in the US... by rmdingler · · Score: 2
      Your quest is commendable, but realities suggest a general readiness to succumb to the belief system.

      It's just easier for many to believe in something than it is to understand everything.

      There is comfort in the validation of long held beliefs, no matter the measure of it's bias on the scientific method.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    11. Re:Not only in the US... by stranger_to_himself · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's fine so long as you're telling people how things are, but very limited if you want to think about how they should be. The problem with abdicating from advocacy is that there are plenty of people without your knowledge, understanding or benevolence who are prepared to fill in the gaps for you. This is why 'promoting societal good' is rightly now a key aspect of scientific endeavour.

    12. Re:Not only in the US... by dryeo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You're thinking of the closures of the fisheries libraries over the holidays. This is the closure of the health libraries. The other year it was the closure of a bunch of research stations. It's the typical right wing agenda, cut taxes slightly so business doesn't have to give cost of living wages, increase spending so the government is running in the red (they came into power with a pretty good surplus) then cut those parts of government that don't agree with their ideology and give lots of money to their favourite industry, oil. Bonus with all the government re-purposed to supporting the tar business they can claim that they're spending more on science then ever.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    13. Re:Not only in the US... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      To paraphrase Sid's Alpha Centauri:
       
      Beware those who would deny you knowledge,
      For in their hearts they dream themselves your master

    14. Re:Not only in the US... by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 5, Informative

      That also covers the US under the Bush administration.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...

      A quote from Ron Suskind, 2004 (the aide he is referring to was later identified as Karl Rove):

      The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." ... "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality--judiciously, as you will--we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors...and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."

      --
      http://www.rootstrikers.org/
    15. Re:Not only in the US... by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 2

      Perhaps you missed the part about Rove being a steamrolling asshole.

      --
      http://www.rootstrikers.org/
    16. Re:Not only in the US... by chihowa · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Because he seems to be confusing "We're powerful enough to avoid facing the consequences of our actions" with "Because we're so powerful, our actions lack any undesirable consequences".

      In the short term, and from his perspective, there is no difference between the two claims. Over the long term, though, this position is unsustainable and will lead to the fall of his "empire". Pretending that you change reality by sheer force of will and political power doesn't actually change reality.

      Either he isn't concerned with the long-term consequences of his actions (maybe because he'll be dead by the time that they start to come due), in which case he's a self-centered asshole, or he genuinely thinks that politics determine reality, in which case he's a lunatic.

      What's unreasonable about those claims is that they are the same power-drunk ravings that have brought down every empire that has ever existed.

      --
      If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
    17. Re:Not only in the US... by SleazyRidr · · Score: 2

      People in power can and do shape the future, but they can only do so within the bounds of reality. Obama can't make a speech and declare that potato chips are now the cure for cancer. If he wants to shape a future with a cure it will take a " judicious study of discernible reality."

    18. Re:Not only in the US... by captainlavender · · Score: 2

      This is very hard-line. Despite what the reddit atheist crowd thinks, there are a lot of religious people who understand that there is no scientific basis for their beliefs. These people, like us seculars, are able to distinguish faith from reason, but they choose to partake of both.

      I also have a problem with scientific reasoning when it is overapplied. Sometime, stuff is hard to measure -- for example, social phenomena and things like how prejudices play out in different situations. Saying "but there's no scientific proof!" is used as an easy way to dismiss any of these more abstract ideas, regardless of merit. When a teacher keeps a student after class and verbally abuses them, there may not be proof, but there are at least concrete actions to point to. But teachers don't usually do that -- if they don't like a kid, it's all subtle, it's all "the way they said it", it's all disputable. If you can find a way to measure those things at all, it's usually ingenious, because there's no formula for stuff like that. Science is also frequently invoked, incorrectly, to explain differences that are the results of circumstance (an extreme example would be saying that black people in the US are less successful because they lack intelligence... but a more subtle and insidious example could be saying that women are better shoppers because they have a gatherer instinct). Evolutionary psychology is infamous for being misapplied in this way. And I will say, this kind of reasoning is particularly prevalent among young students in STEM fields who don't understand the limitations of scientific research. Aka about 60% of the slashdot crowd.

  2. So-called "conservatism" in action. by bmo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    'If you want to justify closing a library, you make access difficult and then you say it is hardly used.'

    So we have "starve the beast" in Canada now.

    Spiffy. Not.

    --
    BMO

    1. Re:So-called "conservatism" in action. by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why do electorates keep falling for this "Government doesn't work! Vote for me, and I'll PROVE it!" crap?

  3. Reality has a well known liberal bias by presidenteloco · · Score: 5, Funny

    In fairness, the libraries aren't being closed. They're being re-purposed as public relations offices responsible for such things as communicating the need to move forward with new forms of multimodal multimedia information dissemination, on a go forward basis.

    Also, the books are not being dumped, they're being converted into bio-fuel (burned in very efficient co-generation waste incinerators).

    --

    Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
  4. Like the Fisheries libraries by cold+fjord · · Score: 4, Informative

    Once again the data is (allegedly) retained, but moved and is now less convenient to access.

    Before the main library closed, the inter-library loan functions were outsourced to a private company called Infotrieve, the consultant wrote in a report ordered by the department. The library's physical collection was moved to the National Science Library on the Ottawa campus of the National Research Council last year.

    --
    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
    1. Re:Like the Fisheries libraries by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Funny

      Unfortunately, the new "Beware of the leopard" signs are still in the contract-tender phase, and are expected to be delayed. In the meantime, feel free to check the locked filing cabinet.

    2. Re:Like the Fisheries libraries by Ichijo · · Score: 2

      With the inter-library loan system, there doesn't really need to be a physical copy of every book in every library, because it's expensive to house so many books, especially in areas with high land prices. But instead of shutting down libraries, they should be downsizing them so they're still local, and moving to digital copies of books. A neighborhood library could be nothing more than a shelf full of holds, a drop box for returns, and a few terminals to request holds and check out physical and digital books. A kiosk at the local mall might be big enough for all that.

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
  5. Re:Neo-Conservatives and education are incompatibl by plopez · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Wasn't there some Austrian dude who like burned a bunch of books and restricted what would be taught in schools to only support his totally bogus regime?

    --
    putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
  6. Re:Odd Change of Paradigm by neiras · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Used to be, we wanted to know everything about everything. Now it seems there are powers out there that want a select few to keep their knowledge, and everyone else should know nothing.

    This. The whole "knowledge is power" thing isn't just a platitude. The rich and powerful have realized that the lower classes are beginning to figure out a little too much for their liking. I think the Internet upset the balance a bit and gave 'em a scare until they realized that Facebook was the great pacifier.

    Mobile tech, internet addiction, social media, health care costs, mortgages, unpaid internships and student loan debt... control the population by enforcing a giant wealth/knowlege/skills/health/opportunity gap. Let the plebs smash themselves to bits trying to get ahead.

    Can't fix the system by playing a part in it.

  7. Re:You get the best government you deserve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You get the best government you deserve

    Stop it. Just stop with this. Does an average person have any control over a government? No. They can write letters or vote for whatever paid-off politician they wish.

    That does not mean they are getting what they deserve. They are merely getting what people with power and influence want. Nothing more.

  8. Re: You get the best government you deserve by Vanderhoth · · Score: 3, Informative

    We have 3 parties the Tories won a majority from just over 37% of the vote. Most of which came from Alberta (North Texas). There's not much the other 63% of us can do, it's how the system works. That being said 2015 is an election year, hopefully the damage Harper's done to the public service by then will be remembered.

  9. They are doing this to all Federal Libraries by thirdpoliceman · · Score: 5, Informative

    I worked for Natural Resources Canada's library system in 2011. My friend worked at Transportation Canada.

    They closed Transportation Canada's library system. It no longer exists. Who knows what happened to the information there, if it even exists any more. My friend told me they housed some of the world's foremost research on transportation science, and were called upon by international colleagues to provide them with information.

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/...

    They did a similar thing to the library at the Ministry of Fisheries and Oceans

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/politic...

    Environment Canada

    http://o.canada.com/news/last-...

    This government has a war on science and knowledge and actively prohibits scientists from speaking to the media without government approval.

    http://scienceblogs.com/confes...

    The Conservative government does not care about facts. They have policies they want to implement, and they will do WHATEVER it takes to ensure those policies are enacted. Even if it means destroying our scientific heritage.

    1. Re:They are doing this to all Federal Libraries by dbIII · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Funny thing is there's a travelling exhibition called "lost treasures of Kabul" which is made up of stuff the museum workers hid from their own government to prevent it from being destroyed. I wonder how the Canadian government would like that comparison?

  10. Alternate Headline by CauseBy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Alternate Headline: "Public Agency Finds Less Expensive Way to Do The Same Job; Saves Taxpayer Dollars".

    This is what people voted for. It's a democracy. If people want the more expensive solution which does the same thing, then they'll vote for that instead.

    1. Re:Alternate Headline by dryeo · · Score: 2

      This government got 37% of the votes (much less when you consider the people who didn't vote) so no, it is not what the people voted for. This government has also squandered the surplus and ran a deficit the whole time they've been in power. Billions spent on advertising how we have the best science and billions given to the bitumen industry. Its got to the point where the oil companies don't really want any more tax credits as they know it looks a lot better if they pay a little tax.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
  11. Curtin Uni in Australia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I was a student at curtin for a while. Whilst I was there they binned some old chemistry reference books than no one had used in a while.
    They were a near complete set of chemistry journals from the 1750ish through 1910 ish. These were one of maybe 3 sets in the world, we sent to the tip. Gone forever.
    This is why I am keen in the digitization of works copyrighted or otherwise.

  12. Re: The real dark ages - physical matter for ideas by Vanderhoth · · Score: 3, Informative

    Actually 5 years ago personal HDs were made against the rule. They were collected then outright band from the network. Employees were mandated to use server storage, but in the last two years, with the creation of Shared Services Canada, there's been confusion about who's supposed to provide that service. A budy of mine who works for DFO is always complaining about fights with IM&TS and SSC. Both suppose to provide a service neither one doing it. Data is the casualty.

  13. Re:You get the best government you deserve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You might want to read up on the election fraud that occurred here. Google: "2011 Canadian federal election voter suppression scandal", aka the Robocall Scandal.

    The Cons worked hard at getting that swept under the rug. For any act like this that politicians get caught in, you can bet there's probably a dozen more they pulled off without the public knowing.

  14. Re:The real dark ages - physical matter for ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Well apparently "science" decided to hide data behind paper walls, making it accessible to a small elite.

    What complete and utter crap.

    The scientists who monitored these things kept libraries, containing their research journals, results, and papers and the supporting documentation.

    And you, like a fucking moron, jump to the conclusion that "a small elite" have been secretly hoarding all of this information.

    You're a fucking idiot. Some of this stuff is decades old, and predates when you could digitize it.

    The government has claimed they're going to digitize it, but the evidence so far indicates they've barely tried to do that, and are moving straight onto destroying records.

    The people complaining are the people who were trying to preserve the data and keep it accessible.

    The secretive douchebags here are the politicians who don't like it when facts get in the way of policy -- because this government makes policy on what they want to be true, and seldom give a damn about what is actually true.

    Oddly, we see the exact same pattern in the US with your neocons, who like to believe when they say reality is X, the rest of the world jumps and says "yes sir, reality is now X".

    This is a political game, and if you can remove the stuff that proves your government is either lying or failing to make decisions based on actual evidence -- then you can pretend you have all of the answers.

    Sorry, but your screed is directed at the wrong group here, and you are full of shit. The scientists wanted this stuff digitized, and had been told that it would be digitized -- they aren't the ones trying to keep the information secret and only available to them.

    Your entire post tells us you are a moron, who believes scientists are secretly conspiring to make sure they have all the information and the rest of us have none.

    Go crawl back under your rock.

  15. A warning, not an instruction manual... by matbury · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Looks like "... was supposed to be a warning, not an instruction manual..." is going to be a new meme. First George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-four, now Ray Bradbury's Farenheit 451.

    Down the memory hole!

  16. Re:Not at all what it seems by DahGhostfacedFiddlah · · Score: 2

    lot of financial issues in Canada and it isn't anything new
    [Citation Needed]

    http://www.cbc.ca/news2/intera...
    Canadians had no financial issues until Harper took power. We were on track to pay off the national debt.

    Libraries are hardly used to begin
    [Citation Needed]

    cost a significant amount to create and maintain
    [Citation Needed]

    They are expensive, and a huge tax burden
    [Citation Needed]

    Everything in those libraries are turned into ebooks
    [Citation definitely Needed]

  17. Re:last time by gmhowell · · Score: 3, Funny

    You probably should have worn more than a trench coat, and perhaps your first question shouldn't have been "is porn blocked on the library computers?"

    --
    Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  18. Fundamental Problem by DarthVain · · Score: 2

    Not to defend the Conservatives I dislike, however a few points worth noting. I have had some experience with this.

    A) Many of these specialized libraries are not used regularly. There may be a need for the information, and sometimes that need might be more than usual, however for the most part I would bet that most of the staff are not all that busy. Hence the reduction of staff. Though as argued this may have led to a decline in service when they are actually needed, making them even less used, etc...
    B) Digitizing is expensive. Storing the information is expensive. Organizing the information is expensive. Hosting the information is expensive. Now multiply all those things by a factor of 5 because you have to use government services or contractors to built it, and infrastructure to host it. There are a whole lot of reasons for this which I won't get into, but the fact is it is reality.
    C) You may or may not agree with it, but if you lower taxes, you need to cut services, and if you cut services you have to decide which ones. Too many people out there somehow think that they don't have to pay taxes and somehow get all the services they want for free. Some have pointed out that the taxes cut are corporate taxes, and I am sure the Conservatives would argue that this makes Canada more competitive and creates jobs. Personally I think that is BS, but the fact is, less taxes means less services.

    Anyway many are painting this as some sort of dastardly master plan by the Conservatives to destroy science and push their agenda. I think you are giving them way to much credit. That may be the round about way result, that has some small affect on the some specific long term research, but likely its immediate impact and gains (which is what most political parties are looking for, I highly doubt the Conservatives are playing the long game here) are negligible. This is more a simple consequence of the Conservatives following their ideological plan they got elected for. They cut corporate taxes using the assumption that it would make Canada more competitive and thus more attractive to corporate job creation, this costs money so to make up for it, rather than raise income taxes (which they also said they wouldn't do) the cut services to things which they don't see as A) important, and likely B) will have little impact on the short term while they are in office so as to have little effect on the next election cycle.

    So none of this is really all that surprising, nor unexpected. If you want to blame anything it is our electoral process that gives a majority government to party that doesn't even have a majority of the popular vote simply because the left is split, and that because these parties have a election cycle of 4 years, unless you have a strong leader with some legacy fetish, odds are no party will think much longer than those terms.