On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 10:54:40PM -0700, Eric T. wrote: > Well let us just think about data for a minute. > All data that is stored by computers is in one "format". Binary. > If you are insisting that the data be readable by ALL possible users then > you need to get it into a generally available structure, like pdf, or ASCII.
But this is precisely the problem: that's not what people do. This is what XML, etc. are supposed to solve - but note that most people *still* use MS Word and other proprietary formats by default. > Data volume? > Oh come on. Terabyte hard drives are under 200 bucks today. Which has nothing whatsoever to do with the problem. It's not about the amount of storage space - as you point out, that's ubiquitous and cheap; it's about storing, say, ten thousand different _types_ of data on that terabyte drive. Are you sure that you have a reader/viewer/converter/interpreter/compiler/manipulator program for every one of those data types? Are you absolutely certain of what they all _are?_ Will you have every single one of them 20 years from now, or will you convert that data - *every* aspect of that data, including the ability to process it in a specific way - into some other format, in a manner that keeps all the information pertinent to it? Oh, and lest we forget: there will be another terabyte of data tomorrow, with its own set of problems. And one the next day, and one the day after that - only that one will be *larger*. Who has the ability to analyze all of that, every day? Is it even _possible_ to do so? *That* is the problem. > File system structure? Who cares? Just use what you OS likes best. [laugh] If you have an unknown glob of data, "what your OS likes best" is immaterial - at least if you want to read that data. Please try attaching, say, an IBM mainframe hard drive to your Wind0ws PC (assuming that you can somehow connect the hardware) and try reading the, e.g., JFFS filesystem on it. I assure you that you will not be able to do so. > The real need is to stop trying to use '70s era Cobal programs to present > the data. If you move the data into the 21st century most of the problems > would disappear. I know, I know who will pay for all this? > Except for the wages of a couple of people sitting in front of a monitor > all day, all the software you would need is available for FREE on the > internet. You would need to give up your big, hot, power hungry minicomputer > and buy some modern PC clones, but that would not cost too much. I hate to tell you, but those "big, hot, power hungry minicomputers" are a Hollywood fantasy. In addition, I'd be curious to see how you'll run a multi-billion dollar business on PCs. If you can do it, or even show other people how to do it, you'll have the luxury yacht of your dreams tomorrow. The "couple of people in front of a monitor" makes for a cute joke, but is simply naive when you have to deal with the problems that I've described. No matter how many people you have sitting in front of monitors, it's impossible to handle the concerns I've listed - even before you consider the daily volume of data coming into, say, an international bank. I.e., you've got not just one impossible challenge but (at least) two of them. > If you do it before your current computers die (as you must, if you want ME > to think you are serious about archiving) you will find that a serial [port > can transfer data from one computer to another just fine. [blink] Even the absolutely best serial ports (not on your Wind0ws machine, sorry) can only transfer about 230kbps - that's about 23 kiloBytes per second, a.k.a. less than 2GB *per day*. How, exactly, will this handle a terabyte per day (assuming that the data set is that small)? > Gee a parallel port even faster... Gosh, 8GB/day. That'll make a *huge* impact. > Got pictures, drawings, films, movies, music, books,video, whatever? > You can display it all right now with free programs. > I do. Really? Here: http://okopnik.com/misc/intro.mis Feel free to download and play that one. It's actually a very nifty format that compresses a huge amount of music into a tiny file size. Let me know if you have any luck, free programs or otherwise. > Got a movie on actual film? Display it on a monitor and capture it into a > modern format. That's certain to do wonders for the image quality. Ever tried it? > The trick is to get the job done in the first place. If you are worried > about the "perfect" transfer of images you WILL lose them. How "perfect" is > that? Data loss is acceptable to _you_ (or at least so you say. I gather your tax data has never been damaged.) It's not acceptable to other people. And meanwhile, as you're struggling with your "display and capture" gadgetry, several thousand movies and songs and pictures have deteriorated into unusability. How "perfect" is that? > Of course this all comes from a stupid, uneducated guy who can just DO > things. Legally blind, one arm not working etc. So what the heck could I > possibly know about conserving data??? Eric, I'm sorry that you have such a negative view of yourself; perhaps you should consider working on improving that. But regardless, you're right about one thing: you _don't_ know anything about conserving data. And I can very easily point you to a blind guy who does, if that actually matters to you: http://linuxgazette.net/authors/brownss.html -- * Ben Okopnik * Editor-in-Chief, Linux Gazette * http://LinuxGazette.NET * _______________________________________________ Liveaboard mailing list [email protected] To adjust your membership settings over the web http://www.liveaboardnow.org/mailman/listinfo/liveaboard To subscribe send an email to [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] The archives are at http://www.liveaboardnow.org/pipermail/liveaboard/ To search the archives http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] The Mailman Users Guide can be found here http://www.gnu.org/software/mailman/mailman-member/index.html
