There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

Has ethernet become illegitimate? A librarian flipped out after spotting me using ethernet

I plugged into ethernet (as wifi w/captive portal does not work for me). I think clearnet worked but I have no interest in that. Egress Tor traffic was blocked and so was VPN. I’m not interested in editing all my scripts and configs to use clearnet, so the library’s internet is useless to me (unless I bother to try a tor bridge).

I was packing my laptop and a librarian spotted me unplugging my ethernet cable and approached me with big wide open eyes and pannicked angry voice (as if to be addressing a child that did something naughty), and said “you can’t do that!”

I have a lot of reasons for favoring ethernet, like not carrying a mobile phone that can facilitate the SMS verify that the library’s captive portal imposes, not to mention I’m not eager to share my mobile number willy nilly. The reason I actually gave her was that that I run a free software based system and the wifi drivers or firmware are proprietary so my wifi card doesn’t work¹. She was also worried that I was stealing an ethernet cable and I had to explain that I carry an ethernet cable with me, which she struggled to believe for a moment. When I said it didn’t work, she was like “good, I’m not surprised”, or something like that.

¹ In reality, I have whatever proprietary garbage my wifi NIC needs, but have a principled objection to a service financed by public money forcing people to install and execute proprietary non-free software on their own hardware. But there’s little hope for getting through to a librarian in the situation at hand, whereby I might as well have been caught disassembling their PCs.

MehBlah ,

Good luck with that here. No port you can access will give you a IP If its hot at all. We don’t allow patron machines to use Ethernet since it bypasses the QOS setting for the public WiFi. We also don’t have any requirements to connect to our WiFi.

The reason for not allowing this is simple. We had several people come in and abuse usage of wired connections. Specifically people with consoles that thought it was okay to come in and kill our Patron vlan to download that fifty gig update for their console.

r00ty Admin ,
r00ty avatar

Meh. So my point of view is that qos for Internet is better done at layer 3. Layer 2 qos has its place, but layer 3 is going to let you prioritise services better.

Moreso, if you do it at layer 3 you don't need to worry about people using ethernet. Every person using ethernet is one less using the extremely finite resources WiFi has. Every active station puts a load on WiFi, less so with the latest versions but they still exhibit a lot of the same problems that mean many workstations can kill WiFi performance.

If you setup your network right (you can actually, although I've not seen it too often, setup guests networks on ethernet before WiFi, such that stations cannot see eachother directly) there's no reason at all to fear ethernet.

MehBlah ,

Its gonna change soon anyway since we are getting new service with four times the bandwidth. For the first time I will be able to get netflow data since our current train wreck ISP(Windstream) wouldn’t give me so much as a read only snmp string on their managed routers. I will have all kinds of options after I replace them with something I can manage. They have this product called weconnect that give you all kinds of information only its hours out of date and sometimes not sequentially timestamped.

deweydecibel ,

If you setup your network right (you can actually, although I’ve not seen it too often, setup guests networks on ethernet before WiFi, such that stations cannot see eachother directly) there’s no reason at all to fear ethernet.

Sure but this isn’t a corporate office with an IT team on call, this is a public library. They could hire someone who will go the extra mile to manage all of this and set the security up correctly, but they’re not likely to get that person or keep them around. Their patrons are not going to be so opposed to wifi that expending all this effort to keep the ethernet ports active will be worth that effort. Maybe in a college library, or a public library in a city center, but not your run of mill local branches.

As for finite wifi resources, I seriously doubt most public libraries would be so frequently at capacity that this becomes an issue, especially when many of them only allow clients for a couple hours at a time without renewing. They just need to scale up for their needs.

r00ty Admin ,
r00ty avatar

I would have expected a public library, run by the city to either use the existing Internet infrastructure from the city (e.g security already is handled) or be installed and maintained by some common city IT team.

Independent libraries sure can have a basic setup, but I'd still say one guy setting up the security outside of WiFi security would mean there's no reason to fear ethernet connections, as they would provide the same level of security to their network, and likely more to the user (assuming it's an insecure AP with portal).

In the case of the OP, I would find it far more likely that the actions of the staff member was more down to (understandable) ignorance of what they were doing and assuming connecting a wire means they're trying to do something nefarious, just because noone else is, and/or hacking in all the movies looks just like that.

Buelldozer ,
@Buelldozer@lemmy.today avatar

I apply QoS at the edge so wired or wireless doesn’t matter to us for performance but either one is still going to our Captive Portal and forcing you to agree to our ToS.

Fun Fact: I started applying QoS at the edge because of the people dragging their laptops in so they could Torrent. They’d blow out our bandwidth for everyone else and we were racking up DMCA warnings from our ISP.

MehBlah ,

At the moment I have no control of the edge router. Its managed by windstream. The qos on the wireless is just on the guest wifi. Like I said soon I will have my own routers and then I can start to control traffic.

Doom4535 ,

This sounds odd to me, unless you connected to an Ethernet port behind a desk or somehow forced open a network closet… They also might not like it if you disconnected one of the public computers to use its cable/port; otherwise if this was an open and public port, you used it as designed and the librarian probably has watched too many Hollywood hacking movies. I have to admit, I never thought of this as a way to bypass the captive portal (sorta just assumed everyone going through the public network would have to hit it, kinda of the equivalent to having everyone sign a liability waiver).

With that said, I can see some institutions not liking connections that aren’t part of the more traditional/commercial networking (but it doesn’t sound like the library took issue with your traffic, just the librarian didn’t like the PHY link you chose to use). For the SMS thing (I haven’t seen that used in a while, you might be able to use some sort of burner number app if they don’t filter them).

DoomBot5 ,

I have to admit, I never thought of this as a way to bypass the captive portal (sorta just assumed everyone going through the public network would have to hit it, kinda of the equivalent to having everyone sign a liability waiver).

That’s because if that library’s network was properly configured it would work exactly like your expectation.

ArbitraryValue ,

Well, you were trying to bypass one of their security measures. They require SMS verification so that they can track you in case you break their rules. Presumably this is why they also block other means of anonymizing yourself.

coffeeClean OP ,

Well, you were trying to bypass one of their security measures.

I was not carrying my phone. Thus bypassing the reckless policy of a tax-funded public resource to exclusively serve people who entered the private marketplace to obtain mobile phone service, in violation of article 21¶2 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

“Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.”

chunkystyles ,

So the protected class they are discriminating against here is “doesn’t want to use wifi”?

You had the means to access the Internet, you chose not to use them.

coffeeClean OP , (edited )

So the protected class they are discriminating against here is “doesn’t want to use wifi”?

The protected class is the poor. The UDHR specifically protects people from discrimination on the basis of property. You cannot treat someone different under the UDHR for owning less property than someone else with regard to all the rights enshrined in the UDHR. Only serving people who bought a mobile phone and paid for a subscription violates that provision.

You had the means to access the Internet, you chose not to use them.

I did not have a mobile phone on me. I could have gone home to fetch my phone because incidentally I happened to have a phone with service at home. But I would not have had time to return to the library and complete my task before it closed.

I’ve also gone over 6 months with no phone service at all sometimes. If I were in one of those time periods, connecting would have been impossible. My phone access is touch and go. I let my service die whenever nothing critical comes up that demands it for a period of time.

And I will do it again. Not having a phone is a goal I will continue to meet, off and on, because it’s important to periodically test whether we have a right to unplug. It’s especially important to test this if you live in a GSM registration part of the world.

chunkystyles ,

I guarantee that a librarian would have helped you if you told them you didn’t have your phone on you.

I don’t buy your story because you’re trying to paint yourself as a victim of some nefarious scheme when in reality you wanted to use a free service in a way the provider doesn’t allow.

coffeeClean OP , (edited )

I guarantee that a librarian would have helped you if you told them you didn’t have your phone on you.

I did tell the 1st librarian I did not have a phone. It’s what led up to green lighting my request to plugin.

I’ve run into this at other libraries because I do not carry my phone. Whenever I ask how to get online without a phone, the answer is to use their PCs (if they exist, and if they are open [as they are closed part of the day]). That’s it. There is no upstream support call. They apparently don’t even give feedback to management that someone was denied access for not having a phone.

deweydecibel ,

Did the library have the desktop set up for public use, as libraries all have nowadays?

Then they were providing you equal access to their internet connection, they just weren’t going to let you do it on your computer unless your computer connected to their internet connection by satisfying their security requirements.

coffeeClean OP ,

I answered this in another reply. The PC room was closed.

In my area the PCs are closed part of the day for some reason (in several libraries), when the library is open for books and wifi. There are two sets of opening hours.

deweydecibel ,

Why are you even in the library to begin with if you’re so opposed to how they manage their network?

If you want to complain, complain. Write to the city, start a petition, whatever.

But regardless of how it’s supposed to work legally, the day that you were in the library, there was a network security setting that was blocking you. You sought to get around that, and you’re not going to get any sympathy for trying to do so.

Just because it’s a public resource doesn’t mean you can break in after hours, and just because you don’t have a phone doesn’t give you permission to sidestep their security policies.

coffeeClean OP , (edited )

Why are you even in the library to begin with if you’re so opposed to how they manage their network?

How does one know how they manage their network before entering the library? The libraries that have ethernet /never/ advertise it. Only wi-fi is ever advertised. I have never seen a library elaborate on their wifi preconditions (which periodically change). This info is also not in OSMand, so if you are on the move and look for the closest library on the map, the map won’t be much help apart from a possible boolean for wifi. Some libraries have a captive portal and some do not. Among those with captive portals, some require a mobile phone with SMS verification and some do not. But for all of them, the brochure only shows the wifi symbol. You might say “call and ask”, but there are two problems with that: you need a phone with credit loaded. But even if you have that, it’s useful to know whether ethernet is available and the receptionist is unlikely to reliably have that info. Much easier to walk in and see the situation. Then when you ask what will be blocked after you get connected, that’s another futile effort that wastes time on the phone. It really is easier and faster to pop in and scope out the situation. Your device will give more reliable answers than the staff. But I have to wonder, what is your objection to entering a library to reliably discover how it’s managed in person?

null ,

Just because it’s a public resource doesn’t mean you can break in after hours, and just because you don’t have a phone doesn’t give you permission to sidestep their security policies.

red ,

Everyone has access, phone or not, just not when the PC room sometimes is closed due reasons.

You don’t have 24/7 access rights as far as I’m aware.

coffeeClean OP , (edited )

That’s not equal access. Everyone has equal access to the PCs running Firefox, but not everyone has equal access to BYoD internet service.

Is someone claiming we only need Firefox? If so, then you won’t mind if we scrap wifi altogether, right? BYoD internet service enables people to keep a data store with them which then connects periodically to operate on the persistent data in a collaborative way, which also empowers people to control the applications that are installed. That’s a different public service for difference purposes than a shared PC where your data does not persist and you cannot control the apps.

red ,

You can’t claim shit about equality for all and access without materials, when discussing byod. Make up your mind.

Everyone has access, byod is covered for 99% as extra convenience.

You aren’t being treated poorly, instead, you have unreasonable expectations. You need to adjust those. You are not a victim, nor were you rights violated.

You tried to circumvent security when the computer room was closed.

The librarians education most likely doesn’t cover anything more than turning things off and on, he/she isn’t likely to understand what you were doing, and the equipment isn’t maintained by the librarians - it’s simply located there.

Data persists both in the cloud, or on a memory stick. Free options exist.

coffeeClean OP , (edited )

You can’t claim shit about equality for all and access without materials, when discussing byod. Make up your mind.

There is PC access, and then there is byod access. It’s a false dichotomy to demand choosing one or the other particularly when only one of the two is available to everyone, and harmful to people’s rights if you simultaneously design a system of workflow on the assumption that one replaces the other interchangeably.

They are different services for different purposes. Don’t let the fact that some tasks can be achieved with both services cloud the fact that some use-cases cannot.

Everyone has access

Everyone has access to a PC running Firefox. Not everyone has BYoD WAN service access.

byod is covered for 99% as extra convenience.

Firefox is not the internet.

It’s not just convenience. It’s the capability and empowerment of controlling your own applications. If the public PC doesn’t have a screen reader and you are blind, the public PC is no good to you and you are better served with BYoD service. If you need to reach someone on Briar, a Windows PC with only Firefox will not work.

You aren’t being treated poorly, instead, you have unreasonable expectations.

This remains to be supported. I do not believe it’s reasonable to only serve people with mobile phones. Thus I consider it a reasonable expectation that people without a subscribed mobile phone still get BYoD WAN service.

Data persists both in the cloud, or on a memory stick. Free options exist.

None of the PCs in any library I have used will execute apps that you bring on a USB stick (but even if they did, the app you need to run may not be compatible with Windows). Also some library branches disallow USB sticks entirely. So a restricted Windows PC cannot replace controlling your own platform, regardless of the convenience factor.

(edit) But strictly about convenience, I also would not say it’s fair for a public service to offer extra convenience exclusively to people who have a subscribed mobile phone and not to those without one. That would still be unequal access even if you disregard the factors not related to convenience. It’s still discriminating against a protected class of people.

red , (edited )

You don’t have to believe it - everyone still knows you are. Time to wake up to reality. Everyone has access, the method of access isn’t discriminating, nor do you have any say in it. In other words, it’s public, free for all, and the way they set it up.

If you don’t like the free service, don’t use it. It not being how you like it isn’t wrong in any way, that’s your problem.

coffeeClean OP , (edited )

Time to wake up to reality. Everyone has access, the method of access isn’t discriminating, nor do you have any say in it.

That’s not reality. The reality is everyone has partial access (Firefox on a shared Windows PC only), while some people have full access via both public resources.

If you want to gain anything from this conversation, try to at least come to terms with the idea that Firefox is not the internet. The internet is so much more than that. Your experience and information is being limited by your perception that everything that happens in a browser encompasses the internet.

In other words, it’s public, free for all, and the way they set it up.

It’s not free. We paid tax to finance this. The moment you call it free you accept maladministration that you actually paid for.

If you don’t like the free service, don’t use it. It not being how you like it isn’t wrong in any way, that’s your problem.

You’re confusing the private sector with the public sector. In the private sector, indeed you simply don’t use the service and that’s a fair enough remedy. Financing public service is not optional. You still seem to not grasp how human rights works, who it protects, despite the simplicity of the language of Article 21.

null , (edited )

Please cite the definition of public service that includes all the things you’ve described; access to the internet via Ethernet on a personal machine running the various software you mentioned.

Quote the passage that outlines those details.

Why not take it a step further? I can’t get to the library so they’re denying me my human rights by not running cables right to my house so I can access it without that restriction.

coffeeClean OP , (edited )

The proof is in the money trail. If the library’s funding traces to a tax-funded government, it is a public service that encompasses all services offered by that institution. It’s also in state or national law that legislates for libraries to exist, which differs from one state to another.

If you want to find a clause that says “only people with wifi hardware may access the internet, and only if they have a mobile phone”, I suspect you’ll have a hard time finding that. At best, I could imagine you might find a sloppily written law that says “libraries shall offer wifi” without specifying the exclusion of others. But if you could hypothetically find that, it would merely be an indication of a national or state law that contradicts that country’s signature on the UDHR. So it’s really a pointless exercise.

null ,

So quote the specifics of what was funded as is relevant to your case.

Again, if they don’t run that line to my house, are they violating my human rights? Or are there boundaries around what defines the service?

null ,

Stop modifying your comment and answer my response.

coffeeClean OP ,

Calm down. It’s a new comment that just came in so of course I’m going to edit it a few times in the span of the first minute or two as I compose my answer. If you wait five or ten minutes you’ll get a more finished answer.

null ,

Lol no, you edited it multiple times over the course of 7 minutes, radically changing the context of what I had already replied to.

That’s not the same as tweaking a few things within a minute or 2.

Edit: suddenly its 10 minutes? Why not just retcon your entire post? At least have the courtesy to note significant edits when you’ve already gotten a reply

coffeeClean OP , (edited )

My client says it was created at 21:24:02 GMT and modified at 21:25:12. Instead of using a stopwatch which you somehow screwed up, just mouse over the time. The popup will show you a span of 1 minute and 10 seconds.

(edit) strange; after I refresh the screen the /create/ timestamp changed. Surely that’s a bug in Lemmy. The creation timestamp should never change. nvm… just realized I was looking at the wrong msg.

null ,

https://slrpnk.net/pictrs/image/cb4c0346-bdca-403e-834c-39cba4d38ae7.webp

Posted 24 minutes ago, edited 15 minutes ago.

I refreshed and watched you edit multiple times over that period.

Stop lying.

coffeeClean OP ,

Stop lying.

I said “wait five or ten minutes”. I’m seeing a 9m1s span. I don’t really feel compelled to be more accommodating than that. Maybe you can write to Jerry and ask to configure it so edits are blocked after 1 minute if it really bothers you. Otherwise if you don’t like the policy of the node, you are free to leave.

null , (edited )

You edited in the “wait five or ten minutes” after I had already replied.

Edit: You’ll note that I indicated that change with my own, clearly indicated edit. You know, common courtesy.

Edit: and you STILL haven’t replied to my initial response.

coffeeClean OP ,

You edited in the “wait five or ten minutes” after I had already replied.

I know five min was in the original version. Not sure if I added the ten but certainly it was not after you posted this. You are seriously paranoid and should get help for that.

null , (edited )

I know five min was in the original version.

Lie.

Edit: the whole last sentence was the edit.

I notice you STILL can’t defend your bold claim about human rights.

Edit: Nice Ad HoMiNeM btw

null ,

Still waiting on an answer that’s not just about evidence you couldn’t find and feel would be pointless, and for you to actually prove your bold, human rights violation claim…

null ,

So quote the specifics of what was funded as is relevant to your case.

Again, if they don’t run that line to my house, are they violating my human rights? Or are there boundaries around what defines the service?

lemmyreader ,
  • Most folks will probably freak out when they see a terminal window (“DOS box”) on a computer.
  • Most folks in my country have no idea that there is something else than WhatsApp as alternative to SMS.
  • Whenever I’ve tried explaining to people that stuff on their website violates privacy or when I try to explain why they are having email delivery problems almost always results in permanent silence or disbelief.

Technology appears to be a scare factor for a lot of people. But in this case the librarian maybe thought that Ethernet was only for their qualified IT department to use.

MelodiousFunk ,

Most folks will probably freak out when they see a terminal window (“DOS box”) on a computer.

Many many moons ago I was working at a small mom and pop operation that used ancient PCs to run their registers. The entirety of the front end ran on a 3.5" floppy. One night after closing, I exited to the CLI and opened edit. I typed in “HELP, STEVE BROKE ME” and went to the back to count my drawer. The shift manager had a proper shit fit.

“What are you editing?!? If you break this machine the boss is going to have your head, it’ll cost thousands to have someone come out and fix it!”

I calmly exited back to CLI and ran the front end exe. ¯_(ツ)_/¯

MisshapenDeviate ,
@MisshapenDeviate@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

If it was a publicly available Ethernet port, it was likely for public use. The fact that she thought it was malicious speaks to ignorance on her part, not yours.

halcyoncmdr ,
@halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world avatar

Even ignoring that, if internet via a wired ethernet connection isn’t an option they provide for whatever reason… their network infrastructure shouldn’t allow the connection anyway. It should be blocked as an unknown device on the network end, regardless if someone plugs into the network.

DoomBot5 ,

Yeah, having services blocked on Wi-Fi and not ethernet just tells me that their IT staff didn’t properly configure the network in public areas properly. That ethernet port should have been disabled, physically locked, or properly configured to use the public network like the Wi-Fi does.

halcyoncmdr ,
@halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world avatar

Exactly, and let’s give them the benefit of the doubt since we don’t know. The librarian or assistant helping OP probably just doesn’t know much about the IT stuff other than how to help people get on the wifi. And it is entirely possible that they’re NEVER seen anyone even try the port before, that’s not common at all. Actually managing the IT infrastructure at that level is almost surely NOT part of their job.

WiFi has been included in essentially everything for over a decade. I mean even ignoring laptops having Wifi way before mobile devices, even going back to the origin of smartphones for the masses, the original iPhone had Wifi back in 2007, that’s 17 years ago.

DoomBot5 ,

Oh I’ve got nothing against how the librarians handled it. I’m more concerned that their IT staff failed to properly shield the library from liabilities like OP.

BolexForSoup ,
@BolexForSoup@kbin.social avatar

Or you could just ask them to avoid confusion as it takes 5 seconds and they may have a way of doing things that you don't know about? It's respectful and it potentially saves you a lot of hassle if it doesn't work and you need to troubleshoot it.

Icalasari ,

Yeah. For all we know, there could be a sign in/out thing at the desk for if you use ethernet - She DID think OP was taking one of the library's cables after all, which implies the public has access, possibly through a sign in/out system

coffeeClean OP ,

I’ve asked librarians a full range of tech questions about what works, what’s blocked, what’s allowed… they /never/ have a clue because of outsourcing. Their guess is as good as mine. In the 90s, I would say you are spot on. Librarians should have answers. Things have evolved to where the policy is decided non-transparently, it’s outsourced to an unreachable company, and librarians are simply as uninformed as the public. Trial and error. If you read the AUPs it never says Tor is banned at libraries, for example, but they simply block it. Experimentation is the way people get answers in my area.

So knowing that librarians don’t have deep tech info, or even basic tech info, and that they also cannot escalate questions, talking to them is really where time is wasted.

Album ,
@Album@lemmy.ca avatar

The reality despite what you or i might do, is that 99% of people don’t carry around an ethernet or hardwire in when there is available wifi.

The library might be public, but it’s still a good idea to communicate your intent or obtain permission prior to using someone else’s network in away they might deem to be unexpected.

“Do you have ethernet or wired internet?” is actually a common library question and the response from whoever works the front desk will likely tell you everything you need to know.

originalfrozenbanana ,

Or, and hear me out, approach everything with hostility \s

natural_motions ,

That’s why I carry an ethernet cable and a shillelagh.

originalfrozenbanana ,

Ethernet cable is the best cantrip, shillelagh is a close second

swab148 ,
@swab148@startrek.website avatar

Whip them with the cable while shouting “ELDRITCH BLAST!”

Bonesince1997 ,

I have been trying this for a while. You end up alone a lot.

Kit ,

Instructions unclear. Am friendly 100% of the time irl and still alone.

Tar_alcaran ,

Tbf, that does get you more upvotes

wahming ,

“Do you have ethernet or wired internet?” is actually a common library question and the response from whoever works the front desk will likely tell you everything you need to know.

Would you trust the reply somebody like the librarian in the OP gave you? Seems like the sort of person who would refuse to admit to any lack of knowledge and just bluster.

EssentialCoffee ,

Do you trust every one-sided story to be entirely accurate of all details?

And what does trust have to do with it? Can we use Ethernet here? If the person says no, would you just walk around the building until you found a port and plugged in?

wahming ,

Do you trust every one-sided story to be entirely accurate of all details?

No, but for the sake of discussion in this thread, that is the scenario we’re all going by. We’re not rendering a legal judgement here, we’re discussing the situation as described.

In a public library, I would fully expect public-facing ethernet ports, especially in sitting / working areas, to be available for public use. I’m not sure why they would be there otherwise. And if they’re no longer meant for public use, it would be on the library IT staff to have disabled those ports.

what does trust have to do with it?

Because I don’t trust non-IT-savvy people to even properly understand the question. I’ve met way too many people with no technical clue who refuse to admit to any sort of lack of knowledge when it’s extremely obvious.

Album ,
@Album@lemmy.ca avatar

If the LIBRARIAN doesn’t understand this as a service the library offers - then they don’t offer it - or if you think they’re wrong you need to have an adult conversation that they do and that it should be ok. It’s weird to just assume you can go around sticking your cat5e into other peoples ethernet ports like that.

acastcandream , (edited )

spoilerasdfasdfsadfasfasdf

wahming ,

We could discuss all sorts of hypotheticals, including where there’s a secret supervillain base under the library and they’re about to assassinate OP for jacking into their network. It’s pointless because we’re not discussing an event we have any way of obtaining any other information about other than what OP has provided.

acastcandream , (edited )

spoilerasdfasdfsadfasfasdf

coffeeClean OP ,

And what does trust have to do with it?

I think they mean trust in the librarian to genuinely know the policy and what should work. They tend not to in this case because ethernet has become obscure enough to be an uncommon question, if ever.

Another library had ethernet ports all down the wall next to desks. They were dead and no one used them. It was obvious that the librarian had no clue about whether the ports were even supposed to function. When I said they are dead and asked to turn them on or find out what’s wrong, they then figured that if the ports don’t work, it must be intentional. So the librarian’s understanding of the policy was derived from the fact that they were dysfunctional. Of course if they were intended to work but needed service, ethernet users are hosed because the librarian’s understanding of policy is guesswork. There is no proper support mechanism.

I asked a librarian at another library: I need to use Tor. Is it blocked? I need to know before I buy a membership. Librarian had no idea. They just wing it. They said test it. Basically, if it works, then it’s acceptable. The functionality becomes the source of policy under the presumption that everything is functioning as it should.

Since ethernet has been phased out, modern devices no longer include an ethernet NIC, and there are places to plug into A/C with no ethernet nearby, the librarians and the public are both conditioned to be unaware of ethernet. So the answer will only be either: no or test and see.

acastcandream , (edited )

spoilerasdfasdfsadfasfasdf

borari ,

OP also wanted to know before “buying a membership”. In what world do you buy a membership to a library?

acastcandream , (edited )

spoilerasdfasdfsadfasfasdf

Album ,
@Album@lemmy.ca avatar

It’s kind of all that matters though. We don’t need to trust her - we need her acceptance of the act for which she is the gatekeeper of. If we don’t have it - trust over what she said is irrelevant since we don’t even have the basic trust over the act.

PM_Your_Nudes_Please ,

Would you trust the reply somebody like the librarian in the OP gave you?

I mean, if the answer is “no” would you just go around plugging into random Ethernet ports until you found one that works? Just because you don’t “trust” the librarian who gave you the answer? That sounds like a fast track to getting trespassed (or at least banned from using their public internet altogether) for abuse of services.

The library isn’t required to provide free Ethernet. They aren’t even required to provide free wifi. But they choose to do so because they recognize that wifi is a big reason people will come to a library to spend time. Which is sort of the whole point of the library. So providing free wifi goes hand-in-hand with the library’s ultimate mission.

But that wifi is provided on an as-is basis, because they can’t guarantee things like 100% uptime, good speeds, or any kind of troubleshooting. And any potential ethernet connection would also be as-is. And in this case, “as-is” could easily translate to “not available to the public at all.” Because again, the library isn’t required to provide any of it.

CyberSeeker ,

As far as people I’d trust to not just make shit up, I’d say Librarian, aka, professional fucking researcher is high on the list.

wahming ,

That pretty much depends on where in the world you are, FYI. Librarian == professional fucking researcher is not a thing in Asia.

jeeva ,

Yes, because it seems in this instance the answer to the question is “no, please don’t plug into the ports you find.”

If it’s a supported thing, the librarian may have been less blustery.

coffeeClean OP ,

When I entered I spoke to a different librarian about the locked PC room (due to a holiday or something). They said I could use wifi but need to give a phone number to a captive portal, which I already knew. My phone was not on me so I said: is it okay if I plug in over there by the catalog PCs? They said yes. Revealing what I mean by "plugging in”, well, i was vague for a reason. I know the population has become ethernet-hostile¹ so indeed asking for forgiveness is better than asking for permission in this situation.

¹ Another library in the area has ethernet ports but they are just decoys (dead ports). I asked the librarian what the problem is, why they are disabled, and whether we can turn them on. Librarian was helpless, and said “use wifi”, which didn’t work for me for different reasons than the other library. But the librarian basically said in so many words “not our problem… you can just use wifi.” At another library, I was able to connect but Tor was blocked. I tried to get support from the librarian. They had no clue but were also unwilling to lead me to someone who could give support. The way it works around here is the info systems are outsourced to some unreachable tech giant, and the librarians are rendered helpless. If the SSID does not appear, the librarian can send an email to someone to say it’s down, and that’s about the full extent of their tech capability.

EssentialCoffee ,

Why didn’t you tell this librarian that you’d asked another librarian and they said it was okay to plug in? Why was none of this included in the original post?

coffeeClean OP , (edited )

The librarian who said it was okay to plugin (which they likely understood to mean plugin an A/C power cord) was young, not as senior as the edgy librarian. I’m not going to take down a kid and get them in trouble for not picking apart what it means when someone asks if they can “plug-in”.

People like Trump will throw his supporters under the bus when self-defense calls for it. I will not.

What would the point be? I didn’t need a defense. I got scolded and was walking out. Since I was calm, the librarian became calm. Police were not called and I was not detained. And if that had happened, I would have exercised my right to remain silent anyway.

Twinklebreeze ,

You sound insufferable. You used vague wording to justify not using your phone to get internet, and act like child when you get caught. They’re not hostile to Ethernet, they’re hostile to you and your behaviour.

coffeeClean OP , (edited )

You set a great example of getting mad at a bitch eating crackers.

I merely tried to get online using an ethernet cable. I didn’t get hostile. I was calm. And because I was calm, the librarian became calm. The only hostility was in the librarian’s single opening comment to me, and what you see in this thread.

null ,

Could I be in the wrong? No, it must be literally everyone else in this entire thread / national library network.

Grow up. You set out to get in trouble, you got yourself in trouble, no one is impressed.

coffeeClean OP , (edited )

Could I be in the wrong? No, it must be literally everyone else in this entire thread / national library network.

Is your position so weak that you need to resort to a bandwagon fallacy?

Grow up.

and an ad hominem?

You demonstrate being a grown up by avoiding ad hominems in favor of logically sound reasoning.

null , (edited )

Is your position so weak that you need to resort to a bandwagon fallacy?

It’s not a fallacy. Your social skills are toxic and that’s been confirmed by everyone here. You aren’t in a position to judge how your actions are perceived by society.

If everyone says you’re being an asshole, you’re being an asshole.

and an ad hominem?

This isn’t a formal debate. It’s me and everyone else booing you for your bad behavior.

mark3748 ,

Another library in the area has ethernet ports but they are just decoys (dead ports). I asked the librarian what the problem is, why they are disabled, and whether we can turn them on.

They’re not decoys, they’re just not patched. Because we don’t generally patch anything that’s not going to be in use. Also because some rando will probably attempt to plug their nasty ass laptop into it, which is also why we block port intrusions.

Tar_alcaran ,

They’re not decoys, they’re just not patched.

Equipment isn’t free, after all, especially if you’re a library.

invisiblegorilla ,

I wouldn’t want you on my network either to be fair. People like you should be kept in an isolated area of the network with a proxy pointing all your traffic to resolve Italkaloadofshit.com

Jumped up little twat.

kernelle ,

I know right? Everyone cheering them on, meanwhile I’m reading the OP and find them to be pretentious and maladjusted. Who talks about the ‘clearnet’ like it’s the internet of normies?

wahming ,

Sounds like a her problem.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • [email protected]
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •