[plug] FOSS condemned for data archival - don't let it go unchallenged

[Richard Meyer]

Bill,

I did not get this from wikipedia.  ;-)

Admittedly, part of bitrot is also the fact that the media you're
storing stuff on may not have a reader that can read it any more - look
at 7 track mainframe tapes for instance.

Of course the media will deteriorate, (unless put into a special field
where time does not pass, which I've just invented, but am having
difficulty implementing ;-)  ). It would be a great help to keep the
application, the OS and whatever else made the backup, including the
hardware.

Add to that the likelihood of just losing the data, as with NASA and
some of the moon landing data.

FOS should be less vulnerable to the shifting of the application, as
where we want to open a Word 1 document in MS Office 2007 (or whatever),
because the formats ARE open and documented and a "reader app" can be
written (probably).

It will, of course, be equally susceptible to the physical degradation
problems.

F'rinstance if we have a doc in whatever format OOo puts it in, we CAN
unzip it and look at the XML code. And we can do that as long as the
media is (are) readable and ZIP and XML exist. Trying that with an MS
format might be a bit tougher.

Anyway, it's Saturday evening and I think we're on the same page,
really, unless I misunderstand you totally.  ;-)

And, yes, if OS were more in use in science, finance, office, etc, the
physical problems WOULD be present, the "what does a bit in this
position mean?" problems would be, perhaps, less problematical.

Regards
RM


On Sat, 2007-12-22 at 21:43 +0900, William Kenworthy wrote:
> No, your reading only one of the definitions (dont believe wikipeadia! -
> though it is mentioned in this context towards the bottom)  I prefer one
> of my old uni lecturers on this from back in the 90's.  We had a guest
> lecturer who had something to do with the national archives and who had
> all these stories about data degradation and having to store not only
> the data, but the programs, operating systems and hardware. 
> 
> The theory is that the older a data set is, the likely hood of not being
> able to use it increases with age - whether its error in the data
> storage itself, or not having the software to read it, or the operating
> system to run the software to the hardware to run the operating system.
> 
> As far as OS goes, thinking about the context, yes if OS is being widely
> used in science, then it will be vulnerable.  There is little in OS that
> makes it less vulnerable to this effect than propriety software.
> 
> BillK
> 
> 
> On Sat, 2007-12-22 at 21:31 +0900, Richard Meyer wrote:
> > Bill,
> > 
> > Bitrot and what he seems to be talking about are different things -
> > bitrot AFAIK is the physical degradation of backup media - he seems to
> > be implying that in a few year's time the data will be unreadable
> > BECAUSE the application will have changed or disappeared. This is a MS
> > speciality - I wonder whether MS Office 2007 can open a Word 1 document
> > still.
> > 
> > Regards
> > RM
> > 
> > PS - that's the way I read it, anyway.
> > 
> > On Sat, 2007-12-22 at 19:33 +0900, William Kenworthy wrote:
> > > As far as I know, the formal term for data degradation over time is
> > > bitrot.  Its long been known and any software (OS or propriety) will
> > > suffer from this over time.  I doubt OS is any worse or better than
> > > prop. software though.
> > > 
> > > google for: bitrot data storage
> > > 
> > > 
> > > BillK
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Sat, 2007-12-22 at 18:48 +0900, Gavin Chester wrote:
> > > > I subscribe to "New Scientist" and often get behind in reading the
> > > > weekly editions, so only just got onto the 8th Dec issue ...
> > > > 
> > > > In that issue, an article by one Paul Marks titled "Hold on to your best
> > > > bits" he writes about the old chestnut of data archiving in the digital
> > > > age and how transient much of it is. But, he gobsmacked me by writing
> > > > this passage:
> > > > 
> > > > "Another problem for archivists comes from open source software [sic -
> > > > note lack of capitals for these pronouns], which is popular with
> > > > scientists because of its low cost and the ability to modify it to suit
> > > > the need of a particular experiment. If part of an experiment uses an
> > > > open-source program for capturing data, there is no guarantee that it
> > > > will still be available on the web at a later date or won't have changed
> > > > significantly. The APA says the scientists archiving data will also have
> > > > to archive any software they use."
> > > > 
> > > > That last issue is a good rule of thumb for any software application
> > > > used, but even moreso for proprietary software where the code is not
> > > > available to see how a particular data format was created.
> > > > 
> > > > Should we let this insidious and innaccurate attack on FOSS go
> > > > unchallenged? Should we mount a letter attack on the author through the
> > > > 'letters' page? Can anyone point to _short_, lucid academic argument
> > > > rebutting the author?
> > > > 
> > > > If you are planning to write as I suggest, then contact me off list and
> > > > I will give the email address and forward you a pdf of the full article.
> > > > 
> > > > Gavin 
> > > > 
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > PLUG discussion list: plug at plug.org.au
> > > > http://www.plug.org.au/mailman/listinfo/plug
> > > > Committee e-mail: committee at plug.linux.org.au
-- 
Richard Meyer <meyerri at westnet.com.au>
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves. 
William Pitt, 1783

Linux Counter user #306629