Discussion Title: Should physical libraries be digitized?

1. Libraries should stop having a physical presence and instead only exist digitally \(i.e. online\).
1.1. Pro: Digital books are easier to search within \(for specific words or numbers\) than physical books.
1.1.1. Con: Even if true, this doesn't mean that libraries should not have a physical presence anymore. Some people might use digital books when searching them yet prefer physical ones for actual reading.
1.1.2. Pro: Searching for specific words in an ordinary book is possible only via the index. Yet indexes don't necessarily contain all words one might be interested in, so an e-book allows for word searching beyond an index's capabilities.
1.1.2.1. Pro: Authors and publishers have little incentive to add comprehensive indexes as it requires a lot of time. One estimate is that [it takes 10-15h per 100 pages of a book](https://authorservices.wiley.com/author-resources/book-authors/prepare-your-manuscript/indexing.html).
1.2. Con: People are limited to their mind's limitations \(biases, imagination...\) in a digital library, whereas they get exposed to ideas outside of their 'world' in a physical library.
1.2.1. Pro: A physical library is more like a directory or a store, where everything that the place offers is shown, whereas a digital library is like a search engine, where what is sought is what is shown.
1.2.2. Con: Digital libraries, too, can recommend books to people, thus exposing them to topics they were not yet in touch with.
1.2.3. Pro: Physical books are always present, advertising themselves to the reader. Digital books are tiny squares in computers that have a higher chance of being forgotten.
1.3. Con: Digitalised books or not, both are acceptable and wanted, depends on the person's preference. So both should be available for a person's use, until physical books are no longer sought.
1.4. Pro: Digital books can be loaned to multiple people simultaneously. Physical books, on the other hand, can be on loan to only one person at a time.
1.4.1. Con: If a library has multiple copies, then multiple people can check out the same book, regardless of format. Libraries tend to have multiple copies of the same physical book on-hand for checkout.
1.4.1.1. Con: A lot of books cannot be loaned from the library, because limited stocking of them among other reasons. It's, therefore, uncertain to have access to books 100% in the library.
1.4.2. Con: People can go to other libraries if the book is checked out at the nearest one.
1.4.2.1. Con: This prospect, even if it is within the realm of possibility, might people dissuade from using the library,
1.4.2.2. Con: This might not be an option for anyone with limited mobility or money, or people who live in remote areas.
1.4.3. Pro: Digital books could be accessed by people around the globe, whereas a library book is mainly accessible to those that are nearby.
1.4.4. Pro: This is done relatively cheaply, because people do not have to go to the library \(at worst by airplane\) to get them.
1.4.5. Con: Digital copies will still be limited on how many copies can be loaned at the same time by the publisher, due to [copyright reasons](https://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Gutenberg:Copyright_FAQ#C.8._How_does_a_book_enter_the_public_domain.3F).
1.4.5.1. Pro: Libraries own a number of digital licenses and only "loan out" that many at a time. While it's an arbitrary and rather imaginary limitation, you do need to be put on a waiting list for your turn to rent a digital book.
1.5. Con: Libraries act as equal access resources to the public, regardless of income.
1.5.1. Pro: People will still go to physical libraries as a public space, not just for books.
1.5.1.1. Con: Once people get out of what they are normally used to \(like visiting a library habitually\), they see the world around them if they look outside of their norm.
1.5.1.1.1. Con: Visiting a physical library takes them out of their norm, which may be being at home. So they have two places instead of one, in which they see the world around them in between visits.
1.5.1.1.2. Pro: People can bring a digital library with them anywhere and could enjoy more unique sights than a physical library \(much of it cannot be taken out easily, so people are stuck there\), due to portability.
1.5.1.1.2.1. Con: Physical libraries are [unique sights](https://www.reddit.com/r/Libraryporn/) worth visiting in themselves.
1.5.1.1.3. Con: People are creatures of habit. They will find a new place to stay at and not notice the outside world when they frequent it.
1.5.1.1.3.1. Pro: If that new place that they frequent is home, then those library visitors will reduce the number of places they travel to from 2 to 1. This reduces their interactions with the outside world even more than if they just visit a library.
1.5.1.2. Pro: People have choices when libraries exist physically.
1.5.1.3. Con: These spaces could be provided in other ways, for example through community centers or public co-working spaces.
1.5.1.4. Con: People do not need extra spaces to go to as there are other locations that can provide that.
1.5.1.4.1. Pro: They can make do with what they have at home, especially since all the books are accessible through an electronic device instead of bookshelf.
1.5.1.4.1.1. Con: Not everyone has a home. Libraries are one of the few public spaces people can spend time without having to purchase something. Some people \(like ones who do not have a home\) don't have anywhere else to go and a library provides a place for them.
1.5.1.4.1.1.1. Con: If this change was implemented, the library buildings could see a new life as a shelter for homeless people.
1.5.1.4.2. Pro: People can go to an outdoor space \(like a park, public space, or beach, which are mainly free\) and enjoy reading ebooks there.
1.5.1.4.2.1. Pro: Outdoor spaces are better than libraries, because people do not get outdoors enough if they frequent libraries a lot, which could lead to [health problems](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2796751/).
1.5.2. Pro: For people who don't have access to the internet or suitable electronic devices to use for books \(like the poor or recent refugees\), they would lose out on equal access to them.
1.5.2.1. Pro: It's a space shared by people of all demographics, perhaps the only place where some people see people who differ from themselves. Programs for seniors and new parents and new immigrants, free meeting space for students and artists, internet access for underemployed people, a place to warm up in bad weather, a place to post your ad if you're looking for your lost dog - people inhabiting space together.
1.5.3. Pro: They are also staffed by highly knowledgeable librarians, who are an in-person resource to everyone, regardless of whether they have access to electronic devices/internet or not \(which accessing librarians digitally requires\).
1.5.4. Con: If a person lives in a country so poor that even a cheap smartphone is unaffordable, it is likely that there are no physical libraries in that area either. At least digital libraries provide the equal access that physical libraries are supposed to provide for developing countries.
1.6. Pro: Digital books are very portable.
1.6.1. Con: Electronics are not allowed everywhere, so physical books would be the only ones able to be brought to those locations.
1.6.2. Con: If books are only accessible through Wi-Fi, then people not near hotspots will not be able to access and read them.
1.6.2.1. Con: Physical libraries have to be visited, so books, regardless of location, have difficulties in accessibility.
1.6.2.2. Con: Digital books can be accessed via mobile data connections, which are usually available.
1.6.2.2.1. Pro: With today's rapidly digitizing age, mobile hotspots through smartphones will eventually get so much data for free, that accessing digital books through the internet will not be an issue at all.
1.6.2.3. Con: E-books do not require constant internet connection. Once the book has been downloaded to the device, it can be used without internet access.
1.6.2.3.1. Con: This depends on whether the book has such permissions. The author or library might limit viewing to Wi-Fi only. Only books with greater permissions have downloading capabilities.
1.6.2.3.2. Con: Even then, if a book's on loan, then the download can expire and one would need to download the book again after a period of time.
1.6.3. Pro: Digital books are easier to carry around in bad weather. For instance, if it rains, physical books could get wet and permanently damaged.
1.6.3.1. Pro: It is possible to make waterproof e-book reading devices.
1.6.3.2. Con: E-book reading devices can also get wet and permanently damaged.
1.6.3.2.1. Pro: E-book readers are more expensive to replace.
1.6.3.2.1.1. Pro: The costs ebook readers have for the [environment](http://theconversation.com/weighing-the-environmental-costs-buy-an-ereader-or-a-shelf-of-books-8331) are also higher than physical books.
1.6.3.2.2. Pro: E-book readers, if permanently damaged, could cause more harm than physical books at times. E-book readers contain all books, whereas one or two physical books can get lost in the rain.
1.6.3.2.2.1. Con: Physical books can be much rarer at times than digital books, which makes them harder to replace. If an ebook gets damaged, one just needs to buy another e-reader in order to get their books back on it \(as the source is not tarnished from the rain\). If a physical book is out-of-print, getting a new one would be hard work.
1.6.4. Pro: Physical books are heavy, and carrying multiple ones would be physiologically too much to handle.
1.7. Con: There would be a loss of valuables.
1.7.1. Pro: Books will no longer be a hard copy, so if the internet or the library's website goes down or loses the online copy \(aka the book's no longer on the internet or in reality\), then there is no way to get it back.
1.7.1.1. Con: Some people may still have physical books at home, so they may be able to scan and place it on the internet if the file goes missing there.
1.7.1.2. Pro: This could happen likely with disasters \(especially [flooding](http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3017&context=libphilprac)\). Having a digital copy makes it possible to reprint it to be in the library again \(provided it's not within a copyright\).
1.7.1.3. Con: The same could be said about physical copies. Without digital editions, rare books can get lost forever in events like natural disasters.
1.7.1.3.1. Con: The internet is not likely to shut down, so we could do all our reading in a digital library without worry.
1.7.1.4. Con: If people download the book onto their computers before this happens, then the book can come back online without a hard copy needed.
1.7.2. Pro: Many libraries are cultural icons and historical landmarks, so these would be lost \(culturally among other methods\) if they go away \(due to a decline in use\).
1.7.2.1. Con: Particularly significant libraries could be preserved. But all those that aren't particularly noteworthy could still be replaced with digital libraries.
1.7.2.2. Pro: For example, the [Birmingham Central Library](https://www.ice.org.uk/news-and-insight/the-civil-engineer/august-2016/deconstructing-a-landmark-bham-central-library) in the UK was considered a landmark, and mourned by many people when it was demolished.
1.7.2.3. Con: The buildings don't have to be destroyed. Libraries that are considered to have cultural significance could be converted to museums, for example, just by changing their purpose.
1.7.3. Pro: [Privacy](https://www.chronicle.com/article/As-Libraries-Go-Digital/135514) is a major concern for library goers.
1.7.3.1. Pro: Projects like [Library Freedom Project](https://libraryfreedomproject.org/)train librarians to fight government surveillance of libraries and their patrons.
1.7.3.2. Pro: On the internet \(where a digital library lives\), if people search, read, download, etc. books, their actions are recorded, whereas physical libraries provide more anonymity.
1.7.3.2.1. Pro: There might be a few, local people at most that look at what others are picking for books. With a digital library, more people, anywhere in the world, may see what library guests are doing.
1.7.3.2.2. Pro: If people don't feel comfortable going to the digital libraries due to privacy concerns, digital libraries will not be as much of a success as physical ones.
1.7.3.3. Con: Digital libraries may be very aware of this issue and would adapt to make library visits and behaviors private to be more appealing to go to.
1.7.3.4. Con: As people become less sensitized to privacy \(due to prevalent tracking, etc.\), they will not worry about this issue as much.
1.7.3.5. Con: Privacy is not a major issue with library goers to begin with, as libraries create an invasion of privacy for them.
1.7.3.5.1. Pro: To check out books, one needs a library card, which has its own privacy concerns.
1.7.3.5.1.1. Pro: Libraries can track what a person checks out through a library card.
1.7.3.5.1.2. Pro: Like a credit card, someone's information can be stolen from a library card, as it has personal information on and through it.
1.7.3.5.1.3. Pro: When someone hands their library card to a librarian when checking out items, the librarian can see a lot of personal information about the person at that time.
1.7.3.5.2. Pro: Other library guests are nearby and can watch a library goer's actions, such as where they look and what they read.
1.7.3.5.2.1. Pro: What is worse is that these people are most likely locals who know the library goer and their whereabouts.
1.7.3.6. Con: The privacy of a digital library is in many ways equal to, or more than, the privacy of a physical one.
1.7.3.6.1. Pro: One may need a library card to a physical library, but use the same library card for digital access.
1.7.3.6.2. Pro: A digital library that is open, like [Project Gutenberg](http://www.gutenberg.org/), could be practically as anonymous as a [little free library](https://littlefreelibrary.org/), \(practically a community book exchange station\).
1.7.3.6.3. Pro: If people want privacy, they can use guest mode in the digital library.
1.7.4. Pro: The process of digitization could [cause damage](https://www.loc.gov/preservation/care/scan.html) to the physical book if not done properly.
1.7.5. Pro: There may be behaviors to preserve exclusivity of information in books, which may negatively \(at the extreme\) cause a loss of information to humanity/the public about them.
1.7.5.1. Pro: Some books that aren't digitized yet may end up hoarded or burned to prevent the spread of exclusive or confidential information within them \(due to the acknowledgement of its permanence there\). If works aren't going to be digitized, then these books may be more available to the public, which is what we should strive for.
1.7.6. Pro: [Copyright issues](https://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Gutenberg:Copyright_FAQ#C.8._How_does_a_book_enter_the_public_domain.3F) would arise.
1.7.6.1. Pro: Libraries need permission from publishers to stock digital copies of books, which could be withheld. Physical libraries have no such limitations, and will still need to be around to fill in digital gaps.
1.7.6.1.1. Pro: -> See 1.4.5.
1.7.6.1.2. Con: This can be resolved if the people who have library cards are the only people able to access the content.
1.7.7. Pro: Even though something is digitized, the [software to read it could become obsolete](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/feb/13/google-boss-warns-forgotten-century-email-photos-vint-cerf) and then it's unreadable.
1.8. Con: Various people \(old, disabled, youth, etc.\) generally have difficulties using modern technology such as e-book readers.
1.8.1. Con: Many seniors [love](https://www.seniorlifestyle.com/tech-devices-seniors-love/) ebook readers because they are lighter than books, and e-paper is easy on the eyes.
1.9. Pro: There'd be a lower chance of theft and destruction from it.
1.9.1. Pro: There would be a limited chance of irreparable damage to valuables \(i.e. rare books\), due to the preservation of information feature that digitizing brings.
1.9.2. Pro: People will be less incentivized to steal something that's available for free digitally.
1.9.3. Pro: People can have a more difficult time stealing a digital book than a physical copy.
1.10. Con: Print copies are physiologically better for our bodies than e-books.
1.10.1. Con: -> See 1.6.4.
1.10.2. Pro: A [2013 review](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/reading-paper-screens/) says that "Before 1992 most studies concluded that people read slower, less accurately and less comprehensively on screens than on paper." And that studies since then have mostly confirmed those conclusions, albeit with less consistent results.
1.10.3. Pro: A [2016 Literature Review](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00048623.2016.1227661) says that for deeper thought, long periods of focus, and textbook materials, paper performs better than electronics.
1.10.4. Pro: Screentime can have a negative effect on childhood brain development.
1.10.5. Pro: At any age screens can be detrimental to eyes and circadean rhythms.
1.11. Pro: Obtaining information would be easier for those who cannot physically access libraries.
1.12. Pro: Digital libraries would be more eco-friendly than physical libraries.
1.12.1. Pro: Instead of printed books with massive amounts of paper required to print and distribute, ebooks would consume fewer resources.
1.12.2. Pro: Digital libraries do not require a large building to be constructed to house their material. All the content could fit into a small storage space.
1.12.2.1. Pro: If multiple digital libraries shared content from this same storage space, then even more resources are saved.
1.12.3. Pro: Transporting books would not require driving, but transferring digitally.
1.13. Pro: Libraries are getting [budget cuts](https://www.ruthhughes.org/ckfinder/userfiles/files/Library%20Budget%20Cuts%20FAQ.pdf), so people will be able to access the libraries in a different place instead of not at all if their budgets get to a point where the libraries close.
1.14. Pro: Digital books have more interactive capabilities.
1.14.1. Pro: Digital books make it easy to take notes - and, crucially, to take notes that then do not appear to anyone else who borrows and reads the book.
1.14.2. Pro: People are closer to the internet to search for something they were unclear about in a book, as they are on their electronic device when reading it.
1.14.3. Pro: Digitized books can be animated, which a physical book cannot.
1.14.3.1. Con: An animated book is a cartoon, not a book.
1.14.4. Con: Being more interactive may be distracting, which can cause people to lose their focus on the book itself.