Entitlement

[gfish]

I have a ridiculous feeling of entitlement to information. I just had to go to the physical library to pick up physical copies of 1980 and 1993 articles. (Online access only goes back to 1995 for this journal.) The whole thing was a field trip to the 20th century. You can't check out periodicals, and they didn't have a scanner, so now I have a stack of minimally-useful potential paper cuts on my desk. You can only pay for the copy cards with cash, and they don't have an ATM. The whole thing made me quite angry. Which is ridiculous, of course, to expect that the full sum of human knowledge be instantly available from the comfort of my own laptop.

But still... the new way is better in every way. I can't really feel guilty for enjoying and internalizing the realities of new technology. Was someone complaining about book store selection in the century after Gutenberg ridiculous? This isn't just about personal comfort, this is about removing an barrier of access to information. That's a noble goal, one with plenty of work left to be done on it. So, grrr, I say, grrr! My rage might be a bit ridiculous, but so is having to make physical copies of data in 2009.

Comments

[sistawendy.livejournal.com]

As somebody who went to grad school much earlier than you did, this wouldn't have fazed me. Even a couple of years ago I saw josefinek reading Xeroxes at the Merc.

[neuro42.livejournal.com]

Yeah, in non-CS fields this is *still* pretty common.

Boy do I miss josefinek.

[maribou]

Advances in publicly and cheaply available scanner tech would help. At my (much smaller) college library, when I make scans of stuff myself, I end up having to make copies and scan the copies, because the scanner/copier can't be trusted to make good scans from a physical object every time and I don't want to have to spend twice as long on it.

It pains me every time.

[cow.livejournal.com]

I was kind of shocked to learn that UBC didn't have scanners available, or even have a little computer lab in the learning centre where one could take a book and scan things.

I mean, I would prefer to scan something three different times (assuming the scanner couldn't be trusted, etc.--a valid issue especially in a public library setting) and verify each page than go through what Fish describes above.

Oh, and to top it off, the only thing I had on me the time I did what Fish describes was a $5, so now I have a copy card with $4.08 or something on it and I'll probably never use it again. (Or if it's like the UW was, by the time I need to, they'll have a new format and the card will be invalid.) Heh.

Seriously, put an $80 scanner hooked up to a cheap computer. I'll fuck with it enough and make it go. A lot of people will find it annoying, but at least the option will be there.

[gfish.livejournal.com]

The really annoying thing is that the copier in question was advanced enough to have scan/email capabilities, they just weren't enabled. UBC: Fuck you, trees!

[cow.livejournal.com]

I was just about to answer a second time with "or better yet, when buying ridiculously expensive copiers, get a model that can scan and e-mail," but....wow. yeah. Awesome.

(Or even better yet, tell Elsevier to go eat dicks and scan everything for the students. I realize this is not yet practical in the current copyright climate, but fuck it, scan it all, make it CWL-restricted, and note it's for educational use only.)

[maribou]

Our copier(s) also have scan/email capabilities. But since we are busy actually checking books out to people (something libraries still do!), helping them find stuff in real journals, fixing the printers, troubleshooting their network connectivity problems, etc (why yes, the help desk IS in the building, they're just never open), we didn't really feel like we had enough time left over to help all the VERY ANGRY people saying "wtf!!! i scanned this thing and then I went and did other stuff and now MY EMAIL DIDN'T COME THROUGH" or "AUGH I ONLY GOT HALF THE PAGES FROM THIS SCAN NOW YOU HAVE TO RESCAN ALL 300 PAGES FOR ME BECAUSE MY PAPER IS DUE TOMORROW AUGH AUGH". Plus the firewall/non-helpful-IT stuff mentioned below. So we disabled it.

*However*, there is a computer lab, in the library, which does have working scanners, and tech people who know what they are doing with them! - and if people ask to scan stuff we send them there, and they can scan stuff. IF that lab is open. Which it actually is most of the time.

[maribou]

"real journals" = apparently how I think of stuff that is available online, as ONLINE journals/databases is what I meant to say. Your frustration, I share it. Just don't blame the library. Also, while I am too sleepy to find for this cite, the latest copyright brouhaha is that "the bad guys" are once again trying to make *providing* copiers that *might* be used to copy their stuff illegal. Let alone scanners. Also Elsevier makes libraries sign licenses for their online content (as do most other vendors). We strike through large pieces of our license, but even the parts that are left would make scanning everything damn hard to do without breaking our contracts.

PS I would, actually, find someone bitching about bookstore selection in the century after Gutenberg pretty ridiculous. DUDE!!! BOOKS!!! Cheer up and take it a little easier.

[gfish.livejournal.com]

Ridiculous, and yet part of me resists letting anything other than technology set expectations. If complaining about bookstore selection in, say, 1800 (before industrialized printing, that is) wasn't ridiculous, then it shouldn't be for just-post-Gutenberg person. It's not their fault if they've internalized the possibilities of new technology faster than the institutions around them. (SELF-JUSTIFYING RATIONALIZATION ALERT!)

[maribou]

Except that most of the people who whine about these things have a "well, YOU PEOPLE should do something about this then" attitude which completely blows off the situation of the people struggling in those institutions and tends to sound like "wah, this is too much work for ME so all of YOU should do more work!!!" (Scan the entire journal collection, cow? Really? Because we're not busy doing anything ELSE with fewer people-hours than we had before the crisis. So all of those other patrons who just want the same stuff they're used to getting must obviously be less important than you.)

As you (both) actually DO do a lot of interesting and useful things, you get a pass though. But it still sounds ridiculous.

I think the complainers in 1800 were also kind of ridiculous. What *was* justified (including just-post-Gutenberg) was the people complaining about stuff like not being allowed to own books that weren't licensed by the government. And the people complaining about the Catholic imprimatur. &c. Complain about the causes, not the effects, and more will change.

[gfish.livejournal.com]

I think this conflict is part of a bigger issue in modern life -- one is never in contact with the people responsible for bad designs/systems/interfaces/etc. Which means there is no proper outlet for the the frustrations they engender, and worse yet not much incentive for things to get better. I go back and forth on the proper handling of it myself -- I have no desire to hassle the person I happen to be dealing with, who isn't responsible for whatever annoyance I'm fighting with, but at the same time they're the only obvious conduit I have to get the message that something is needlessly stupid and broken up the chain of command. So, yeah, I mentioned my surprise to the librarian yesterday that there wasn't some non-primitive way to get a copy of this data. I hope I didn't make it sound snarky or accusative. I had no desire to make their life less pleasant. But... there should be such a way. And maybe the correct solution is to abolish copyright entirely and let Google put up all their scans for free download and screw Elsevier (which I'm not convinced of... but not convinced NOT of either). They're still my interface to the system I think needs changing.

[maribou]

Were you already talking to the subject librarian for your subject? If not, may I suggest contacting them directly? http://toby.library.ubc.ca/libstaff/subjectlibrarians.cfm . There's also a feedback page specifically for e-Resource stuff (it seems more geared to questions but it explicitly says "comments" as well): http://www.library.ubc.ca/home/forms/ejournalhelp.html

Also, if you look at the web page for the journal that DOES go back to 1995, there is probably a web contact link for the journal database people themselves (you may have to dig a bit, but I just went and looked up some random journals, and they DID have publisher contact info), where you could urge them to put further backissues online. (And if they say "well, they are online, your school doesn't pay for them" you can say "well, how the jeezly much are you charging for them?" AND suggest to the subject librarian that you, at least, would find having further back issues available worth the $$$.)

Not trying to be obnoxious, just ... if this really does bother you there is stuff to do that is less extreme than abolishing copyright and more useful than harrying the person working the desk.

[gfish.livejournal.com]

I think it is reasonable to feel frustrated that there are few ways to (politely, respectfully, non-confrontationaly) express my dissatisfaction with the appointed representative for a system with which I have a complaint. It's a generic problem with modern organizations, simply due to their size and hierarchical structure. Telling me to go home and look up a specialized complaint line isn't very satisfying, as of course very few people are going to do it. Which means that most complaints never get heard, which is systemically counter-productive to getting things fixed. I'm left either feeling at the mercy of a system which obviously doesn't want to hear my concerns, or feeling like a jerk for burdening some random low-level worker. I think it's a general cause of friction in our society that we haven't found a better way to deal with this situation.

It may sound pretentious, but I think there is value to this kind of whinging. One, well, it's kind of fun, and this is just a silly blog in the end. But two, it helps me clarify and explore my own position, and hopefully further the dialog about what we're going to do about information access as a society. We are facing a point where a good chunk of a generation is treating copyright law as seriously as they do drug prohibition. That's a fairly serious situation and it didn't have to be this way.

(And no, the publisher only provides 1995 and past. And at the risk of pushing this conversation even farther afield, I feel very little desire to negotiate with people holding information -- particularly academic papers! -- hostage like that. They've made their position quite clear through their actions. Assuming they aren't already scanned, they could ask Google to scan the backlog and it would be done pretty damned quick. If they weren't so intent on maintaining their artificial and doomed monopoly, that is.)

[maribou]

Hm. I don't think I meant "negotiate" with the publisher so much as "cuss out" the publisher, although rereading what I said, I can see how that came across wrong. I wasn't sure if part of your frustration was that the library should do whatever it takes to GET those backfiles, even if it costs them dollars they don't (think) they have to spare from other stuff - which either digitizing or purchasing more things from the publisher would cost them a significant amount. I get very twitchy about "just give everything to Google" since Google is trying to be just as controlling as everyone else, limiting access under their proposed settlement to one terminal per library & etc. I'm much more heartened by things SOME publishers are doing like allowing us to share all our Springer e-books between consortial members - a consortium which includes the huge public library systems in Denver... which means that thousands of public library people will be able to quickly get access to digital copies of in-print Springer books for free, without having to leave their homes. Or preview-loan-purchase agreements with major e-book vendors that allow patrons to drive collection decisions. And I'm even more into pushing open access journals, shared CC (or even looser) licensed curricular materials, &c. Most times the librarians are the ones pushing this stuff and the faculty are the ones that don't like the idea, from what I've seen. Maybe UBC is different. Anyway, now I'm just rambling.

Was I really telling you to go home and look up a specialized complaint line? I may be misreading some of your situation because I do work in a small residential college - if you came to me, on the desk, and expressed a desire to talk to someone about our serials collection, I would *walk* you to either your subject librarian, or the serials librarian, or the public services librarian, or the library director if they weren't around, right then and there. But I thought I was saying, "Hey, since you obviously prefer NOT having to go to the physical library, here are some ways to press your case without going there again."

I don't think there is no value to expressing your frustration. As I said above I actually feel the same way a lot of the time. I think what I've said so far has been more about me trying to pursue the questions you raised than to say you shouldn't raise them. And, it's your blog. You're entitled to feel entitled!! (I say things I think are ridiculous all the time, honestly.) But I do think there are things you can do that can (or at least SHOULD) make a difference. I really DO think, from what I've seen, that libraries take patron complaints seriously (especially if it's about policy and not random and seemingly unjustified "this person is mean to me" stuff), and I really DO think it would be worthwhile to communicate at least some of what you've said on here to people at the library who are well situated to bring up what you've said as a concrete example when they are arguing-for-such-and-such in a committee or a meeting or a professional conference. It *would* be better if you could say to random person on the desk "hey, you know, I really have a problem with X" and be sure that said problem would be properly passed up the chain, but honestly most of those front-line people are just trying to make sure the entire system doesn't implode on a daily basis and don't really want to bug their higher-ups with "hey, you know, this patron said we should do this thing that seems vaguely impossible to manage under our budget."

Perhaps I was mistaken in taking your original frustration as pointed *at the library* when really you are more frustrated at the current state of society and I overreacted with all this "well, what about this" stuff. Hopefully even if I've irritated it's helped you to clarify things to yourself to some degree:). I'm responding out of interest and not out of defensiveness, I'm pretty sure.

[zzyzx-xyzzy.livejournal.com]

I have *never* seen a university administered copy machine set up to use the scan/email. For the machine on my floor it's abunch of sysadmin nonsense: the copier can't be behind our lab firewall for some reason, the copier's email doesn't do SSL so it can't get across the firewall to talk to our mail server, no one wants to whitelist the copier in their SMTP server if it's on a building wide subnet, etc etc.

In depseration I have been known to set my laptop to pretend it's on the copier's subnet, connect ethernet direct from a laptop to the copier, and use the copier's FTP function. For chapter-sized scans this is still faster then trying to use a flatbed scanner.

[bigbumble.livejournal.com]

The frustration with the physical library is not new. I once attended a scientific talk (Pre-internet) where the speaker commented, "Two weeks in the lab will save you a week in the library."

[woggie.livejournal.com]

Back in in early 90s there was a guy I knew who, when he wanted copies of something at the library, would lug his flatbed scanner down there and set it up to scan everything on his dime and his equipment.

No telling how SPL would react to the same behavior in this day and age.

[zzyzx-xyzzy.livejournal.com]

I've been thinking digital cameras are good enough nowadays that some kind of portable folding copy stand would be the quickest option.

[woggie.livejournal.com]

I'm somewhat dissatisfied with my camera as a substitute scanner, but then it's just a piddly 5.1 megapixel camera. Good lighting and a tripod are often also definite requirements for such an arrangement.

[maribou]

Do they make line-by-line pen scanners? I thought they did. Pick up one of those and you can scan whatever you want:).

[basal-surge.livejournal.com]

Although those physical copies in the library are still probably more durable than any digital stuff, even with the risk of acid papers. We are in an undocumented age, as the bulk of our printed material is still on self destructing acid pulped papers, and none of our digital media are durable enough to last even decades without corruption.