Why is digital data so fragile? | Experts Explain

[natr0n]

I came across this very well made video on data storage media.

 

[Shrek]

M Disc

"M-DISC is an archival-quality storage solution that preserves photos, videos, music, and documents for 1,000 years or more."

 

[bonehead123]

Quite simply, it's because it is/was created by fragile-assed, imperfect hoomAns, and stored on/written to fragile-assed, imperfect media, which was also designed/created by..... yep, you guessed it.... fragile-assed, imperfect hoomAns

 

[Shihab]

Dunno. It's very reductive video, imo. Reliability of the storage medium (which the video also barely touches) is but on factor determining why (or how) digital data is "fragile."
Talking about digital media fragility while skipping error detection/correction methods and redundancy, at the very least, is just sensationalism.

 

[AusWolf]

Disclaimer: I haven't watched the video, but I will (I'm at work).

I'm not sure if digital data is really that fragile. I remember the days of vinyl discs that were done after one scratch. I also remember tapes that lost a bit of their quality after every use, not to mention when the player ate them. I remember analogue signal degradation on TV. Then, I remember news about SD cards fished out from cameras that were stuck on the bottom of the sea for years, and still worked (the SD cards, that is). We also have M-discs, as someone previously linked. All in all, I think analogue audio has better quality and life-feel, but digital data is more robust.

I'm curious what the video has to say about this.

 

[Shrek]

One has to also recognize error correction; some data may be corrupted, but it can still be recovered.

 

[ThaGameRr064]

like the fragile nature of HDDs, also SSDs could crash. I remember the old 80gb laptop ssds that would probably been more breakable than an desktop hdd.

 

[Frick]

It's not fragile. Depending on the definition of fragile. I will never watch the video.

 

[Ahhzz]

It's not fragile. Depending on the definition of fragile. I will never watch the video.

then you should probably go ahead and move out of this thread, because that's the purpose of the thread. Thanks.

 

[R-T-B]

then you should probably go ahead and move out of this thread, because that's the purpose of the thread. Thanks.

Is it to solely discuss the above video, or is the topic itself the video claims to discuss in the title text up for grabs as well?

Because yeah I'm not watching either, but I can give you several reasons digital data beats analog for fragility.

 

[Ahhzz]

Is it to solely discuss the above video, or is the topic itself the video claims to discuss in the title text up for grabs as well?

Because yeah I'm not watching either, but I can give you several reasons digital data beats analog for fragility.

nope, but coming in simply to shit-post would result in points

 

[evernessince]

Dunno. It's very reductive video, imo. Reliability of the storage medium (which the video also barely touches) is but on factor determining why (or how) digital data is "fragile."
Talking about digital media fragility while skipping error detection/correction methods and redundancy, at the very least, is just sensationalism.

I think the video is pretty old as well given the focus on CDs and lack of depth regarding HDDs and NAND (SSDs, flash, ect).

It's not fragile. Depending on the definition of fragile. I will never watch the video.

Yep, just like storing data physically (paper for example) it really depends what it's stored on and how it's stored.

 

[Space Lynx]

I came across this very well made video on data storage media.

I don't understand though, what if the cd's are kept a air conditioned studio or house for 100 years? Many American houses are temperature controlled year round. According to the video the artifical way of agiing these discs faster was exposing them to higher temps and humidity, which may not occur to some people who have cd's in storage.

 

[Frick]

then you should probably go ahead and move out of this thread, because that's the purpose of the thread. Thanks.

nope, but coming in simply to shit-post would result in points

So the point ISN'T solely to discuss the video? Why should I leave then?

I just get incredibly frustrated by these kinds of threads. Posting a video, the lowest form of information delivery IMO, with only a few words about what the video is about and essentially just say "discuss" is ... it annoys me, and I do not see the point of such threads. At least make a writeup on the major points of the video, or provide qoutes, or something. It is an interesting topic, but is this thread supposed to be a bigger discussion on digital storage or is it just an external comment section to the posted video?

 

[delshay]

Hope I did not miss anything, but the video focus on CDR, but here I have normal music CDS that must be at lease 15+ years old.

 

[ExcuseMeWtf]

Analog data is fragile too (in fact magnetic tapes deteriorate when not stored properly, so most of tapes from 80s will soon/already got unusable), it's just threats are typically different. Diversifying backups is obvious way to go.

 

[bug]

M Disc

"M-DISC is an archival-quality storage solution that preserves photos, videos, music, and documents for 1,000 years or more."

Yeah, well, the CD-ROM was supposed to be good for 100 years. And while the aluminum or gold sheet would certainly hold the data for that long, some discs started exfoliating after 5 years (or less).

Clay slabs will easily last for thousands of years. The more you complicate the solution, the faster it fails. However, one particular set of digital data is not meant to live forever. The advantage of digital is that it's trivial to copy. That's how it outlasts other solutions.

 

[AusWolf]

Yeah, well, the CD-ROM was supposed to be good for 100 years. And while the aluminum or gold sheet would certainly hold the data for that long, some discs started exfoliating after 5 years (or less).

Clay slabs will easily last for thousands of years. The more you complicate the solution, the faster it fails. However, one particular set of digital data is not meant to live forever. The advantage of digital is that it's trivial to copy. That's how it outlasts other solutions.

Not to mention you couldn't store 700 MB of data on all of the world's clay slabs. Even if you could, recording it and reading it back would take forever.

 

[AlwaysHope]

Hope I did not miss anything, but the video focus on CDR, but here I have normal music CDS that must be at lease 15+ years old.

I have music CDs from the late 80s & early 90s, still playable & sound as clear as the day they were released. It depends on how they are stored imo.

 

[bug]

Not to mention you couldn't store 700 MB of data on all of the world's clay slabs. Even if you could, recording it and reading it back would take forever.

Try a simple "search"

 

[delshay]

I have music CDs from the late 80s & early 90s, still playable & sound as clear as the day they were released. It depends on how they are stored imo.

I have a similar timeline of CDS & I always hold it by the edge,. ...Not a single scratch or fingerprint.