On 4 October 2017, Scott Bennett wrote:
Let me give an example. I have for at least ten years asked my localpublic library to provide a) a secure shell client, b) a secure web browser for ordinary use where anonymity is not a concern, c) a secure FTP client, and d) the TBB for use by those who desire anonymity. They have always refused to budge. They run an unsecurable OS on their public computers. They provide only Internet Explorer for web access. I'm unsure whether they still allow any FTP access at all. As you can imagine, they have severely limited the usefulness of their computers to the library patrons they claim to serve. I could not, for example, submit my on-line application to renew my flight instructor certificate via the library's computers. They have refused to let me speak with those making the decisions about what is provided on their public computers, much less to make an organized presentation to them. I was told that the decisions about software on the computers are made by the library board, not even by the IT staff. What is a good approach to get better results?
I fear there is nothing you can do. If they're like that, it's not going to change until there's a new chief librarian or head of library IT. Public libraries can be terrible for problems like this. When the right person is in the right job, they can move fast and experiment, but that's rare. When a library thinks offering only IE is the right thing to do, Tor must terrify them.
But if you can't speak to the public library board there's a problem much bigger than what they run on their computers! That is just not right. Public libraries have to be responsible to their public. Could your city councillor help? The local newspaper?
Good luck! It's a shame your local library is ignoring someone with your expertise.
Bill -- William Denton :: Toronto, Canada --- Listening to Art: https://listeningtoart.org/ https://www.miskatonic.org/ --- GHG.EARTH: http://ghg.earth/ Caveat lector. --- STAPLR: http://staplr.org/