|Posted on Saturday, July 27, 2002 - 5:54 am: |
The tilty mill sends it's morning greetings...
|Posted on Friday, July 26, 2002 - 11:40 pm: |
|Posted on Friday, July 26, 2002 - 11:37 pm: |
Playing wax cylinders is easy.......1906 Edison.
There quite a number of people in ARSC doing digital copies of Brown & Black wax cylinders, some of the CD's recorded from these 100 year old cylinders will likely never outlive the original cylinders.
My Edison is still playing with no signs of mechanical failure, (never been rebuilt, just oiled).....the 2min wax cylinders are just as clean as the day they were made.
Some things last in spite of time.
|Posted on Friday, July 26, 2002 - 10:43 pm: |
Anything digital is offensive to a true audiophile...
|Posted on Friday, July 26, 2002 - 8:32 pm: |
Yeah, I'm having one fuck of a time finding anything to play my wax cylinders on... and where's my Beta VCR?
Vinyl LPs have persisted because in some respects they haven't been surpassed. What's scarier is that the CD may be on its way out -- not because there's anything wrong with it (though there are a few things wrong with it), but because the MP3 has been such a success.
|Posted on Friday, July 26, 2002 - 8:25 pm: |
Gee, I've had no problem playing my 78 speed records on a turntable manufactured just last year... I think there is a tendancy towards fearing this fast moving future in this regard and quite understandably so. I'm not so pessimistic in this regard though, I look at past examples of preservation compared to what they were a hundred years ago and we've made great strives... I really don't believe it will be so difficult to look at a photo taken today in a hundred years no matter what medium it was recorded on.
|Posted on Friday, July 26, 2002 - 7:53 pm: |
"every physical print photograph is getting digitized because it just makes sense"
You can be nearly certain that the reasons for doing so are economic, not some idealistic venture. They probably got a grant to convert everything or some big donation. Even so, they probably hope to sell or distribute such digital images and information as well.
As Dr. Johnson said, "No one but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money." I'd say the same thing holds true for digital conversions at the Smithsonian et al.
|Posted on Friday, July 26, 2002 - 6:00 pm: |
That's just it- 'digitized.'
Digitized in what format, under what standard?
Because when you want to access that information, you will need to do so using software (and in many cases hardware) that knows exactly how to do it.
Let's say you digitized the contents of your local newspaper's microfilm. You elected to go with a tape drive (the big industrial kind.)
What are the odds that in 50 years, anyone will have a machine capable of reading it? 100?
To put this another way, how many people will be able to listen to an *analog* 8 track in 50 years?
Now make that motherfucker digital, and watch the scope of the problem explode.
First you build your hardware to read the code.
If that picture was encoded as, say, a GIF, the binary will be instructions to a program to dislpay a GIF. You can't make it into a picture without the program.
If you don't have the program...
Imagine that instead of the actual painting of Olympia, you have a book telling you what color goes at what spot on the canvas. You must repaint Olympia to see it.
The book is written in a dead language that nobody knows how to read. It also assumes you already have exactly the right pigments and brushes handy.
|Posted on Friday, July 26, 2002 - 3:49 pm: |
Bullshit... everything is being endlessly archived... print material like newspaper has been stored on microfilm for years and in turn microfilm images are now being digitized. Take the Smithsonian for instance, every physical print photograph is getting digitized because it just makes sense. Regardless of how far down the road we get now, we're saving and recording everything more than ever. I can find more information about how to fix a cotton mill from the 19th century than I ever wanted to so it should be quite clueless in a hundred that if my great great grand pikkle wanted to see what kind of porn ole grampy pikkle was perusing, all he'd have to do is flick a switch and probably jiggle some wires...
"Ew, great great grandpa pikkle, why are they all so hairy?"
|Posted on Friday, July 26, 2002 - 1:27 pm: |
I don't know about that Pikkle.
It will only be developed by NASA if it is developed. There is not enough profit otherwise.
One of the great drawbacks encountered thus far with making things last- you can put em on computers and make endless backups. Kick them around.
In 100 years, when your great grandpikkles get it into their little heads to check out Grandpappypikkles early writings, let's say they dig your hard drive out.
With it's proprietary hardware and file systems. That no one can repair or access.
We are encoding endless heiroglyphs and not leaving any rosetta stones lying about.
|Posted on Friday, July 26, 2002 - 6:27 am: |
Except, instead of painting, I'd say calligraphy is more likely analogy.