Recording the Discovery of the Decade and other discoveries
- Thread starter mrodoc
- Start date
paul
Moderator
Here's an interesting page in Wikipedia on trying to preserve information on laserdisc from a BBC Project called "Domesday". At the time I'm sure everyone thought the information would be permanently available to anyone who wanted it for many years in the future seeing as it was all on computer media. They can still get the information, but don't include any indication of cost and effort...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_Domesday_Project
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_Domesday_Project
& that was 20 years ago - still not completed: https://openpreservation.org/blogs/bbc-domesday-reloaded-needs-emulation-finish-job/
https://www.iconbar.com/articles/CAMiLEON_Emulation_and_BBC_Domesday/index937.html
migration issues for the long-term preservation of digital materials:
http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue/29/camileon/
https://www.iconbar.com/articles/CAMiLEON_Emulation_and_BBC_Domesday/index937.html
migration issues for the long-term preservation of digital materials:
http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue/29/camileon/
andrewmcleod
Well-known member
Physical hardware goes obsolete relatively quickly, and can be excessively expensive to re-create to read stuff. Hence sticking your stuff on CD/DVD is a bad idea for archiving digital data - the best storage is live storage. And since storage space keeps increasing, all of past knowledge can just be tucked in the corner of society's new shared 'hard drive' or whatever.
Digital data formats do go obsolete BUT it's much, much easier to either keep the format accessible because the software used to access is also data. If you have a codec to decode a video, for example, all you need is to not lose that software (ideally the source code). Even if you don't have that, recreating software to access a format (provided it is documented) will be much easier than (say) building a new 5.25" floppy drive.
That's not to say all formats are equal - something like an old MS Word document is likely to be more of a pain in the bum to read (since it implies needing a relatively large piece of old software with lots of quirks) compared to something like JPEG, PDF, HTML or even the OpenOffice formats (which are documented).
Paper might last a long time, but try storing a sound clip or a video by writing it on paper... it can be done but you will need a lot of paper. If all you want to store is plain text, then a simple plain text file should be easily readable to anyone with the translation table (e.g. ASCII, Unicode) and the details of the binary scheme (e.g. little or big endian, byte size) for all time with a trivial amount of programming.
Digital data formats do go obsolete BUT it's much, much easier to either keep the format accessible because the software used to access is also data. If you have a codec to decode a video, for example, all you need is to not lose that software (ideally the source code). Even if you don't have that, recreating software to access a format (provided it is documented) will be much easier than (say) building a new 5.25" floppy drive.
That's not to say all formats are equal - something like an old MS Word document is likely to be more of a pain in the bum to read (since it implies needing a relatively large piece of old software with lots of quirks) compared to something like JPEG, PDF, HTML or even the OpenOffice formats (which are documented).
Paper might last a long time, but try storing a sound clip or a video by writing it on paper... it can be done but you will need a lot of paper. If all you want to store is plain text, then a simple plain text file should be easily readable to anyone with the translation table (e.g. ASCII, Unicode) and the details of the binary scheme (e.g. little or big endian, byte size) for all time with a trivial amount of programming.
pwhole
Well-known member
Bear in mind also though that as online storage increases exponentially, as it is at the moment, there will simply not be enough hardware or electricity generated to keep them powered up. It's not 'secure' if it's switched-off - until you switch it back on again to check it's still integrated. Schr?dinger's cat photos! If everyone stores everything on the cloud, we are heading for a data disaster. I know many people who have literally every photo on their phone stored online - and that's 4000 X 3000 pixel-images of their cats, brthday parties, jobs, all chucked in together. It's mathematically impossible to satisfy this 'need' for ever - or even ten years.
PeteHall
Moderator
andrewmc said:
You are not wrong about storage space increasing! The datacentre market is booming at the moment, I think I'm working on about 10 hyperscale datacentre schemes at the minute, from early planning and feasibility, through to a couple in construction. In suitable areas, the power capacity in the network is fully booked out for the next 10 years already (and that includes all the planned upgrades over the next 10 years).
pwhole said:
An interesting thought!
As far as power goes, big data centres can typically weather up to 3 days without a power supply, utilising on-site back-up generation. In the event of a power outage, there are various mechanisms used to maintain power while the generators fire up; this is typically using a battery bank, but there are also flywheel options out there.
In terms of longer term electrical demand, this is part of a bigger picture. If we are moving towards electric vehicles, electric heating in our homes etc (as per current policies/ trajectories) we will need to massively increase generation anyway. I'm not sure the demand by data centres will be that significant compared to the overall consumption of the country, even though it is a vast and growing demand.
I would speculate that as more and more moves online (think Zuckerbergs "Metaverse") demand will continue to increase exponentially and the money will follow the demand, so we will keep building more data centres to meet our "needs".
Since the volume of new data being created is increasing exponentially, the volume of existing/ historic data becomes proportionally less significant, so there is little reason to think it will be dumped. If dumping 20 or 30 years of historic data buys you a week or two of current demand, why would you bother facing the inevitable backlash by doing that?
Chocolate fireguard
Active member
I think that's quite a small warehouse, as warehouses go.2xw said:
The volume of our (average sized) terraced house is about 450m^3.
2xw
Active member
PeteHall said:
Ages - some articles say 24 hours. But that isn't too bad for something stored for a thousand years. I guess that and the cost are one of the reasons we aren't using it right now.
Twist bioscience and Microsoft are working on it specifically, I don't know much about investing but to be honest if you're an investor (with a reasonably high risk appetite) I'd consider bioscience companies more generally - Oxford nanopore, Illumina, novogene etc etc. Genomics is moving rapidly - techniques used in labs in 2015 are now dated. The human genome project finish in 2003 after 13 years and cost $3bn - now it can be done for ?300 and the NHS has done 100,000 of them. Investors in BioNTech have done pretty well...
Might be worth investing in Chocolate Fireguard too, as they seem to be volunteering to host 2025s planetary data centre
wellyjen
Well-known member
There is a lot of deduplication that can be done. Delete all buy one picture of common subjects like cats, parties, babies, sunsets, aeroplane wings and no one will notice. People will replace their own memories with the standard photos.pwhole said:
It might be noticable in Weezit threads here though.
Roger W
Well-known member
I've shedloads of photos of people I don't know in places I can't recognise, taken I can't remember when. I'll get round to sorting through them someday...
Having said that, what I think is the oldest book on my bookshelves dates back to 1873 and is still perfectly readable.
Having said that, what I think is the oldest book on my bookshelves dates back to 1873 and is still perfectly readable.
AR
Well-known member
I notice that vinyl was mentioned as an outdated format earlier, but bear in mind that as long as the substrate material is durable, the spiral scratch is still the most long-lived means of preserving a sound recording. Remember the gold disc attached to the Voyager spacecraft? Not only that, but the Scientologists put the recordings of L. Ron Hubbard's speeches onto disc as they felt it was the best way to preserve them for posteriority...
paul
Moderator
Have a look at: This Photographer Makes Platinum Palladium Prints of Nature That Last 1,000 Years https://petapixel.com/2016/02/16/photographer-makes-platinum-palladium-prints-nature-live-1000-years/
pwhole
Well-known member
AR said:
Indeed. However, I spoke to a guy I know at a famous record label only last week, and they are in a right mess now with their release schedules, as raw vinyl supplies (made in Texas and the Far East only, I think) have also crashed. Plus we have no vinyl pressing plants in the UK any longer, or even sleeve manufacturers. The days of Garrod and Lofthouse are over. Most vinyl records are now pressed in the Czech Republic, and the re-growth of this medium is almost exclusively down to the purchasing power of middle-aged, well-employed men spending their excess cash. Brexit and Covid are just making it much worse, along with massive-name releases clogging up production.
This is an example of the panicky articles currently going round that particular business:
https://mixmag.net/feature/vinyl-industry-record-breaking-point-manufacturing