top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 49 points 2 months ago (2 children)

in mass effect 2 one of the salarian npcs says something like "you can never have enough redundancy with digital storage" and it's shaped the the way i use computers to this day

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 47 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

    You just know some clueless c suite chucklehead got hoodwinked by a smooth sales presentation and FOMO over “the cloud is the future” into signing this contract.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 42 points 2 months ago

    I wish the final paragraph was the first paragraph.

    It's not clear if the channel has backups of its data, but based on its determination, we suspect not. This is strange, though, especially for a major organization, as one can easily purchase a six-bay NAS on Amazon and populate it with the best HDDs. This also goes against the 3-2-1 backup rule, which says you should keep three copies of your files stored in two different mediums, with one of them running offsite. Hopefully Nine PBS will implement a better backup system once it regains access to its data. And at least there's still a chance — it's not like the fire that the South Korean government experienced last year, which saw 858TB of data go up in smoke.

  • source
  • [–] 39 points 2 months ago (6 children)

    Stone tablets with dick drawings survived 10000 years but these chucklefucks can't preserve our history for 100

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 33 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    Unfortunately we did in fact lose the vast majority of dick drawings made 10,000 years ago and what has survived did so through mere chance. Not much has changed really.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 32 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

    We probably shouldn't store all our dick drawings in one place

    But joking aside we should be better at this by now. Passing down knowledge that came before us is pretty damn important to science and human advancement. Unless we want every every generation to have to rediscover what germs are and stuff.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 2 months ago* (2 children)

    I think it's actually worse now than in the past.

    All our paper and ink degrade very fast compared to the ones used historically; laser-printed stuff is even worse; and digital media (with the possible exception of tape, which might be slightly better than paper) worse than both. All our modern data is stored on such media.

    There are some projects that exist; such as the memory of mankind project, which uses human-readable laser-etched ceramic tablets stored in an abandoned salt mine for long term archival. They also have ceramic micro-film, but one of their requirements is that the most important data can be read without any need for a computer, etc. hence the aforementioned larger tablets.

    It's relatively small scale though.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 2 months ago

    Check out the Domesday Project

    The BBC set out to store a bunch of data for future generations. They thought that putting it on laser-discs would allow people to read it centuries from now.

    Within 25 years, it was basically unuseable.

    Modern humans are soooooo good at this.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 26 points 2 months ago

    Never trust a cloud

  • source
  • [–] 22 points 2 months ago

    local network attached storage servers stay winning.

  • source
  • [–] 22 points 2 months ago* (10 children)

    70 years of television is not 50tb. 50 tb is like how much storage a typical reddit nerd has.

    Let's say 1 hour is 1 GB. It's not, 1 hour at 1080p is like 5 GB at least, but let's imagine.

    50,000 hours is ~6 years. Did PBS only produce 6 years of video over a 50 year period?

    50tb is just not that much storage for a television channel. The older stuff probably also is recorded on film or physical media.

    The total amount of video that PBS has is probably in the PETABYTES, not terabytes.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 30 points 2 months ago

    This isn't all of PBS, just Nine PBS out of St. Louis, MO.

    Like the majority of PBS stations, most of their content isn't original. They broadcast tons of stuff made by WGBH, for example. It wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that only 6 years of original video was produced at this station in the last 50 years.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 14 points 2 months ago (7 children)

    probably compressed fam and the old shit won't be hd

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 2 months ago* (5 children)

    the old shit won't be hd

    I can tell that you were born after 9/11 based on this comment. That's not how anything works. Old shit was filmed on film, it is made HD by scanning the film. Old shit doesn't have smaller file sizes.

    Do you ever wonder why you can buy 1960s movies on bluray in 1080p? It's because old films were still HD, they were stored on analog on film reels. Old shit is made digital recently by scanning the film reels.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 2 months ago

    Not all TV was shot on film, especially live TV which in the early days was often not even stored at all and a lot of what was shot on film was on 16mm which can be digitized at lower definition with out loss. But most important is that the lack of concern for preservation is not new. Most of the legacy media companies already lost considerable parts of their history well before digitization was even on the cards and were typically lazy about digitizing anything that wasn't immediately monetizeable once it was.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 21 points 2 months ago

    You're thinking of film cameras used for motion pictures. While some shows were shot on 35mm or 16mm film, you're forgetting that a ton of television particularly in the 70s, 80s, and 90s was shot with 525-line analog NTSC TV cameras. This was especially true for lower budget productions like most PBS content. Nobody's bringing out the 35mm camera for an all-night live fundraising telethon, that's way too expensive.

    This stuff was stored using reel to reel video tape recorders on 2" Quadruplex film or later on U-matic or Betacam tapes (if your station was lucky enough to get one. You might have just made do with 2" Quad til the station manager eventually bought a consumer VHS recorder some time in the 80s.)

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    Could be low quality original archives that were then digitized at like 480p, depending on when they made the archive.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Amazon published an article about how they made a cloud backup of BBC archives, UK tv channel. The article says that 100 years of BBC content amounted to 25 petabytes of storage (~25000 TB). I would think that PBS archives would need a similar amount of storage.

    https://archive.is/suZz6

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago*

    the bbc archive is across multiple channels that almost exclusively produce original programming

    from what i understand, 9 pbs is a local news channel that mostly airs syndicated shows


  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 20 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    lmaoooooo fucking morons not even keeping a local archive of their own works? that's pleb shit

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 30 points 2 months ago

    non zero chance there was a directive to outsource archival hosting/services. a strategy of austerity and neoliberalism is for decision makers to force public institutions to form "public-private" partnerships or generally contract out services to the private sector rather than even consider doing the work in-house. in this way, the public institution evolves into a pass-through organization where public resources go right back into profit-maximizing rent-seekers.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 19 points 2 months ago
    [–] 19 points 2 months ago* (11 children)

    All data will be lost eventually. Catastrophically or piecemeal.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 2 months ago (10 children)

    Even though everything dies you should still try to keep it alive the best you can regardless

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago (9 children)

    No, sorry, I mean digital data. Like all these computer stuff. It is a severe problem that we don't really have a way to backup out enormous amounts of data in a way that will last, say, 100 years. We're currently living in a dark age.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago* (5 children)

    m-discs and blurays supposedly will last many centuries with data intact in a dry cave, but can't store very much per disc.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    blurays supposedly will last many centuries

    My toddler has entered the chat

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Yeah, storage capacity is a big part of the issue. We can carve data into stone, but not a lot.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago

    There was an announcement some months back that a very durable, very high capacity data crystal had been made in a lab, but I can't comment on the prospects for such tech becoming widely accessible.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    public TV channel sues Iron Mountain data center, which hosts archival materials, to ensure preservation

    Ahhh yes suing the business that's gone bankrupt I'm sure that always works.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 18 points 2 months ago*

    Iron Mountain did not go bankrupt, a middleman company called OSS did. Iron Mountain had a contract with OSS to store the data, and can't release it to anyone else without a court order. Nine PBS is suing Iron Mountain to get that court order so they can legally retrieve their data.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 2 months ago

    Honestly it's just funny... the empire that thrives off of, and is built upon erasing and defacing other peoples' histories, cultures, etc. is also now fumbling with their own (though it's not like as if their "history" and culture as they try to preserve it isn't almost entirely made of shameless lies). Self-inflicted "karmic justice," if not even 1/1,000,000th of what they have done to others- not that anyone else even wants to do to the west what they do to the rest of the world, they are their own worst enemies, and their only true enemies.

    The rest of the world, and those suppressed groups within the core whose histories are actually precious to them- those who the US tried to erase- will live on, and the only thing the rest of the world really needs to remember of the empire is its hatefulness and treachery, hopefully even their descendants will disown them and base their identities on rejecting and being better than them.

    ...perhaps there's a bit more spite to my usual schtick from just seeing some typical racist/"colonialism was good actually" bullshit. But it's not like any of what I said is incorrect either, I'd love to be proven wrong in a positive sense but this always works too.

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 2 months ago

    When the average homelab hobbyist has a better backup strategy than a major broadcaster. amerikkka-clap

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 2 months ago

    they scraped it for AI and then sold the hard drives

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 2 months ago

    Fucking enraging

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Surely a cloud storage provider like this would offsite backups on tape, right?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›