[xkcd 1683] Digital Data

[lena@gregtech.eu]

I'm doing my part

[sorse@discuss.tchncs.de]

Am I doing my part?

[itsathursday@lemmy.world]

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.

[rozz@lemmy.sdf.org]

My eyes!!

[allero@lemmy.today]

For sure you are!

[mesamunefire@lemmy.world]

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 less copies end up getting removed. I think it's fundamentally flawed to say the internet will never forget.

[moody@lemmings.world]

Well it wasn't even posted on your instance, so you're already just viewing a thirdhand copy of it

[muntedcrocodile@lemm.ee]

Despite that its still the same actual bits of data

[feathercrown@lemmy.world]

[moody@lemmings.world]

It's identical, but it's not the same bits

[draneceusrex@lemmy.world]

It's not, it already has a fucking 9GAG watermark on it...

[crusa187@lemmy.ml]

Well, for thot pics, there’s always more jpeg. For everything else, there’s lossless data formats.

[tanisnikana@lemmy.world]

I like how /u/gofsckyourself didn’t show up with a higher quality version.

[rickyrigatoni@lemm.ee]

yes it is. all electrons are just the same one moving very fast.

[buddahriffic@lemmy.world]

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.

[thebrideworecrimson@sopuli.xyz]

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.

[crusa187@lemmy.ml]

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.

[naughty_not_bad@lemmynsfw.com]

Hey check this cool meme out!

[ourkaos@lemmy.today]

Heh, heh...

The Bits of Theseus

[buddahriffic@lemmy.world]

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.