• Tollana1234567@lemmy.today
    1·
    7 hours ago

    is sex even that common libraries, its mostly homeless people, and only one instance a patron was “researching” on PH on thier public computers like 10 years ago, he was legit jotting down PH material on a notebook.

  • udon@lemmy.world
    2·
    9 hours ago

    I think this is quite a sensible rule that is just not stated explicitly very often

  • _lilith@lemmy.world
    2·
    10 hours ago

    Don’t fuck in the stacks is pretty standard really. People still do it but its annoying mostly

  • Saapas@piefed.zipEnglish
    581·
    1 day ago

    I remember people saying that libraries in the US can’t ban people watching porn on the library computers because freedom of speech or something and that homeless people deserve to watch porn too. I want to believe they were yanking my chain but it just sounds very American hah

    • ShinkanTrain@lemmy.mlEnglish
      22·
      1 day ago

      They should add a little beaded curtain that gives access to PCs that are designated crank stations.

    • jaybone@lemmy.zipEnglish
      141·
      1 day ago

      If you’re homeless in a Republican state, jerking off in the library, you get a free bus ride to a democrat state. Then everyone from the Republican state criticizes the state you were sent to for allowing homeless people to jerk off in the library.

  • Cyberflunk@lemmy.world
    22·
    1 day ago

    My classical studies minor (and Dan Carlin’s Hardcore History podcast) make me want to say:

    Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges. (The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws.) Which, Tacticus wrote. Cicero lived during the fall of rome

    I think he would’ve said “O tempora, o mores!” (Oh the times! Oh the customs!.. ish) that lament he used often when describing the state’s decline.

    I love this meme on every level. I’m going back to my corner

    • luciferofastora@feddit.org
      1·
      8 hours ago

      Cicero lived during the fall of rome

      *he fall of the Republic. The Imperial era (Principate + Dominate, if you distinguish) in the west lasted another five centuries and its successors took a while to fully fragment. The eastern empire is a whole different chapter.

      My own amateur attempts at understanding sources (and Bret Devereaux’s blog) make me want to point out that Rome’s decline wasnt such a clearly defined moment as the ascent of Caesar.

      Tacitus was another century and change later. He will have grown up in the tail end of Nero’s reign end, witnessed the Year of Four Emperors and spent most of his early adulthood during the reign of Domitian, whose authoritarian style further curtailed the Senate’s powers.

      Before that background, it’s not hard to see why he’d believe the fall of Rome to be imminent, depending on when exactly he wrote that sentiment. I don’t know what it’s from (but maybe someone else here does?), but I’ll place it shortly after the end of Domitian’s reign, about 100AD.

      By the assassination of Domitian, Tacitus was 40. The city had (supposedly) been founded ~850 years ago, the Republic had been formed ~600 years ago, survived for ~450 years, and the Imperial era was ~150 years old. It would go on for another ~380 years. If we calculate from the legendary founding 753 BC to the deposition of Romulus Augustulus in 476 AD, Rome lasted just about 1200 years.

      He obviously couldn’t have predicted any of that, but writers predicting the impending doom is such a common phenomenon, you could make a drinking game out of it: Go through the list of famous Roman authors and drink every time you find one bemoaning how far they’ve fallen from the glorious past. For the sake of your liver, you probably should limit it to Rome, because that trend is still going strong.