The library card is a barrier to library use

I just came back from London and the Internet Librarian International conference. (The twitter stream is the best way to get an impression).

The conference was one of the best I have ever been to. Greatly due to the wonderful people that you can meet and listen to, but also because of great programming.

One of the best parts of this conference is the conversations you have during breaks and meals. This year I got a chance to sit and talk to Åke Nygren, Michael Stephens, Trude Westby and many others. It is such a priviledge to learn from and share with so many brilliant people.

On the last day I started a conversation with Åke Nygren about a thought that popped into my head during the day. Why do we insist that library members log into library websites with library card number and a pin-code? Why not let them have the option to log in with their Facebook  credentials, OpenID, Google- or Twitter login? I see this option at more and more sites and would like to have this possibility available for my library members as well.

Library cards are useful, for libraries, not for library users. They are an anachronism from the analog days. Why not go the way of Social Login? The ease of use for our websites and services would be greatly increased. The possibilities for communication and services increased.

As we stand today I can see several problems with library cards.

1. They are one-use-cards. They are not useful for any other purpose (except scraping ice off car windows in winter) – other cards usually have multiple purposes today – my bank-card is also an ID, my work identidy card is an ID-card that also opens doors and gives me access to parking.

2. They are just numbers – the library card only function is as a carrier of a barcode that gives the library member number. Why  not use other ID-features, either from other cards already in use (like student ID cards at universities and colleges) or add useful information/functions to the card with smart-card techology? (I believe that DOK is working on this )3. They are easy to forget. Many people do not use the library often enough that they feel the need to carry the card around all the time. Which means that they try to use the library without the card. Usually that ends up beeing frustrating, humiliating or cost money. Bergen Public Library charges 10 NOK (about 1.5 US$) every time you try to check out books without a card.  I do not like this, it is a barrier to a happy relationship between member and library.

So I believe we have two paths to go in the “identify library member” game:

1. Make it easy to use some other means of identification to use library services both online and IRL. Facebook login, use other ID-cards as library card etc.

2. Make the library card more useful and full of added value. The card can be upgraded with memory chips and contain more information, poems, audio clips, special offers or access to “premium services”.

Arkivert i:Library 1.0, Security, Users, Library card, Social Login

Library computer security 2.0?

In a comment Jeremy from Canada raises the question of security in the Library 2.0 world. He raises some good points, and the most important in my opinion is:

I think it’s great that people are waving the flag for Library 2.0, but they have to start documenting the security that goes along with it or us IT people are going to take the blame for the problems that will inevitably arise.

The real issue here, apart form security, is that unless Library 2.0 involves all the various people who work in and around libraries it will fail from lack of support from the really important people. If the ICT-staff feels excluded from the discussion, I doubt that the technology part of Library 2.0 will ever lift off from the ground. Any library attempting to implement Library 2.0 without involving the expertise of the ICT-staff, support personell or any group (including users) have not understood the core concepts of openness, radical trust and communication that are the heart of Library 2.0.

Now to the security issue. There is definetly one, but I think that it might be useful to reconsider the way we view security. In the library public PCs are the gateway to the library resources and they are usually tested to the limit both of resources and security. I have myself picked chewing-gum from the keyboard, removed files from a supposedly locked harddisk, run restore routines and generally been frustrated by the sheer magnitude of keeping a public PC in a public library alive and running. So Jeremy definetly has a case when he writes:

Right now I get requests from staff/patrons for DVD burners, unrestricted USB/floppy access on PCs, little or no restrictions on internet PCs, the ability to install their own software, unrestricted wireless access (aka. hello BitTorrent, goodbye bandwidth), open network shares for patrons with unrestricted quotas, MP3 filesharing terminals, and more. All this in the interests of supporting a 2.0 way of life with little or no concern for the security and/or legal interests of the users or perhaps even the staff

Both the security and legal aspects does need to be considered. Security can be based on “worst case scenario” as in “unrestricted wireless access (aka. hello BitTorrent, goodbye bandwidth)” but this needs to be supported by evidence and experience. I have not heard of extreme misuse of bandwidth in any of the academic or public libraries that offers free and open wireless access here in Norway. It might be time for a different and more trusting approach, where the library staff understands that the ICT-staff is NOT responsible for the problems that may occur if there is instances of misuse. IF the trust is misplaced and major misuse occurs, the the policy has to be reconsidered, but I do believe that it is better to trust first and sanction later. “If you trick me once, shame on you, if you trick me twice, shame on me.”

The issue is also divided into the security of public access computers in the library, and the access and services that the library offers in and outside of the library. The first part is a problem that will be with us for the forseeable future, and not one which I have the knowledge and background to suggest any solutions for, but I also see a trend that will take some of the pressure of the public access PCs and that is the move toward mobile computing.

The proliferation of small computers that use any kind of connectivity, wifi or 3G, to connect their Palm, PocketPC, mobile phone, OrigamiPC, iPod 6G, PSP or DS to use the library services will present two challenges to the library, first the library has to provide services that are compatible with smaller display technology and in platform independent formats, and secondly the importance of the public access PC will decrease, but may be even more important to the people who has no other means of access, which in turn challenges the library to provide PCs that gives the user most of the usability the private units have.

The legal aspect of opening up the library as a communications and information network node are interesting, but not one I´m able to go into now. Sufficient to say that we must first have instances of use that are legally troublesome before we raise the bar for all legal use.

Arkivert i:Library 2.0, Security, Users