this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2024
0 points (50.0% liked)

Technology

59651 readers
2617 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

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.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Toes@ani.social 0 points 2 months ago (27 children)

Yeah if you're looking for long term it needs to be archival media. Many people think the flash drive will hold it forever but they are potentially the most fickle.

[–] MrSoup@lemmy.zip 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

USB-A is best bet today, will live longer than other formats and USB adaptors will still exist when USB-A will disappear entirely.

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Huh? USB is a connector, not an archival format.

[–] MrSoup@lemmy.zip 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Werent we talking about usb flash drives?
Since usb flash drives use usb, I think we can keep using them to store data i long term, rather than using floppy, cd or other analogic archive.

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

The problem is that USB flash drives don't keep their data intact for very long when they're powered down. It lasts long enough for everyday use, but not even as long as a hard disk for archival.

[–] MrSoup@lemmy.zip 0 points 2 months ago

Oh, gotcha. Was thinking about the peripheral type support rather than its actual lifetime.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 0 points 2 months ago

USB-C seems like it's going to be around for a while.

[–] Anti_Iridium@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

There is also this thing called electron detrapping

load more comments (25 replies)
[–] hendrik@palaver.p3x.de 0 points 2 months ago

Well, nothing lasts forever. I'd say distributing them on something that lasts 10+ years is better than doing noting. Otherwise they just get lost, buried in the attic or the next harddrive crash takes them.

[–] Wilzax@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (3 children)

I have a feeling USB drives will be readable for a long time to come, considering that we still use the standard almoat everywhere, nearly 28 years after its introduction.

That said, copying the data from old archives into new formats is always a good idea

I have a feeling USB drives will be readable for a long time to come

The drives may still be useful, but the data will long be gone. I have a flash drive from 06 that was last used in like 08 09 and most of it's data was gone by 2019. The drive itself is fine. But what was on it has slowly faded away.

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Note though that usb Sticks (if you mean that with USB drives) usually get the worst, cheapest quality flash. It's a lottery, and expect nothing in no-name sticks.

* quality in yield, ssd > sd-card/emmc > flash sticks

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] vaxhax@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It's not a bad start though, and how hard would it be for the people who have surviving copies to copy it to "the next best new thing" in 10 years? The problem is of course that sequence would need to be continued on, like a tradition, which is doable as well.

[–] mister_flibble@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago

Honestly in a use case like family photos, redoing it every x amount of time is probably a good idea anyway so new ones can be added.

[–] mox@lemmy.sdf.org 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (5 children)

I explained that they ought to be recipes to new media every N number of years or risk deteriorating or becoming unreadable

This is important, and for some media, it should be more often than that.

People forget that flash memory uses electrical charge to store data. It's not durable. If left unpowered for too long, that data will get corrupted. A failure might not even be visible without examining every bit of every file.

Keep backups. Include recovery data (e.g. PAR2) with them. Store them on multiple media. Keep them well-maintained. Copy them to new storage devices before the old ones become obsolete.

It's funny that with all our technology, paper is still the most durable storage medium (under normal conditions) that doesn't cost an arm and a leg.

[–] BehindTheBarrier@programming.dev 1 points 2 months ago

If I had a cent every time an artist on patron had their computer die on them and lost works in progress or all their old stuff... I'd afford a few coffees.

[–] wrekone@lemmyf.uk 1 points 2 months ago

Anything important, I write on clay tablets.

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

People forget that flash memory uses electrical charge to store data. It's not durable. If left unpowered for too long, that data will get corrupted.

Yeah, but the link in the article, strict checks and no data loss over 52 weeks. Not neccessarily in USB sticks though. And sure, backups.

[–] mox@lemmy.sdf.org 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

That number comes from a single manufacturer's performance targets. It is not a guarantee of real-world results. You might be able to get Intel to replace an SSD if one of them corrupts data in under 52 weeks (assuming you notice it) but your data will still be gone.

Hardware performance can and does vary by brand, model, and manufacturing run. Even the nominally identical cores within a single CPU have slightly different performance limits. YMMV.

Note also: that 52 week target is halved at just 5° higher power-off temperature.

[–] SkyNTP@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 months ago

It's funny that with all our technology, paper is still the most durable storage medium (under normal conditions) that doesn't cost an arm and a leg.

Sophistication often creates fragility. The human mind marvels at sophistication naturally; appreciation for resilience usually only comes after that fragile thing has broken. Of course it's too late by then.

All them young whipper snappers will continue to learn these life lessons the hard way, it seems.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Tape backups, baby.

No, I don't have a library of those. I don't even have a tape drive.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] vext01@lemmy.sdf.org 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

These people haven't heard of zfs then?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] francisfordpoopola@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Buy Spinrite. It's not perfect but it's the best thing available for drive maintenance and recovery. I have used it for over 10 years. If the drive is dying it'll take forever, but I've recovered data that was nearly gone due to sector loss. It goes down to the bit level BTW. Someday Steve will release v7 .. someday.

[–] LostXOR@fedia.io 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

If your data is really important, you should send it to a reputable data recovery service. Using the drive any more (even with a tool like SpinRite) risks further damage.

[–] francisfordpoopola@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I think you are mistaken and don't understand how Spinrite works. It reads at the bit level and only reads once at level 1. If the data is going to be lost at the first read then it'll crash when read by a professional company.

[–] LostXOR@fedia.io 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Do you have a source for that? I am unaware of any modern hard drives that support reading individual bits; the minimum unit of data that can be read is generally one sector, or 512 bytes. If the sector fails to be read, the drive will usually attempt to read it several times before giving up and reporting a read error to the PC.

Data recovery companies can remove the platters from a damaged drive and put them in a working drive, as long as the platters are in good condition, preventing further damage. (If the platters themselves are damaged, you're screwed either way).

[–] francisfordpoopola@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

This is the best I can find in a pinch. It's possible it reads at the sector level and repairs at the bit level. It's been awhile since I've been knee deep in Steve's ass and testimonials. Old Security Now episodes have a lot of info on how it works.

https://www.grc.com/sr/faq.htm

Data recovery companies work the hardware which can be a point of failure. Spinrite tries to recover the data before the hardware fails. The greater density a disk has, the more failures are expected and error correction just assigns bad sectors as they fail. Between that and the OS, my understanding is that the slow degradation of a drive is managed until it can't be. Even running Spinrite on a new drive is beneficial because new drives come with bad sectors. By assigning them as bad up front you get ahead of bad sectors and even can catch a lemon before it crashes. I've recovered unreadable drives with Spinrite. It's impressive. It doesn't solve all issues, but it's really good.

[–] francisfordpoopola@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

I talk out of my ass at times, and the bit level statement could be one of them. Nevertheless Spinrite is a little known but amazing tool for HDD and SDD maintenance and recovery. Just go hop over to the forums. I used to be a member in them back in the late 2000s. You'll see. There are deep drive nerds and they know their stuff.

[–] n3m37h@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 months ago

This is the first time I've seen anyone else talk about SpinRite, known about it a long time too

[–] tunetardis@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 months ago (7 children)

That's why I back up my data on stone tablets in Cunieform.

Seriously though, if you wanted data to last for centuries, what would be your best bet? Would it be some sort of 3D-printed mechanical storage? At least plastics are generally not biodegradable, though they are photodegradable, so I guess you'd want to stick your archive in a dry cave somewhere?

Or what about this idea of encoding the data in the DNA of some microbe and cutting it loose? What could possibly go wrong?

[–] Quexotic@infosec.pub 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)
[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 months ago

It's a shame their capacity lags so far behind current hard drives. And not many drives for these discs are still made, so what are the chances of them becoming unreadable just because no one has equipment to read them?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Please stop that, DNA is good for mutations, not for long-term consistency.

[–] tunetardis@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 months ago

Well I guess I'm picturing DNA encoding like a RAID billion in terms of redundancy, so with some checksumming, you ought be able to sort out any mutations? But I'm no geneticist.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] TommySoda@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

In my life I've had several HDD's and SSD's fail on me. None of that shit lasts forever and you would honestly be surprised how often they fail. For huge servers like data centers the average failure rate is between 1% and 2% per year, and sometimes even higher. They literally have to replace hard drives on a daily basis because of failure.

Disk failure is one of the reasons I have copies of all of my important stuff saved to every hard drive on my computer, along with an external just in case. One time my system drive failed and I couldn't save anything because my operating system stopped working. Had to reinstall the OS and do a data recovery. Ended up with a bunch of photos that were corrupted, distorted, or missing half the photo.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 months ago

I still have a dvdr and good quality discs stored properly can last decades. Not perfect and harder and harder to find readers, but for long term backups its an affordable solution.

[–] Random123@fedia.io 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That shouldnt be all doom like.

Easiest thing is to make 2-3 copies of usbs and label the date the usb began its use, put a rough estimate on when the next generation should repeat the whole process until the pictures become irrelevent.

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

USB sticks and SSDs are no good for long-term storage. The data on them degrades rapidly if they're not powered up. Spinning disks last longer. So your process would be better done with those.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 months ago

how music is so complicated to archive now

??

load more comments
view more: next ›