News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by alexophile on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @11:30AM (#2193446)
In my (biased, but well-founded) experience, it comes down to a question of whether I'd rather be distracted by a cute girl or an old man getting reprimanded for looking at dirty pictures.

[bg: I really like libraries - worked at one in the suburbs in high school and have since moved to the city, which exaggerated the weird bits]

One thing that's worth noting: if you're on a college campus, a great place to find some legit quiet time is in departmental libraries, especially the social sciences.

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by rbanffy on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @11:52AM (#2193561)
A couple years back, I decided to pay a visit to the campus library during the FISL (international free-software forum) that happens every year in Porto Alegre, Brazil on the PUC (pontifical catholic university) campus. I needed to grab some articles from CACM and their library has full access to the ACM online library, as well as decent wireless, something no tech event quite manages to have.

Porto Alegre is notorious for having a disproportionate number of cute girls. I was on the Engineering floor and, even there, I got distracted several times by them.

So, no, it's not every library that's cute-girl-free.

Unfortunately, they don't serve coffee.

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by Roritharr on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @12:47PM (#2193883)
Sounds like a good place to go study abroad...
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by ramchip on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @12:55PM (#2193926)
You'll have to refrain these thoughts. It's a catholic campus ;)
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by dhimes on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @01:20PM (#2194043)
It's a George Carlin pun: "Johnson sends Humphrey a broad (abroad). Details, along with some wild films, after these messages."

"Broad" is an old-fashion slang reference for woman in the US- much like "chick" became later. People who used the term "broad" non-perjoratively are well into their seventies now.

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by alexophile on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @01:39PM (#2194167)
I was under the impression that the only way to use "broad" non-pejoratively is in reference to the actual breadth of something.

That being said, sometimes it's safer to study abroad from afar.

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by dhimes on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @03:16PM (#2194616)
Yes, you can't say it any more... It actually fell out of favor long ago, but originally it wasn't considered all that bad of a term IIRC (I was pretty young).
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by dhimes on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @05:38PM (#2195248)
For some reason I can't reply to alexophile and steveklabnik here, so I'll just leave this:

alexophile: you may be correct about this- I'm too young to remember. But I heard it used by people who had no other signs of misogyny that I ever noticed, which is why I had that impression. Carlin was one of those people to the best of my knowledge.

steveklabnik: But there are terms that you "can't use" now that were never perjorative. The scientific name for the race to which African-Americans belong is "Negro." Sometime in the '60s (I think) the leaders of this ethnic group took offense at the term. So, you can't say that somebody who used the term in, say, the '50s, was necessarily using it perjoratively (although you could make the argument that somebody using it non-scientifically in the '80s may have been).

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by steveklabnik on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @08:44PM (#2195850)
> For some reason I can't reply to alexophile and steveklabnik here, so I'll just leave this:

If too many replies happen too fast, HN hides the reply link to try and slow down conversation. You can always get around this by clicking the 'link' link, but the idea is to encourage in-depth replies over chatty conversation, so use it wisely!

That said, while some people may have been running around saying "Negro" in a scientific manner, I'm sure many more were using it as a slur. Even then, they may not have intended it to be a slur, but that doesn't mean it's not exposing institutionalized racism; "he's not racist, he's just old."

I see this happening myself with 'gay' and 'faggot.' I have nothing against homosexuals, yet in anger I often use terms that are derogatory to them. It's something I'm working on.

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by dhimes on Wednesday February 09, 2011 @07:59AM (#2197267)
A reporter who wanted to refer to the race of a person would have used the term "Negro" as a neutral term. Not all categorizations are necessarily bad.

But I understand your point, and I think you understand mine, and there's lots of other important stuff to discuss- so, good thread.

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by steveklabnik on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @05:16PM (#2195172)
It wasn't considered all that bad of a term at the time, but then again, at certain points in history it was socially acceptable to use a variety of ethnic slurs, so...
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by alexophile on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @05:26PM (#2195210)
Right, I think that's more because, at the time, it wasn't all that bad to refer to women pejoratively.
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by Locke1689 on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @10:09PM (#2196085)
Wait, what? I have never heard "broad" used pejoratively (as a native English speaker of age 21). If anything it's archaic, not offensive.
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by rbanffy on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @01:15PM (#2194011)
The good thing with catholicism is that there is always forgiveness for those who repent.
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by bobbyi on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @07:48PM (#2195653)
“When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realised that the Lord doesn't work that way. So I stole one and asked Him to forgive me.”

-Emo Philips

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by elomar on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @01:24PM (#2194072)
It's in Brazil... even our catholic campuses aren't all that catholic ;)
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by Roritharr on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @01:17PM (#2194023)
If you go to confession, you should come prepared.
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by swah on Wednesday February 09, 2011 @04:58AM (#2196973)
I'm from Porto Alegre too, I graduated at PUC. Small world.
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by mberning on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @11:58AM (#2193585)
I came here to post this very thing. When I was working downtown I decided to go to the library during my lunch break. To my surprise there was almost nobody in the library actually reading. However, there were people on every single computer workstation. Glancing over the screens I could see a variety of pornographic images, facebook and myspace pages, and youtube. The library is a great resource, but I was completely pissed off that my tax dollars go to support that.
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by JacobAldridge on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @12:23PM (#2193739)
"but I was completely pissed off that my tax dollars go to support that."

People who can't afford a few hundred dollars for their own computer and the monthly bill for internet access? If you're looking at porn in the library, it's because you can't do it anywhere else, not because you're abusing tax dollars.

Would I like the poor, the disadvantaged, the isolated to be using the library resources my taxes pay for to advance their lives? Hell yeah. Am I going to begrudge them - let alone get pissed off about - them using it to do the things I can do on my phone, on my way to the well-paying job? Hell no.

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by mberning on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @01:26PM (#2194082)
This is completely and utterly asinine. Not only does this inappropriate use cause a hostile environment for people that legitimately want to use the library, but it lowers the number of available workstations for legitimate use. Just imagine your grandmother or little sister going down to the library to do some research and being uncomfortable in this environment. Think they are going to go back? No, of course they won't. But they will continue to pay tax to fund it. I don't understand how anybody could be 'OK' with this gross misuse of public funds.
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by silentbicycle on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @03:31PM (#2194691)
When I worked for a public library system (for, not at; I was a library employee), a fair amount of my time was spent watching the public internet stations. Mostly, helping people use the internet, keeping track of who was out of time, etc., but occasionally that meant kicking out people we caught looking at porn.

It's not like it's encouranged. Be realistic. It's usually grounds for banning, and I doubt my library system was unique there.

See also: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=759069

Some people spent time on facebook, myspace, flash games, etc., but some people spend lots of time on Hacker News, too. Not sure what your point is, there. It's not like kids were allowed to sit playing flash games all day when people wanted computers for schoolwork (or whatever).

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by mberning on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @06:32PM (#2195402)
Who said it was encouraged? Every library is different. I'm sure if you go to one out in the burbs it is a lot different than in in the inner city, like I was visiting.
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by silentbicycle on Wednesday February 09, 2011 @12:52PM (#2198437)
Your tone is making people misconstrue your point.
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by mileszs on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @02:52PM (#2194508)
Perhaps we should pay someone to decide what people are allowed to look at on those computers. Actually, that doesn't seem fair. Perhaps we should pay a committee to decide, and they can hand their decision to an IT department to implement. Well, I suppose adding another responsibility to the library's IT staff will mean we'll have to pay to add a position to the department so they're staffed well enough. There. Problem solved. Funds are no longer being misused. Right?

Because this is the internet, the above probably seems really snarky. It's meant to be a calm, civil anecdote to illustrate my point, but I apologize if it does seem hostile. In any case, I think preventing people from using their library computer time as they see fit 1) will result in upset users due to many false positives, 2) results in more ... "big-brother-ism", if you will, 3) will cost as much money as it saves.

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by rapind on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @03:54PM (#2194795)
I'd pay a small tax increase of .1 cents to abolish internet pornography in libraries. Call me a party pooper, but there's a time and place, and the place for pornography is definitely not public spaces.

I don't care if there's a nude painting on display, but I do care if there's some hard core humping on a computer monito in a public place where my child can see it... I mean he was just born, give him at least a few years innocence!

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by silentbicycle on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @04:15PM (#2194907)
You make it sound so easy. Leaving aside the complicated legal question for determining what is and isn't considered pornography* , how would you go about actually doing it? Is internet filtering perfectly reliable? Would hiring several extra library employees specifically to watch the internet stations suffice? Library staff are already trying to prevent people from viewing pornography on the public computers, working within the resources available. Sheesh.

* At the library system I worked at, it was a matter of staff judgement.

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by rapind on Wednesday February 09, 2011 @08:46AM (#2197353)
I reread my comment after it had been downvoted and realized I was probably not clear at all. I don't care about the downvoting, but I wanted to clear it up so no one reading it felt persecuted or unappreciated.

When I said .1 cents I actually meant a small amount but not a trivial amount per paycheck multiplied by the tax paying population. So around 7 million per year. Not sure if that's significant enough, but it was just a figure off the top of my head meant to demonstrate that by paying a small amount individually we could help the issue.

Anyways, I've over-explained it now... but I felt like a douche when I checked my threads this morning.

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by silentbicycle on Wednesday February 09, 2011 @10:01AM (#2197585)
I understood where you're coming from. Unfortunately, tax increases for any library services can be a hard sell.

Mainly, I just wanted to point out that it's a quintessential "Small Matter of Programming" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_matter_of_programming) issue in library policy, and people who have never worked for a library can easily underestimate the difficulty. My response was a bit over-bristly, though, sorry.

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by rapind on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @04:17PM (#2194919)
I'm perfectly happy with staff judgement. If they need it then I vote we pay them for their extra time or another resource to help (well I'm Canadian so my vote only counts up here).

Didn't mean to say it was easy, jus worthwhile.

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by mberning on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @03:36PM (#2194712)
I see your point. From a different perspective, if the library weren't so complacent on enforcing the rules there would be a need for less workstations, less IT staff, less infrastructure, less management. I guess I look at people surfing porn and youtube on public computers and see that as a 'waste' of money as compared to how it was intended to be used.
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by silentbicycle on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @03:39PM (#2194737)
If they're anything like every library I've ever worked for or visited in my entire life, they're probably too underfunded and understaffed to perfectly block people from using the public computers to do anything the local policy considers inappropriate. I highly doubt it's a matter of complacency.
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by steveklabnik on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @05:20PM (#2195181)
In fact, most librarians I know (admittedly not too many) are even more "information should be free" than your average GNU hippie.

These are the places with a sign up in the windows that said "The FBI has not yet raided us," after all.

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by silentbicycle on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @05:24PM (#2195207)
That matches my experience. Those positions are not contradictory, though. It's about preventing a hostile environment for people who want to use the library, and keeping anybody from monopolizing public resources.
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by steveklabnik on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @05:27PM (#2195212)
It's true. There's a difference between acknowledging that and getting righteous about 'my tax dollars going to some poor people looking at porn,' that's all I'm saying.
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by mberning on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @06:26PM (#2195383)
Since when does watching where your money goes make you righteous? Has nothing to do whether I think they are right or wrong for looking at porn. I don't give a shit if people look at porn, or do drugs, or work as a prostitute. What drives me nuts is that this unsanctioned use drives more and more cost every year. If all the people viewing porn at the library were kicked out how many workstations would be rendered unnecessary? Probably a significant number. Those funds that would have been spent on those workstation could be put to use somewhere else, such as local police, fire, sanitation, etc. A rather better use of money in my book. Sorry if that comes off as being 'righteous'.
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by steveklabnik on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @06:51PM (#2195467)
> Sorry if that comes off as being 'righteous'.

The problem is that you're presenting it as a class issue. Read it again:

> Glancing over the screens I could see a variety of pornographic images, facebook and myspace pages, and youtube. The library is a great resource, but I was completely pissed off that my tax dollars go to support that.

This is a bit different than an argument that they could cut down on 'probably a significant number' of computers if there was lower usage. The whole point of having a resource is to use it, so I'd argue that we should be trying to promote utilization anyway...

'surfing youtube' vs 'how it's intended to be used' is missing the forest for the trees: libraries are about disseminating information.

> Thus, modern libraries are increasingly being redefined as places to get unrestricted access to information in many formats and from many sources. They are extending services beyond the physical walls of a building, by providing material accessible by electronic means, and by providing the assistance of librarians in navigating and analyzing tremendous amounts of information with a variety of digital tools.

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by theBobMcCormick on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @05:30PM (#2195223)
Would this be the wrong time to bring up the HN guidelines? (http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

Calling someone else's argument asinine seems to be exactly what the guidelines specifically ask not to do. eg:

"When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. E.g. "That is an idiotic thing to say; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3.""

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by anigbrowl on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @03:27PM (#2194669)
I see and empathize with your point, but you're getting into some tricky first amendment issues if you attempt to police what people are doing (short of playing videos at high volume).

Strangely enough, I often study at a public law library (where I am right now) and I occasionally see the staff kick someone out for misuse of the computers here, even though it's run by the county. Perhaps it's because there are only 6 of them and they're meant for accessing legal databases like Lexis/Nexis, not checking your facebook status. (I'm using my laptop, they probably wouldn't approve of me using HN on a library machine either!)

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by silentbicycle on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @03:44PM (#2194759)
In my experience as a library employee, there had to be a strong case that somebody was disrupting other patrons' abilities to use the library / creating a hostile environment before they could get kicked out. Coming in falling-down-drunk, stealing stuff, or looking at porn on the internet stations was pretty clear cut, but sometimes the line was fuzzy.
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by rbanffy on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @01:16PM (#2194019)
> ...using it to do the things I can do on my phone, on my way to the well-paying job

You really shouldn't watch porn on your phone while you drive. ;-)

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by dhimes on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @01:22PM (#2194057)
Well, we're not allowed to text any more so what do they expect?
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by jarek on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @02:03PM (#2194284)
Maybe he's on a train. In a personal compartment.
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by JacobAldridge on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @02:52PM (#2194514)
Actually, I was referring to Facebook, Myspace and YouTube (from the parent comment) more than the porn, though it doesn't read like that! And I don't actually have a smartphone, so the only thing I can do with my phone on the Underground when going to work is ... tell the time.
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by Semiapies on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @01:30PM (#2194119)
And they're paying into the library too with their taxes, poor or not.
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by mberning on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @01:46PM (#2194202)
They may or may not, but I would put money on a majority of them not paying income tax due to the large number of homeless and vagrants.

But that is beside the point. Paying taxes does not give you the right to a) break the rules (surfing porn IS against the rules) and b) causes an environment that is not conducive to the intended use (i.e. a filthy environment that drives away legitimate users)

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by JacobAldridge on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @02:00PM (#2194276)
I think the porn thing (which is as much about rules not being enforced as anything) can be separated from "facebook and myspace pages, and youtube", which were part of your original point.

Is it just the vagrants watching porn that pisses you off? That's maybe caring too much about the topic, but it raises a fair point.

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by Semiapies on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @02:30PM (#2194407)
Homeless folks still have to pay sales taxes in most places.

People breaking the rules is certainly a valid complaint. However, I'm not aware of libraries banning YouTube (if people are using headphones), Facebook, or whatnot.

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by WildUtah on Wednesday February 09, 2011 @03:34AM (#2196840)
Homeless folks still have to pay sales taxes

And a lot of cigarette taxes and booze excise taxes. Really poor people pay a much larger proportion of their incomes in taxes.

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by kensan on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @12:33PM (#2193797)
`In my younger and more vulnerable years my father gave me some advice that I’ve been turning over in my mind ever since. “Whenever you feel like criticizing any one,” he told me, “just remember that all the people in this world haven’t had the advantages that you’ve had.”` - The Great Gatsby
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by mberning on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @01:50PM (#2194218)
I don't see how them being disadvantaged exempts them from library rules. Does being disadvantaged exempt people from the law. Of course not.
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by khafra on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @02:22PM (#2194372)
The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by Semiapies on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @04:24PM (#2194971)
I suspect we can make a sensible distinction between being harassed by the police for being homeless and not being able to look at porn in a public library.
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by darklajid on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @07:53PM (#2195672)
I think that is just as misleading as the quote above.

Decide for yourself: Is this thread about viewing pornography in public places? Is this thread about _homeless_ or _too poor to pay for internet access in any way_ people looking at porn? Or are we seriously discussing about tax dollars being spent in a wrong way?

Disclaimer following: I'm not a US guy and I've never been there, but both based on extrapolation (looking at my country, guessing it's not that different over there) and some public media stunts I'd like to reset some expectations here.

Paying for library internet access and the machines there won't ruin your country, period. If the libraries are somewhat similar to ours, the machines are old/reused/will stay for years or are a gift of a local company. Internet is a given for most places anyway and doesn't cost more if you're not only using it behind the counter but offer a couple of public places to use it as well.

So in the end I think the "tax dollar" argument is moot. It's - with my limited understanding - completely bogus and just tries to reinforce a moral problem with the use of public workstations ("I don't like your use case _and btw I pay for that_"). Chances are, you're not. Not in any way worth mentioning. Had a donut or a coffee at Starbucks (bridging the gap back to the article again) recently? Chances are you paid a lot more than the amount of your taxes going into "funding for internet usage in libraries".

Seriously. This thread seems completely disconnected from reality and nothing but a "WAH!" in my book.

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by Semiapies on Wednesday February 09, 2011 @11:51AM (#2198098)
Hmm. Perhaps you could read the actual responses by the people in the thread (including myself), instead of blindly responding to "the thread", whatever that is.
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by burgerbrain on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @08:03PM (#2195702)
Of course there is always the oh so subtle difference between "being harassed by the police for being homeless" and "being harassed by the police while incidentally being homeless".

I've lived in 3 major cities, and I've only once seen what I would describe as unwarranted attention from the police directed the homeless. In fact, the majority of the time the police seem to completely ignore them, even when they're purposely making a scene. They know there's realistically nothing they can do, crazies will be crazy.

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by Semiapies on Wednesday February 09, 2011 @12:01PM (#2198148)
And yet, still unrelated to library porn-viewers.
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by rhizome on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @04:19PM (#2194932)
You should attribute the quotes you use. Anatole France.
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by blackguardx on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @12:37PM (#2193827)
Pissed that your tax dollars provide computer access to people without computers? You don't approve of the sites they visit, so would you also complain if the books they read didn't meet your approval?

Not everyone in the library should have to read Shakespeare, ya know.

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by bandushrew on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @06:21PM (#2195367)
could we skip the shocked outrage part of the discussion?

Tax dollars go on random, pointless crap pretty much most of the time, and to be honest if I had to choose between, say, paying for the govt to invade Iraq or paying for someone without a computer to view pornography or visit facebook, I would choose the latter without hesitation.

Its a shame you dont approve of how others utilise their available resources, but maybe you could discuss the issue without faux-outrage. Its a boring and (these days) over used means of communication.

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by theBobMcCormick on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @04:44PM (#2195045)
Isn't it somewhat the opposite? It's not that "your tax dollars" are supporting that people browsing porn at the library. To prevent people from browsing porn, the library have to spend more of "your tax dollars" to either install filtering software or employ people to walk around and look over people's shoulders.

That's not even considering the far thornier problem that porn filtering programs can often block legitimate web browsing, such as looking for information about sex education, safe sex, STD's etc.

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by RickHull on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @12:03PM (#2193615)
> In my (biased, but well-founded) experience, it comes down to a question of whether I'd rather be distracted by a cute girl or an old man getting reprimanded for looking at dirty pictures.

Ha! Reminds me of my Brooklyn Public Library experience. The building looks fantastic on the outside, but on the inside it is a dreary, institutional wasteland. I had to pick my inspiration up off the floor when I walked in. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Brooklyn_Public_Library_by...

After I located the one room with outlets, I crammed my way onto the folding table and connected to the flaky wifi, which needs to be reauthorized every hour. While answering emails, I could not help but notice the hardcore anime porn viewing session at the bank of workstations across from the table. I doubt I'll be back.

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by mhb on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @12:36PM (#2193816)
The cost and monthly fee for a cell modem is pretty negligible compared to the benefit of a rent-free workspace.
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by RickHull on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @03:00PM (#2194548)
You still need power, though.
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by VolatileVoid on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @12:50PM (#2193902)
Try the new Battery Park City NYPL. Spacious, quiet, and while not awe-inspiring outside or in, it's certainly not dreary.
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by bluekite2000 on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @01:02PM (#2193950)
"it comes down to a question of whether I'd rather be distracted by a cute girl or an old man getting reprimanded for looking at dirty pictures" : exactly my experience in SF public library vs a cafe in Mission.
Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by ionfish on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @05:58PM (#2195308)
"A great place to find some legit quiet time is in departmental libraries."

This has been my experience too. My current favourite is the Earth Sciences library. It's in one of the older buildings in my university, so the whole place has a much more humane feel than the concrete box of the main library. There's also more space to stretch out, and it's not as busy.

Re:Ditch Starbucks and work at the library by beagledude on Tuesday February 08, 2011 @11:55AM (#2193575)
I've worked at the library quite a few times until I found a co-working space.

+1 on the distraction comment.