Hi Robbie,
On 01/04/2019 07:23, Robbie Joosten wrote:
I don't think making this GDOR complient is that hard. It's all pretty
well defined what you store (everything), where you store it, and why.
There are some philosophical problems with allowing users to have their
data deleted. Assuming the copy is good enough to reproducing the
experiment. Deleting a copy would constitute murder.
You have correctly identified the underlying philosophical issue: it is
a variant of what is now known as the "Teletransportation paradox", see
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teletransportation_paradox>.
From the point of view of methods developers like you and me, there is
an additional issue: with insufficient raw data to work with, we are
required to create living experimenters as part of our development work.
For the most accurate results, these should be faithful copies of real
synchrotron visitors and beamline scientists, who in many cases are
personally known to us. How should we handle these copies when we need
to release new or updated methods? Since these copies need to be
indistinguishable from the originals, how can we tell whether we are
upgrading the copy or the original?
Regards,
Peter.
This means that the
backups have to be stored in a rather libertarian "state" like Sealand
or Somalia.
Keeping that in mind, perrhaps this sort of backup should first be
implemented with the future African synchrotron.
Cheers,
Robbie
On 1 Apr 2019 07:46, "[email protected]"
<[email protected]> wrote:
While this may sound absurd, the principle of incremental backups
can help out a great deal here. Like Apple’s Time Machine, all we
need to do is store a copy of the things which have changed rather
than the entire facility, which reduces the burden by at least a few
orders of magnitude. Such efficiency savings will I am sure be of
great interest in this project. Surely though we could save a copy
of the experimental Eigenstate before the experiment too, offering
the option of going back and having another go - every
experimentalists dream!
I do however take issue with your hypothesis that only the
experimental equipment need be backed up - surely the experimenters
also need to be archived, to allow the question “What were you
thinking??” to be accurately answered when the reviewer’s questions
come back. Unfortunately due to quantum entanglement issues this
would probably require archiving the mind-state of dozens of people
every time you hit “go” with the associated data protection issues -
I for one would not like to fill in the GDPR section of that EU
application :-)
Anyhow, best of luck with your application,
Graeme
On 1 Apr 2019, at 04:59, Petr Kolenko
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Dear colleagues,
We all are very happy about the storage of raw crystallographic
datasets. But, is it really enough? No! Can we do better? Yes, of
course!
The problem is that the crystal after the measurement is usually
burned. It does not make sense to store them any more. But, in order
to maximize reproducibility and increase the reliability of all our
results, the committee of the Czech and Slovak Crystallographic
Association has decided to force our researchers to back up the
whole experimental station (including synchrotrons and their storage
rings) after each crystal, each use. Storage of synchrotrons under
liquid nitrogen is welcomed, but not necessary, yet. For the next
decade, in-house storage of complete XFELs is expected (EU project
Horizon 2030, proposal EC.2030.14.1.CZ.004).
Best regards,
Petr
########################################################################
To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1
--
This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential, copyright
and or privileged material, and are for the use of the intended
addressee only. If you are not the intended addressee or an
authorised recipient of the addressee please notify us of receipt by
returning the e-mail and do not use, copy, retain, distribute or
disclose the information in or attached to the e-mail.
Any opinions expressed within this e-mail are those of the
individual and not necessarily of Diamond Light Source Ltd.
Diamond Light Source Ltd. cannot guarantee that this e-mail or any
attachments are free from viruses and we cannot accept liability for
any damage which you may sustain as a result of software viruses
which may be transmitted in or with the message.
Diamond Light Source Limited (company no. 4375679). Registered in
England and Wales with its registered office at Diamond House,
Harwell Science and Innovation Campus, Didcot, Oxfordshire, OX11
0DE, United Kingdom
########################################################################
To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1
--
Peter Keller Tel.: +44 (0)1223 353033
Global Phasing Ltd., Fax.: +44 (0)1223 366889
Sheraton House,
Castle Park,
Cambridge CB3 0AX
United Kingdom
########################################################################
To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1
