• Ready! Player 31@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Trying not to spoil it but this is a plot point in a relatively famous, relatively recent sci-fi book, where the characters need to record a warning that lasts for millennia. They end up carving it into the rock of Pluto since all other data mediums would fail over that timespan.

  • Krik@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    Deutsch
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Storing data for decades or even centuries is a difficult thing. But the problem isn’t the storage it’s the data format!

    Who knows if a person 300 years from now has a program that can open .png or .jpg? Or the dreaded .doc and .xls that even Microsoft has problems with today. This poor future fellow probably won’t have the capatibilities and might need a few years or decades to develop a reader app.

  • tibi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Only downside is that only data that people care about right now is being saved. But what seems useless now might become valuable in the future. It’s hard to grasp how much data has been forgotten on some old computers, or some CDs, or websites that have gone dark.

  • LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    18 hours ago

    About that… we could record someone’s every word and different people would read entirely different things into it. Consider how strangers have reacted to your own internet comments.

    • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      23 hours ago

      Even with jpeg, you only lose data each time it’s encoded. If you save the file instead of taking a screenshot, the quality remains the same.

      That said, I don’t know if there’s a digital storage method widely used that will last longer than a book without some sort of active aspect to the storage (like copying the files to a new medium every now and then).

      I think punch cards are one that can, but they aren’t used much anymore due to poor density and speed, plus being susceptible to literal bugs. It’s possible to encode digital information into carved rock, but that would also have density issues (higher density means less reliability because the amount of damage required to make it unreadable is lower).

      I think there’s a good chance that a lot of the knowledge we have today could be lost entirely if civilization collapses to a certain degree just due to how we store it.

        • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          18 hours ago

          Yeah, though it has that issue with data density. The denser the data, the more likely it will become degraded from erosion or chipping.

          Also if there’s a discontinuity between our civilization and a future one, the denser the data, the less likely any future civilization would discover it’s there, even if it still has enough integrity to be read.

      • crusa187@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        21 hours ago

        You’re right, the format’s integrity is only as good as the medium upon which it’s stored. Hard disks are really only good for a few decades if left untouched. Punchcards maybe a few thousand years if sealed up well.

        The “active aspect” you mentioned is the key. There are file storage systems which employ regenerative error correction to achieve exactly this sort of desired outcome. I use one on my home server called ZFS. It was originally developed by Sun Microsystems and works great. The only catch is that there is a limit to the number of drives in your storage array which can fail before data becomes unrecoverable. So, you have to be constantly vigilant, and if a drive is starting to go, replace it before a potential worst case scenario of cascade failure.

        Unfortunately, I don’t know of a way we could store something indefinitely without this kind of active monitoring and occasional TLC. If a sort of caretaker is required, this might be a good job for AI with real world robotic hooks - have it monitor the array and fabricate replacement drives for installation as needed.

        • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          19 hours ago

          One other possibility that just occurred to me is to encode it into living DNA along with better error correction mechanisms so it doesn’t mutate. Like thinking from a “leave data for future civilizations to find” perspective, though it could also be a decent long term passive(ish) archival. Maybe completely passive if a self-sustaining but isolated environment could be created for it.

          Not great for data you want to keep but also actively use, though. Or data you want to be able to modify.

          • exasperation@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            53 minutes ago

            living DNA along with better error correction mechanisms so it doesn’t mutate

            Isn’t DNA, like, famous for its mutations?

  • mesamune@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    I’ve always thought that argument only works as long as data is free or close to free. Once it incurs a cost, I think copies end up getting removed. I think it’s fundamentally flawed to say the internet will never forget.

    • Nytarsha@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      13 hours ago

      The media on the internet will all eventually be behind a paywall. It seems like we’re heading in that direction.

      • freebee@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        That seems to imply everything you’re willing to pay for would still be accessible. That’s just not the case I think. Things dissappear full stop, also if you do want to pay for it.

        A lot of non super popular, not very internationally known media eventually disappears into non-accessible copies in private collections: hard drives, non public accessible computers etc and at the same time becomes nearly impossible to purchase or otherwise retrieve online. For example public broadcasters in Europe: they don’t want to put in the money and effort to preserve their entire archives, they don’t make everything from the past accessible, things do get lost in their archives (sometimes as a conscious choice) and at the same time it is illegal for private people to archive it… until it is too late. For example lots and lots of radio plays are probably already lost forever.

  • itsathursday@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    1 day ago

    Good luck finding the raw original video of anything these days. The amount of 3gp an rm files that used to float around compared to the reactionary emoji text bs you see today. Get off my lawn.

  • TheBrideWoreCrimson@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    22 hours ago

    See, that’s why I started using JPEG-XL for long-term storage. Apart from being better in every aspect for lossless and near-lossless still images than any competitor, the generation loss even over 1000 lossy save and load cycles is negligible.

    • tibi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      But converting from a format to another is a lossy process. It’s best to just keep whatever original format you have, unless you are creating the images yourself.

    • stevedice@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      18 hours ago

      That really doesn’t matter when someone screenshots your JPEG-XL and posts it in a website that transcodes it to WEBP and adds a water mark.