Music industry’s 1990s hard drives, like all HDDs, are dying

some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org to Technology@lemmy.world – 466 points –
Music industry’s 1990s hard drives, like all HDDs, are dying
arstechnica.com

My father told me he wanted to make USB flash drives of all the scanned and digitized family photos and other assorted letters and mementos. He planned to distribute them to all family members hoping that at least one set would survive. When I explained that they ought to be recipes to new media every N number of years or risk deteriorating or becoming unreadable (like a floppy disk when you have no floppy drive), he was genuinely shocked. He lost interest in the project that he’d thought was so bullet proof.

152

You are viewing a single comment

But what actually is "archival"?

Like, what technology normal person has access to counts at least as enthusiast level archival?

Magnetic tape, optical media, flash, HDD all rot away, potentially within frighteningly short timeframes and often with subtle bitrot.

1960s style punch cards. Made of concrete.

I write these words in steel, for anything not set in metal cannot be trusted.

M-DISC, at a guess. The media would last long enough at least for grandkids, who will have bigger things to worry about.

Don’t forget, you also need drives that work that long and connect to computers or some other device to utilize the bits, and the bus they use must be available and working, and the disk format they’re written in must be readable, and the images themselves encoded with an algorithm that we still have access to, etc. it’s not just the media.

I think it’s possible, thanks to the retro enthusiasts, we still have access to some things from the 70s and 80s, but they’re getting fewer and fewer, especially in a working state. That’s only 50yrs ago. What happens when you want to go 100? Or 500? A few thousand? We are familiar with journals from the Civil War, and have found items and notes from Egypt, Roman, and Ancient Greek civilizations, how can we preserve what happened in the currently information rich time we live in, for future generations? Especially as much of it migrates online to blog posts and social networks and news sites that eventually shut down due to corporate issues or shifting internet traffic?

Upload it to the cloud and make it someone else’s problem to deal with keeping up with the physical medium changes. Then your descendants only have to worry about figuring out how to deal with an outdated file format they can no longer open… and even when they can finally open it, it’d be super low quality… just like how we have to squint really hard at videos from VCDs now days.

There have been plenty of cloud services that have shut down and taken their data offline. And plenty of current ones deleted data after users have gone inactive. Or require constant payments to keep accounts active. Cloud, as it exits now, is not the answer to the archival question.

You’ll be very hard pressed to find anything else that’d out last the day when all three of AWS, Azure and GCP shutdown and take their data offline.

I get it though, Lemmy doesn’t want to admit these services exist other than to dunk on them in the most anti-corporate fashion… so continue to pretend such is the case!

They take your data down pretty quick when you die and stop paying for it. And as much as we all want to think AWS and GCP and Azure are sticking around forever there’s no reason at this time to believe they will be around in 100+ years.

If anyone is responsible to keep things around for 100+ years, they’d have a job to do… and even then, cloud providers will still make their life significantly easier than juggling a bunch of storage mediums that goes in and out of storage medium fashion.

Probably M Disk as others have said for consumer use, but Microsoft is working on storing data in glass that could last for potentially 100,000 years +. Not that you’d ever likely have that in your home. Although, maybe by 2100 we will, who knows. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/project-silica/

This is really the only way. Ironically not far off clay tabs just much much smaller.

Holographic storage is a fluff project, the resolution we'd need to match modern density is simply to narrow to be done optically. I mean it sounds fun but will never be practical

That’s just straight up factually incorrect. From the link:

As a storage technology, Silica offers volumetric data densities higher than current magnetic tapes (raw capacity upwards of 7TB in a square glass platter the size of a DVD), and using beam steering of the laser beam, we’re able to achieve system-level aggregate write throughputs comparable to current archival systems.

Hard drives offer the best price/capacity ratio, but they need to be powered periodically (at least once or twice per year). As with any other storage medium, include parity data and have multiple backups to avoid data loss.

Tape is too expensive.

Optical media can also be pretty good as long as you get discs made from inorganic materials and store them properly. M-disc is supposed to last like 100 years. The biggest problem is that they are on the path to obsolescence and optical drives may stop being manufactured. Also, it's a good idea to check on the condition of the discs periodically and redo any that shows signs of degradation (probably a good idea to replace non-M discs every 10 years regardless).

But regardless of the media, there is no archival method that doesn't require active maintenance, like periodically checking the data, ensuring you have multiple backups, refreshing any aged media.

Like, what technology normal person has access to counts at least as enthusiast level archival?

Cloud storage? Store it on 2 different providers like B2 and iDrive or something, pretty low complexity.

Is it? It's rather expensive and would you really know, if the data is gone or corrupted?

You'd have to download every single file in certain intervals and check it. That's not really low complexity.

I've got photos in Flickr dating from 1999 onwards. Ten thousand or so of them, and a couple of the early ones are now corrupted.

But they are my "other backup" for Google photos so I don't mind too much. I also have a USB Blu-ray drive at home that I use to periodically burn M-Discs that I hand out to a few relatives.

That's about as good as I can conveniently do for backup, and it's probably better than the single-point-of-failure box of negatives that my parents have in their cupboard.

Good backup software will just do that as part of its thing, like Restic for example.

And who does that?

I think you don't really get my point. I'm not arguing that there are no ways to archive data. I'm arguing that there are no technologies available for average Joe.

It is hardly a good strategy to basically set up half a datacenter at home.

Yeah that's fair.

Common cloud storage such as google drive should be pretty resilient for the average person, data stored there is replicated in multiple data centers and verified with checksums, and it provides a trashcan and versioning in case of accidental deletion.

You have to hope neither goes out of business either.

That's why you have 2, there's no solution for long term storage that requires zero checking on things that I can think of.