Following from this script to create an RSS feed of items checked out of the library, I’ve created another little tool: dvd2rss.pl is a Perl script to extract a list of DVDs from the Provincial Library OPAC, sorted so that the newest DVDs are listed first.

Like the earlier script, this one is designed to work with the web-based Dynix OPAC (and is probably to some degree dependent on the way the PEI catalogue works, and how results are rendered). It should be easy, however, to modify it to work with other Dynix installations, and to display other sorts of searches (new books, new kids books, etc.).

Here is the RSS feed that the script generates. I’d like to enhance it a little to pull the description of the DVDs from the OPAC too. As it is, though, each RSS item links to the DVD in question in the catalogue, so you can easily check its status, and put it on hold if you like.

Here’s what the result looks like in NetNewsWire:

A reminder that if you pay your Prince Edward Island property tax in installments, there’s one due on August 31, 2004 (tomorrow).

I am always forgetting when my library books are due. The PEI Provincial Library sends out handy email reminders, and they have a website that lists checked out items, but I need more (and more obvious) prodding.

The result is opac2rss.pl, a Perl script that automatically connects to the web-based Dynix (aka Epixtech) OPAC and grabs a list of the items I’ve got checked out and the date they are due. It then creates an RSS feed that I can read in my newsreader every morning.

The result looks like this:

The Alibi project in Nova Scotia was invaluable in getting this working, and the O’Reilly book Spidering Hacks was useful in understanding how to use the Perl HTML::TreeBuilder module.

Blogger reports 40 people on Prince Edward Island using their service. Most of them I’ve never seen. Neato.

Here is a page describing the archive of the sediment data my father gathered between 1968 and 2001 (aka “his life’s work”).

Prince Edward Island, like many jurisdictions, has a government-supported program of providing public Internet terminals to its citizens. Here in PEI this is called the Community Access Program, and it involves 76 locations across the Island that offer a variety of services, including, at the very minumum, one public Internet terminal.

As I’d never been to a so-call “CAP site,” I thought I should visit one, so I went up the road to the Atlantic Technology Centre, which opened this year, and has just expanded and improved its facilities.

One of the first things I noticed was their Acceptable Use Policy, which is posted in front of every terminal. I took one down and asked for a photocopy of it, and the security guard at the front desk helpfully provided one for me (click for a larger image):

Now I must admit, before going any further, that in my heart I am a "let anyone do anything as long as it doesn't harm anyone else" kind of person. I don't believe in limits to expression. I don't believe in censorship. I don't believe in monitoring. So take everything I say with that in mind.

That said, I don’t have a fundamental problem with the notion of an Acceptable Use Policy inasmuch as a corporate entity needs to protect itself from liability. But I think the Technology Centre’s Acceptable Use Policy goes much further than that, and it does it in an annoyingly amateur fashion that results not only in setting up a draconian environment, but a foggy one at that.

It starts off slow: respect the facility, the people and the equipment and keep the noise nown. I’ve got no problem with that.

Then things heat up:

Clients visiting ATC CAP Site are prohibited from accessing inappropriate websites or material. Users are not to visit unacceptable websites (i.e. porn, bomb construction, hate literature, etc.) If in doubt that a site is deemed inappropriate please contact ATC Corporate office.

Now even if you’re willing to set aside that there is a difference between expression about something and doing something (i.e. websites about building bombs vs. actually building bombs), the guideline about what’s “inappropriate” isn’t a technical legal definition. They’ve set up a situation where “inappropriate” is, in essence “whatever we say is inappropriate.”

That’s wrong. Not only do I find this approach personally objectionable, but I would argue that it is in contravention of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms that says, in part, that “Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:”

• freedom of conscience and religion;
• freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
• freedom of peaceful assembly; and
• freedom of association.

Further, as the mission statement of the Canadian Library Association says:

We believe that libraries and the principles of intellectual freedom and free universal access to information are key components of an open and democratic society.

I agree. And I think “access only to that information we deem acceptable” isn’t the same as “free universal access.”

The next two sections of the Acceptable Use Policy are the “hammer” they use to enforce the policy:

The websites you visit are logged and monitored by Security personnel.

Security cameras are used to monitor the CAP computers and users.

That seems just plain draconian to me: I can’t imagine how it’s possible for anyone to freely and openly explore the world of the Internet with an electronic watchdog literally looking over their shoulder. It’s a violation of privacy, and unnecessary limit to freedom, and combined with the earlier “we’ll decide what’s appropriate” clause, it sets up a dynamic where surfing the web becomes an intellectual minefield.

The requirement that users not install viruses, worms, etc. is reasonable (although it might usefully be accompanied by a warning that this doesn’t mean the public terminals are necessarily free of these).

The limitation that children under the age of 16 must be “supervised by an adult” seems wrongheaded. I think one of the most useful aspects of the Internet is the access it affords to older children and teenagers to information that they would have difficulty — perceived or actual — getting access to otherwise. A teen who wants information about birth control. Or the effects of drugs. Or communism. A more reasonable approach — and one adopted by the provincial library system — is that parents must give one-time initial consent for children under 15, after which they are allowed free, unaccompanied access.

The “first come, first served” policy seems reasonable.

The “Use of profanity, obscenity, or printing content of an unacceptable nature is no acceptable with ATC” suffers from the same problems as the prohibition against “inappropriate websites or material,” namely the lack of a definition of “unacceptable material.”

The statement that “Downloading and copying of copyrighted material, including photographs, books, music and movies is strictly prohibited” is the blanket paranoid “you can’t run Kazaa” clause. Leaving aside that the computers at the CAP site afford no access to floppy, CD, USB or any other way of “downloading and copying,” a statement like this demands considerable elaboration. For example, there is considerable content on the Internet that, even though it is “copyrighted,” is freely available for personal use. This website, for example, is subject to this license, which allows copying.

Indeed it might be more appropriate to simply let the following clause, “ATC CAP Site computers are not to be used for criminal intent or acts,” stand, and leave out the copyright clause, for at least the prohibition against criminal acts has a dispute settlement mechanism, and leaves the responsibility with the user of the computer for determining the appropriateness of their actions.

Why is all of this important?

Because the Community Access Program is the cornerstone of the provincial and federal governments’ program to ensure the closing of the so-called “digital divide” and the universal access to the power of the Internet. Mitch Murphy, at the time the Minister of Technology, put it this way in 2000:

CAP sites enable communities across Prince Edward Island to take advantage of the Internet and other information technologies as a tool for social, cultural and economic development.

When CAP sites are cloaked in unacceptable Acceptable Use Policies, though, government is creating another sort of digital divide: between the people with the resources to freely browse the Internet from their home, without video camera monitoring, security personnel logging and arbitrary content restrictions, and those without their own means, who are left to browse in public under a sort of digital house arrest.

This has to change.

What are the chances that Aliant, after operating without its employees for these many months, will simply decide to do without employees altogether? Could they simply decide that it’s better to offer poor (or no) service, without the “hassle” of actual employees, in perpetuity?

If you have two cars parked beside each other, with radios on, both tuned to the same station and each radio with the volume turned up to ‘5,’ (halfway, in other words) is this any louder, in practical terms, than only one car?

One of the points that Edward Hasbrouck makes strongly in his book Practical Nomad: How to Travel Around the World is that it’s inherently dangerous to use a public computer (like in a library or Internet cafe) to do things like online banking.

Even if the activity over the network is secure — using a browser to connect to a secure banking website, for example — there’s no way of telling whether or not the computer itself is secure. For example, there could be something in place, installed by a earlier user, that logs all keystrokes to a file. So you naively type in your credit card or bank account number into a “secure” browser, but it’s also logged to a file where it’s later examined and used for nefarious purposes.

The same danger applies to anything you do with a browser that’s not public — checking your Hotmail, for example.

I’m wondering it others have tips and techniques that can mitigate this danger. I imagine, for example, that using a version of “Linux on a floppy” or “Linux on a CD” that you could use to reboot a public machine would go a large way towards averting things like keystroke logging. Any other suggestions?

This is of concern not only for nomads, of course, but for the large number of people for whom “Internet access” is “driving down to the local library.”

I ran into Catherine Hennessey on Queen Street this morning, and she mentioned several benefits of the new central parking kiosks in Charlottetown that I hadn’t thought of previously:

• Because you can buy the same “chit” for windshield display from any machine, no matter the location, you can buy a couple of hours worth of parking and park in several different locations downtown over that time. Can’t do that with parking meters.
• The chits aren’t specific to the car, nor to the person, so if you’re leaving your spot early, you can pass your chit on to someone else who can live it out for you. This is commonly done (although officially disallowed) with public transit transfers in big cities.
• The presence of card-readers in the kiosks will enable, at least in theory, merchants to be able to give their customers “free parking” but giving them pre-charged cards good, say, for an hour of parking.