Some people think that the library is a waste of money and the computer technology is replacing its function. To what extent do you agree or disagree?有人认为图书馆就是浪费钱，电脑技术正取代它的功能，你在多大程度上同意或者不同意?
When it comes to the issue about whether public libraries deserve to be kept, some people may argue that public libraries should exist since virtual books cannot replace them, but I cannot agree with this opinion.
Admittedly, public libraries may create a better atmosphere of study for individuals than computers do. For people who are not well-motivated and self-disciplined, studying on the Internet may be easily interrupted since there exists more attractive information online, such as scandal and gossip of celebrities. However, when individuals are surrounded with learners who concentrate on their study, they may be also engaged in study better since no one laughs or shout loudly in library usually. Nevertheless, modern technology actually makes traditional libraries obsolete to some degree.
To begin with, computer technology allows users to find what they need more efficiently. In the past, learners have to spend some time on arriving at libraries and they still need some time to pick up the very books they look for. However, current technology transforms books into virtual ones and clients could find the specific books after entering some key words in a search engine. Thus, compared to orthodox libraries, the Internet actually serves to save more time for learners.
In addition, cancelling public libraries, governments could save more money. Running a public library is actually costly since governments need to recruit a lot of employees to guarantee the daily operation. On the contrary, if public libraries are substituted by virtual libraries and database, only a smaller number of employees need to be kept to maintain those electronic devices and the site of public libraries could also be utilized for other purposes, such as establishing shopping malls. Therefore, such economic factors also explain why public libraries do not need to be preserved.
In sum, it is costly to run public libraries and modern technology may function better, considering that searching information on the Internet is faster and running public libraries is expensive.
In many universities and cities the library is an important building, providing a place for people to read, study and gain information. However, some people claim that it a waste of money maintaining the library in an era when the Internet is accessible to all. However，I believe that some of the library's functions cannot be substituted.
There is no denying that the advent of the computer and the Internet has made it possible for people to access information conveniently at home and in the office. In comparison the construction and maintenance of the library need to cost more money and the storage of paper books means that a large quantity of wood resources would be consumed for paper making, which may have adverse impacts on the environment.
Despite the above-mentioned drawbacks, I still think that the library plays an irreplaceable role in the modern society. The library is an ideal place for people to enjoy reading, acquire knowledge and participate in cultural activities. The atmosphere of the library encourages people to read and for those who love reading ,the experience of sitting in the library is different from browsing web pages at home. Also, in many cities the library has become a landmark， representing the cultural identity of the city.
Overall, although the role of the library is challenged by the information technology, it does not mean that the library has lost its value. Considering the price of maintaining the library, it is advisable for the library to cut down the collection of paper books and introduce more electronic books.
The advent of computer technology has shaped the landscape of many traditional industries,among which the public library is the one that has been unprecedentedly challenged.Although the concern and worry for fading dominance of library is not unwarranted,I still believe the maintenance of public libraries is necessary.
Libraries, though not so easily accessible as the digital books backed by the computer technology,can create an atmosphere which can sooth readers and then make them more concentrate on reading and studying.The piles of books,ranging from literature ones such as novels,poems and proses to the non-literature counterparts such as encyclopedias, history books and so on will give readers a sense of solemn and they are likely to treat reading as a holy baptism stimulating their cognitive development. In comparison,when readers get some information by e-books,they may regard it as a spiritual fast food,thereby absorbing little but to idle away time.
Another point for continue to run public libraries is that the functions of libraries is not restricted to do some readings; instead,it is now a multi-functional complex in which the visitors can attend an academic lecture,exchange opinions on some issues with participants in some seminars or receive some professional training and education.This experience can hardly be obtained through some e-books or online courses,which may mainly focus on the presentation of knowledge itself rather than the communication of those who are engaged in it.
Of course,cost of the maintenance of public libraries is one point that undermines the predominance of them.In the virtual digital world ， cost can be reduced because of less spending on personnel and premises,making the price of some e-books more seductive.Easy access to abundant resources is also magnetic to some readers,especially who need to keep pace with the latest information.
In conclusion,public libraries still our attention and effort to maintain its operation,in spite of the rising importance of digital libraries.
While it is true that the internet contains a vast quantity and variety of reading material that cannot hope to be matched by a single library, I still believe that there are unique social and psychological benefits that are vital to intellectual development, which can only be gained in a library. For these reasons I disagree with the statement, and believe that local governments should continue to fund public libraries.
First of all, the actual physical sensation of holding and reading a real book should not be overlooked. In the modern world, people, and particularly children, spend an incredible amount of time staring at screens. Whether it is from their phone, their computer or a television, pixelated images have become standard way for most people to consume their media. The experience of turning the pages of a paper book, adjusting the position of it in your hand for comfort, and even taking the unique smell that every book seems to develop through being well-read and well-travelled, is one that can truly stick with a person, and enhance the connection between reader and writer.
Secondly, being in an environment such as library, where one can meet other like-minded individuals in a quiet space, can breed creativity and bear relationships that cannot be achieved through the cold screen of a computer. I personally have struck up many conversations in a remote section of a public library with another keen reader in search of a new fantasy novel. These encounters often lead to personalized book recommendations, an impromptu discussion on a book that we had both enjoyed, and sometimes even a friendship, built on a foundation of common interest and intellectual connection.
These benefits may seem peripheral and not worth considering when deciding upon the value of public libraries, but I believe they are an essential part of what makes reading so enriching. Humans are social creatures, and the value of novels themselves can be broken down to the fact that they allow us insight into an otherwise inaccessible place, another person’s mind. It would therefore be highly unwise to remove the social aspect of reading, by defunding libraries in favor of internet databanks.