At risk of lengthening an already silly, off-topic discussion ... there have been good arguments here in the past on why re-processing archived data can yield important new information. But in the very long run I think, protein structures will be all figured out and new technology will allow for true snapshots of non-periodic structures etc. ... I hope. So the value of the scientific data itself will ultimately diminish. What will not diminish is the historical and cultural information associated with scientific research: email, personal notes, powerpoint presentations, reviewer comments, proposal and paper rejections, equipment lists and prices, etc. These cannot be reproduced in the future (spouse of archaeologist talking here). So it is for this kind of data that long-term storage may be most important ... and should not be overlooked.
Reminds me of a recent issue of Archaeology magazine that featured efforts to reverse engineer the 6502 microprocessor chip that many of us knew and loved in the late 70's and early 80's. Believe it or not, the designs have been lost, so a team resorted to "excavating" a chip using modern microscopy technology (www.archaeology.org/1107/features/mos_technology_6502_computer_chip_cpu.html<http://www.archaeology.org/1107/features/mos_technology_6502_computer_chip_cpu.html>). Just for interest: the sumerian tablets, some of the oldest written language, are actually packing slips. One would break open the clay "wallet" to see what the package was actually supposed to contain. Mundane lists of mail-order stuff back then, but valuable information today. Those which survive unbroken were probably from stolen shipments. Funny twist of fate. Richard On Dec 14, 2012, at 10:41 AM, Artem Evdokimov wrote: In terms of information density clay, paper and suchlike are not likely to be competitive with any modern storage device. However, if there really is a serious need to store relatively large amounts of information for a really long time I see no issues with laser (or afm) engraving on thin gold layers,deposited on top of e.g. fused sio2 and then counter-deposited or sandwiched between layers of some equally tough subtance e.g. the same fused silica or sapphire, etc. The assembly is mechanically stable, oxidation is not an issue and provided that gold feature size is kept reasonably large (say 50 microns per pixel) I estimate the practical read limit (noncontact optical readout) to be in the hundreds of thousands of years as long as the assembly is protected from air convection and weather by a suitable enclosure e.g. a modest size mountain. Best of all, information can be stored as words and imagess readout is simple and requires nothing more than the language to be still there at read time. As we evolve towards becoming telepathic quasicorporeal space mushrooms this may become an issue. Alternatively, given that there is no apparent issue with transmitting information across time (not a time machine but a backwards looking time telescope) all of this is unnecessary since we will be able to simply look back in time and see what we need to see. This technology naturally is immediately and profitably abused for nepharious/amusing/creepy purposes. Luckily, as a space mushroom I will have no interest in private momets of Queen Elizabeth's life, no matter how amusing they might be. -artem On Dec 14, 2012 9:20 AM, "Richard Gillilan" <r...@cornell.edu<mailto:r...@cornell.edu>> wrote: This is too funny. My wife's new job is scanning Sumerian clay tablets into computer. I kid you not. On Dec 12, 2012, at 5:35 PM, Laura Spagnolo wrote: > I would definitely go for babylonian clay... > > > > On Dec 12, 2012, at 10:31 PM, Adrian Goldman wrote: > >> I say write them out onto acid-free paper: should be good for at least 300 >> years without active management, if there is no fire. If that doesn't work, >> I believe babylonian clay tablets have an even longer expected life time…. >> >> Dale, I must say I am impressed… I gave up after the exabyte to DAT >> transition, and decided that if I really wanted to get data sets from (my) >> old projects, it would be easier to regrow the crystals… >> >> Adrian >> >> >> On 13 Dec 2012, at 00:22, Dale Tronrud wrote: >> >>> I don't believe there is a solution that does not involve active >>> management. You can't write your data and pick up those media 25 >>> years later and expect to get your data back -- not without some >>> heroic effort involving the construction of your own hardware. >>> >>> I have data from Brian Matthews' lab going back to the mid-1970's >>> and those data started life on 7-track mag tapes. I've moved them >>> from there to 9-track 1600 bpi tapes, to 9-track 6250 bpi tapes, to >>> just about every density of Exabyte tape, to DVD, and most recently >>> to external magnetic hard drives (each with USB, Firewire, and eSATA >>> interfaces). The hard drives are about five years old and so far >>> are holding up. Last time I checked I could still read the 10 year >>> old DVD's. I'm having real trouble reading Exabyte tapes. >>> >>> Write your data to some medium that you expect to last for at least >>> five years but anticipate that you will then have to move them to >>> something else. >>> >>> Instead of spending time working on the 100 year solution you should >>> spend your time annotating your data so that someone other than you >>> can figure out what it is. Lack of annotation and editing is the >>> biggest problem with old data. >>> >>> Dale Tronrud >>> >>> P.S. If someone needs the intensities for heavy atom derivatives of >>> Thermolysin written in VENUS format, I'm your man. >>> >>> >>> >>> On 12/12/2012 1:57 PM, Richard Gillilan wrote: >>>> Better option? Certainly not TAPE or electromechanical disk drive. CD's >>>> and DVD's don't last nearly that long and James Holton has pointed out. >>>> >>>> I suppose there might be a "cloud" solution where you rely upon data just >>>> floating around out there in cyberspace with a life of its own. >>>> >>>> Richard >>>> >>>> On Dec 12, 2012, at 4:41 PM, Dale Tronrud wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Good luck on your search in 100 years for a computer with a >>>>> USB port. You will also need software that can read a FAT32 >>>>> file system. >>>>> >>>>> Dale "Glad I didn't buy a lot of disk drives with Firewire" Tronrud >>>>> >>>>> On 12/12/2012 1:02 PM, Richard Gillilan wrote: >>>>>> SanDisk advertises a "Memory Vault" disk for archival storage of photos >>>>>> that they claim will last 100 years. >>>>>> >>>>>> (note: they do have a scheme for estimating lifetime of the memory, >>>>>> Arrhenius Equation ... interesting. Check it out: >>>>>> www.sandisk.com/products/usb/memory-vault/<http://www.sandisk.com/products/usb/memory-vault/> >>>>>> and click the Chronolock tab.). >>>>>> >>>>>> Has anyone here looked into this or seen similar products? >>>>>> >>>>>> Richard Gillilan >>>>>> MacCHESS >>>>>> >> > > Dr Laura Spagnolo > Institute of Structural Molecular Biology > University of Edinburgh > Room 506, Darwin Building > King's Buildings Campus > Edinburgh EH9 3JR > United Kingdom > T: +44 (0)131 650 7066<tel:%2B44%20%280%29131%20650%207066> > F: +44 (0)131 650 8650<tel:%2B44%20%280%29131%20650%208650> > http://www.biology.ed.ac.uk/research/institutes/structure/homepage.php?id=lspagnolo > laura.spagn...@ed.ac.uk<mailto:laura.spagn...@ed.ac.uk> > > > > > > > > > > > -- > The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in > Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
