Slashdot Mirror


Delete Never: The Digital Hoarders Who Collect Tumblrs, Medieval Manuscripts, and Terabytes of Text Files (gizmodo.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report: Online, you'll find people who use hashtags like "#digitalhoarder" and hang out in the 120,000-subscriber Reddit forum called /r/datahoarder, where they trade tips on building home data servers, share collections of rare files from video game manuals to ambient audio records, and discuss the best cloud services for backing up files. The often stereotyped hoarders letting heaps of physical items of questionable utility dominate their homes and lives often suffer social stigma and anxiety as a result. By contrast, many self-proclaimed digital hoarders say they enjoy their collections, can keep them contained in a relatively small amount of physical space, and often take pleasure in sharing them with other hobbyists or anyone who wants access to the same public data.

[...] Many people active in the data hoarding community take pride in tracking down esoteric files of the kind that often quietly disappear from the internet -- manuals for older technologies that get taken down when manufacturers redesign their websites, obscure punk show flyers whose only physical copies have long since been pulled from telephone poles and thrown in the trash, or episodes of old TV shows too obscure for streaming services to bid on -- and making them available to those who want them.

150 comments

  1. Amateurs by tomhath · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I suspect the real hoarders are those who collect porn.

    1. Re:Amateurs by Somervillain · · Score: 1

      I suspect the real hoarders are those who collect porn.

      Why do you say that? Porn has a very short shelf life. People get bored of it quickly and chase what is new and novel. With music, you can get joy from listening to a song over the years. Do you have porn you enjoy looking at over the years? People often are often more excited to hear old songs than new. Do you ever feel that way with porn?

    2. Re:Amateurs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do actually

    3. Re:Amateurs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I feel this way with my wife. I never get tired of her, although I know this is not really common.

    4. Re:Amateurs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You're revealing more about yourself than about the world.

    5. Re:Amateurs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's more common than you think; I never get tired of her either

    6. Re:Amateurs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> Do you have porn you enjoy looking at over the years? People often are often more excited to hear old songs than new. Do you ever feel that way with porn?

      It's almost exactly like music. You never want to revisit the porn from one's youth? Or check out the golden age of porn? Granted, alot of porn is hack or lame, but the good stuff has amazing shelf life IMO

    7. Re:Amateurs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GOLD.

    8. Re:Amateurs by LostMyAccount · · Score: 1

      You're both in trouble. She told me she's sick of you both and thinks you're just going through the motions, too.

    9. Re:Amateurs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why do you say that? Porn has a very short shelf life. People get bored of it quickly and chase what is new and novel.

      Given how much vintage porn from the 70s is easily found on most tube sites, you might be surprised ... hell, the novelty of women with pubic hair might do it for you if you've grown up thinking women have always been bare.

      If you only go for what is new and novel, you end up where most internet porn addicts get, that if it isn't extreme, offensive, and highly specific it no longer does anything for you.

      Do you have porn you enjoy looking at over the years?

      It's porn, given a long enough time from the last time you saw it, it still fills the same function. Changes in beauty standards and body hair don't really change that.

      People often are often more excited to hear old songs than new. Do you ever feel that way with porn?

      Sometimes, yes ... a bunch of years ago when Gonzo porn became a thing, it became a real turn off. No, I don't want to see you choking her, slapping her, or spitting on her -- it's a turn off, and in many cases it feels like it tips over the edge to being non-consensual. It skeeves me out when I'm alone, watching it with a partner (yes, people do that) and it becomes unbearable since neither of you wants to see that.

      Me, I like a little variety in my porn ... all ages, shapes, and levels of beauty are beautiful. Endlessly seeing identical women in identical scenes just feels hollow (even by porn standards).

      I can guarantee you, someone right now (pick any now that suits you) is watching vintage porn.

      I mean, sure, there are days when you want the little pigtailed candy raver in a lesbian strap-on scene ... there's also days when that 40 something mom going at it with enthusiasm is what works.

      You have to have variety, or you pretty much get yourself so that only one specific thing works for you.

      It also means if you get laid in real life (yes, that happens too) you will have such a screwed up idea of what you want that you'll be a terrible partner, because she might not be into whatever that thing is.

    10. Re:Amateurs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suspect the real hoarders are those who collect porn.

      Why do you say that? Porn has a very short shelf life. People get bored of it quickly and chase what is new and novel. With music, you can get joy from listening to a song over the years. Do you have porn you enjoy looking at over the years? People often are often more excited to hear old songs than new. Do you ever feel that way with porn?

      By the way you stereotype music listeners alone, I'm guessing you're about 14 years old.

      Shut the fuck up already and let the adults talk. And to be clear, no, I don't like any of the shit you call music today. Now get off my lawn before I throw another greybeard stereotype at you, which will likely send your fragile ego into a full blown panic attack. Fuck off and go find your quiet space, pussy.

    11. Re:Amateurs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Porn has a very short shelf life." TRANSLATION: "I have a very short attention span."

      I'm not being randomly insulting...this is a big problem, especially among millennials. Before you accuse me of being get-off-my-lawn, check out the science. Research lately has been pointing to the fact that multi-tasking, looking at multiple screens with different content all day long, is leading to a statistically measurable and significant increase in attention span deficit.

      I can see it in my roommate. She is 28 years old, and watches every movie on the TV with either a tablet in her hand for imgur/reddit/facebook/twitter or a phone in her hand for a video game. I'm quoting her the other day directly when I jokingly asked if she was physically able to watch a movie, 90 full minutes, without doing or looking at anything else and only using her mind to think about the one movie. She said: "I can't even imagine watching a movie without also tabletting!"

      Thus, what you feel as "I can't watch the same porn again a second time" I suspect is "I need to continually watch new porn otherwise my brain gets bored/distracted/detached/aware-of-the-abyss".

    12. Re:Amateurs by supercell · · Score: 1
      Since porn is slowly heading towards being banned. Look at what the UK is doing. Fat feminist that can't get laid want it off the internet. So hoarding of porn is a real thing.

      https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/...

    13. Re:Amateurs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More generally, video, whether it's porn or all your TV shows and movies. My home fileserver grew from a humble MythTV beginning (though sickbeard long ago replaced MythTV) but I added various arrays and a bigger case to keep it reliable (so that failed drives are a simple maintenance problem rather than a "disaster" to recover from -- because the TV needs to be wife-friendly, which means it needs to STAY UP). Then you add the family music collection, services like homeassistant, nextcloud, etc. Even if you start at the other end, it's tempting to add lots of storage.

      And if you ever have a hankering for watching a particular Star Trek or Blue Planet or Game of Thrones episode, well, there it is at your fingertips whenever you want it.

    14. Re:Amateurs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aware of the abyss. :) Your post was already interesting, but I love that last line the most.

    15. Re:Amateurs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you think there aren't people out there with big collections of porn you are very naive

    16. Re: Amateurs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Classic full length movies have qualities like interesting stories, dialogue, characters, and production values that are often missing in the newest flicks.

    17. Re:Amateurs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're still revealing more about yourself than about the world, naively. Reading is key.

    18. Re:Amateurs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you have porn you enjoy looking at over the years?

      Yes.

    19. Re:Amateurs by Shaitan · · Score: 1

      Of course. In fact, most of that new porn you are looking at is actually old porn being recycled.

    20. Re:Amateurs by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      I'm not tired of my wife either. After 26 years of marriage, she still fascinates me.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    21. Re:Amateurs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Suspecting that there are with big hoards of porn reveals what about him (or her)? Do tell, I'm curious.

    22. Re: Amateurs by TimMD909 · · Score: 2

      Sex advice is why I come to Slashdot.

    23. Re:Amateurs by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 1

      But it's also a case of whoever accumulates the most porn wins. Guy I used to work with ended up having his porn collection used as a navigation aid by commercial aircraft. If you knew where to look it was even visible from the ISS.

  2. I miss my dead trees... by Crash+Dummy+Redux · · Score: 2

    I have too many PDF scans of Byte Magazine on my iPad. #digitalhoarder

    1. Re:I miss my dead trees... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I look at my Byte collection on the bookshelf. I have
      the first years complete except for vol1#1. The covers
      are amazing and the ads are amazing and a funny note
      of history of computers/hardware the is no longer. I
      think things and the world was easier to digest back then.

      Anyone remember Smoke Signal products?

      So sad...

      CAP === 'protects'

    2. Re:I miss my dead trees... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      is this one about you
      https://archive.org/details/BY...
      oh no
      you don't float
      you sink with that toned cyclist's body of yours
      https://www.kickingthebitbucke...

    3. Re:I miss my dead trees... by Crash+Dummy+Redux · · Score: 1

      Was that creimer? His man boobs are bigger than mine!

    4. Re:I miss my dead trees... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lost the password to that site gris?

    5. Re:I miss my dead trees... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean creimer who is taking on Wreck It Ralph AND Casey Neistat this week?

    6. Re:I miss my dead trees... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i gotta say your persistence is funny you shitmoth

    7. Re:I miss my dead trees... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      peen0r is smaller

    8. Re:I miss my dead trees... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yup
      that was you when you were still young and had potential
      could have had love
      sex
      a life
      but no

  3. Why internet? My work machine ... by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 2
    I dont think I have seriously deleted any file since 2000 at work. Log files from unit testing suites, sure, and the scratch folders for temp work, sure. But any file created by me, be it a text file, or a script or bmp file or a partial edit of an email, or a several dozens prior drafts of the presentations, nothing has been deleted. The email archive goes all the way to 1997. Some early emails are in large flat text files, which I am going to reorganize and extract all the meta data and make them clean anytime now...

    I count about 8 Tb spread across several machines as my current disk usage. Wondering if this is high, low or medium in technology sectors. None of it are videos or animations. Not much of bmp files, or binaries. Images are, at best, jpgs.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:Why internet? My work machine ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      8TB of text and still images? That's a *lot* I have under 3TB, and that includes many old Linux and Windows installation isos.

    2. Re:Why internet? My work machine ... by Jason+Levine · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Every time I get a new laptop, I take the files on the desktop of the old laptop and put them in a dated folder on the desktop of the new one. So on my current laptop, I have "Old Laptop - 2018-01-18". Inside that is another old laptop folder and inside that is another one. There are files that are a decade old in there which I haven't looked at in nine years, but I don't get rid of them because "maybe I'll need this one day and it only takes up a couple of MB."

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    3. Re:Why internet? My work machine ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Honestly, I'm just impressed that you were able to keep the same job for 18 years straight. That's a rarity nowadays.

    4. Re:Why internet? My work machine ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ditto. Hell, I have files here that started out on cassette tapes in the mid 80s (games from long gone computers, basic code, high-school assignments and such). Pretty much the only times it's been a nuisance is when I first digitised all of my CDs, and when I first digitised all of my DVDs, as in both cases I needed to pay a bit for extra hard drives, but capacities caught up soon enough so that what took up 2-3 hard-drives on one computer fitted easily in 1 on the next one.

      All files are sorted reasonably well into relevant directories. File names can be a bit obscure for older stuff (6 and 8+3 character limits), but the most part they're self-explanatory. I don't look at the old files all that often but the way I look at it they fill up negligible any physical space and it's nice to occasionally go for a cd down memory lane, so why the hell would I bother deleting them?

      Clearing out physical, house-filling clutter makes sense; clearing out old files not so much.

    5. Re:Why internet? My work machine ... by Shaitan · · Score: 1

      I do this too

    6. Re:Why internet? My work machine ... by weepinganus · · Score: 1

      I do the same thing. Since each of my new computers has had, typically, an order of magnitude more storage than the previous one, the entire recursive archive costs me less than 10% of the capacity of the new one. (I say typically because there was a discontinuity at the transition from spinning rust to SSD.)

      Obligatory xkcd:
      https://xkcd.com/1360/

    7. Re:Why internet? My work machine ... by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      Where I am working now four of the other six employees have been there 20-30 years.

    8. Re:Why internet? My work machine ... by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

      My 25th anniv is coming up soon. First six years we did not have that kind of disk capacity.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    9. Re:Why internet? My work machine ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that would also be me, but I've got a few disk failure disasters before I was wealthy enough to have abundant storage.
      Pre-2000 porn image collection that I miss ...

    10. Re:Why internet? My work machine ... by jon3k · · Score: 1

      I do something very similar. When I upgrade an OS or get a new machine, I just make a copy of my old home directory and put it on my nas in a backups/ directory with year + machine name (2019-03-10_pc_name). I'm usually very good about storing anything I'm actually creating either on the nas directly or in a github repo, but there's an off chance some random config file might be handy or something. I don't remember every needing to get something, but the folders are really small and it gives me peace of mind.

  4. A quiet but growing problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    History, culture, thought, and knowledge has been recorded on and in physical media for thousands of years. Now it is not. Unless we make progress in the archiving of digital works, historians of the future will simply have nothing to work with -- the end of history, as Fukuyama says.

    1. Re:A quiet but growing problem by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well how much physical media has been lost, destroyed, degraded over the ages. The burning of the Library of Alexandra has been said to set mankind back Hundreds of years.
      During revolutions it is popular to burn and destroy material from opposing ideas. Storing and preserving such media is a multi-generational activity, which requires a lot of capital, as well danger (from such revolutions), Digital Storage is cheap, and big. For under $10,000 a hobbies in digital archiving can collect enough data to fill up the worlds largest physical library in physical media. If we have thousands of people doing this hobby, who will then copy the data to new media, we are better off then we ever were.
      The key advantage of digital media, the more times your copy it, the safer the data. Because a digital copy is an exact copy of the data. So unlike taking a Tape Recording of a Tape Recording by the 3rd or 4th copy its quality is nearly useless. Or trying to transcribe books, where errors from human translation happens (see the joke from Red Dwarf can happen.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re:A quiet but growing problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      During revolutions it is popular to burn and destroy material from opposing ideas.

      Idiots seek to mindllessly destroy things they don't understand.

      Intelligent people understand they're may be actual useful information to gain from "opposing" ideas, and thus aren't hell bent on destruction in order to achieve a goal.

      Stupidity and Ignorance have stood the test of time as well. That doesn't automatically mean that there's value in perpetuating it.

    3. Re:A quiet but growing problem by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      I think you are missing point.
      Physical media in practical terms, isn't any better then digital media in terms of long term storage. There is a theoretical advantage, but practical there isn't.

      The reason why Stupidity and Ignorance have stood the test of time, because we as humans are still animals, with primitive and instinctive actions, which have came from hundreds of millions of years of evolution. The urge to destroy a threat is in us all, as it is a good way to normally insure your survival. Now the problem with idea's is that they can be just as damaging, so our lizard brain kicks in, and we want to destroy it. It takes an intelligent person to fight the instinct and say it needs to be preserved over the threat it causes me.
      But I always remember what my Stat Teacher told me, about 1/2 of the population has below average intelligence.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  5. Hoarder, or preservationist? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This sounds entirely different than hoarding. Hoarding involves buying junk that everyone has and keeping it for forever in your labyrinth like house. This is more like digital preservation. Years ago someone kept all the Usenet posts, and now (for better or worse) you can read them all because someone preserved it.

    It's actually true that you never know exactly what might be useful in the future. We dig up junk from the past and call it archaeology. Archive.org has been attempting to preserve the whole web since its inception. Is that hoarding, or preservation?

    1. Re:Hoarder, or preservationist? by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      I think the difference would be if they classify and organize the data. Or they just dump it all to the D:\ Drive (or /mnt/Archive directory)
      Data is useless if you cannot find it again.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re:Hoarder, or preservationist? by Penguinisto · · Score: 2

      To be fair, even if you never archived or organized any data, most competent OSes have file indexing that allows you to still search through a pile of random crap and still have a half-assed chance of finding it... doubly so if that crap is ASCII/text-based.

      One time, that indexing even saved my bacon, allowing me to reconstruct roughly 180GB of suddenly disorganized-by-filesystem-error-then-recovered CG asset (Poser-readable) files. I still keep that directory hanging around today, as it contains stuff with vintages reaching back to 1997 or so - it's fun to mount it into DAZ Studio and fart around with it (and sometimes resurrect some of that stuff thanks to SubD, CollisionDetection and Shader-baking, neither of which existed on a real practical level back in the day.)

      Also, that pile of disorganized digital crap never rots, never molds, never gets infested with (or crapped on by) mice, degrades from plumbing leaks, etc. This allows for the possibility of future re-organization into something useful, as long as you have a means to read those files (like in my example, as long as I have something that can import Poser's ASCII-based .cr2/.pz3/pz2/cm2 and Wavefront .obj files, I'm golden. Otherwise, I'll have to mass-convert it all by batch, which I'm probably going to do before the end of this year...)

      There is of course the risk of data and filesystem corruption, but compared to the piles of random crap a physical hoarder keeps laying around the house in mass quantities? Two different animals altogether.

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    3. Re:Hoarder, or preservationist? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Data is useless if you cannot find it again.

      Agreed. But this is the perfect job for computers. You shouldn't have to manually organize data and classify it. It's the difference between Yahoo and Google.

      When Yahoo started, they had this crazy idea they were going to provide a manual index of the internet. These days we know that's basically insane, but in 1995 some people thought it was an OK idea. Altavista (and later Google) came around and applied algorithms to the job, and the modern search engine was born.

      But yes, I agree that data that you can't find anything is at least temporarily useless. But there's a lot of indexing you can easily apply to your already horded data that'd organize and index it very quickly.
      '

    4. Re:Hoarder, or preservationist? by Miamicanes · · Score: 1

      In a sense, it IS kind of like having a house with rooms piled floor to ceiling.

      Consider for a moment the data on a 250GB USB1.1 hard drive frome sometime around 2006. Ignoring for a moment the increasing annual possibility of drive failure due to age, imagine trying to look for a file on that drive. At USB 1.1 speeds, the disc is for all intents and purposes locked away and unusable (at least, from the perspective of Windows Explorer or Gnome 3's file manager, especially if the computer has antivirus software running that decides to try scanning the entire drive before it'll allow you to do anything with it). Connect the drive to a computer running a minimalist Linux distro and use Bash to copy the files to a newer, faster hard drive, and it's probably going to take DAYS for the copy to complete. Even if you rip the drive out of its enclosure and connect it to an IDE-to-SATA-to-USB3 adapter, it's going to take at least half the day to finish, just because even pre-SATA IDE was shockingly slow compared to SATA2 or SATA3.

      There's also the fact that hard drives are AWFUL for long-term storage. They can literally suffer mechanical failure after years of non-use... and if it happens, cheap recovery options are basically nonexistent. They start at 'ungodly expensive' and increase exponentially from there.

      Non-LTH single-layer BD-R media is just about the best long-term storage medium available today (cheaper LTH media is no better than organic-dye DVD+/-R... it fades and has a predicted half-life of around 3-10 years before accumulating enough errors to prevent reading as a normal filesystem, and 10-20 years before accumulating enough errors for even forensic recovery to encounter nonrecoverable errors in at least a few files). But BD-R media is pretty slow to read compared to just about everything besides tape. So, once your BD-R collection grows beyond a certain point, you'd BETTER have some good way to at LEAST keep a copy of the file metadata indexed and on something like a hard drive or SSD, or you're going to be in a world of pain trying to someday even figure out what files you HAVE, let alone the contents of any file.

      That said, if you had to pick a single media type for "throw in a box and forget about it until far in the future", Non-LTH BD-R is absolutely your best choice. Even if optical drives cease to be a common cheap CONSUMER item, they're all but GUARANTEED to exist in some form for bulk archival storage & commonly used by libraries, universities, enterprises, etc. Just be aware that getting a mountain of BD-R discs containing 40TB of data into a form that can be searched and browsed in any kind of interactive manner will probably itself require several weeks of effort.

      Note: avoid the temptation to use multi-layer discs. Multi-layer discs have a lot more that can go wrong (and can manifest unrecoverable read errors for deeper layers long before a single-layer disc of comparable age would have encountered problems). Also, when you're storing data for the long haul, be aware of your goals. Requiring that the disc be directly-readable as a normal mounted filesystem without special handling is a MUCH more difficult goal than simply requiring that data be confidently readable by forensic means. A BD-R that Windows 2030 someday chokes on and rejects as 'unreadable' when you stick it in (because the malware analyzer choked on an unrecoverable read error) might nevertheless be readable just fine if you rip the raw bitstream from the disc using Ubuntu 42.06 and use a utility to reconstruct a corrupted UDF filesystem. And if you actually know what precisely you're looking for and approximately where to find it, your likelihood of getting it off the disc is likely to be high for decades, maybe centuries.

      Someday, digital archaeologists are going to make careers out of using robotic disc-rippers and AI content-analysis to sift through exabytes of old data from the 21st century, searching for treasures like an old cat video from Youtube that HASN'T already been viewed 400 trillion times, or a fifth-grade book report from someone who later went on to become the 84th president of the United States.

    5. Re:Hoarder, or preservationist? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can you help me? What is "Non-LTH BD-R" that is absolutely my best choice. With Google I can guess something like M-Disk, but I am not sure.

    6. Re:Hoarder, or preservationist? by Miamicanes · · Score: 1

      There are two kinds of BD-R (recordable blu-ray) discs.

      The first ones that came out had a shiny metallic layer that permanently dulled when the laser burned it. The technology was used precisely because everyone knew by that point that recordable discs based upon organic dyes had a TERRIBLE track record for long-term stability. By the time development of BD-R discs began, nearly ALL 10+ year old CD-R discs had at least some unreadable sectors, and DVD+R and DVD-R had an even WORSE track record. The catch was, the first-generation BD-R discs required a totally new manufacturing process and tooling, so only a few large companies (like Mitsubishi/Verbatim) made them... and they were pretty expensive, especially compared to DVD+/-R discs.

      A few years later, the industry decided that Azo-based organic dyes WERE good enough for the unwashed masses, even while simultaneously conceding that their long term stability was unquestionably likely to be inferior to the original BD-R discs. Basically, their argument was, "yeah, Azo-dye BD-R discs will start becoming unreadable after 5-10 years... big deal, most people don't need archival-quality discs with hundred-year lifespans, and anyone who does can still use the more expensive original kind." At that point, companies like CMR (legendary for making low-quality discs) jumped on the bandwagon, and started cranking out LTH BD-R discs by the millions.

      The really SHITTY decision the industry made was NOT giving a unique, unambiguous name to the original non-LTH type BD-R discs. Officially, they might be referred to as "HTL" (high to low)... but you will NEVER see "HTL" as an advertised feature, nor is there any unambiguous logo, certification, or anything else that allows you to unambiguously determine that a given pack of discs is HTL type, and not LTH. All "LTH" discs will specify it somewhere on the packaging... but they won't necessarily go out of their way to make it obvious, and they'll often try to word it as though it's a selling point instead of a disclaimer.

      Broadly speaking, the cheapest non-LTH discs are usually going to be at least twice as expensive as the most expensive LTH discs. Of course, you might always get lucky and trip over a liquidation sale or something, but most of the time, you can just ignore the cheapest discs entirely and take for granted that they're going to be LTH.

      Likewise, store-brand and non-major brand discs are almost ALWAYS going to be LTH. Ditto, for pretty much any discs purchased at a big-box retail store like Best Buy or Walmart. For all intents and purposes, you're going to have to buy non-LTH discs online.

      Take Amazon reviews and listings with a pound of salt. Amazon is NOTORIOUSLY sloppy with its "SKU-keeping". If a listing doesn't EXPLICITLY identify a specific model number or UPC, you should probably assume the worst. Likewise, if the listing says the discs are non-LTH, but it's merely "fulfilled by Amazon", double check the SKU or UPC listed in the ad. Amazon is known for being really sloppy about commingling things they view as "commodity items. By the same token, if the listing unambiguously identifies a SKU/UPC for a product you've confirmed is non-LTH, but there's one or more reviews that say it's LTH, that could mean EITHER that Amazon was sloppy and sent someone a pack of LTH discs despite the ad saying they were non-LTH, or Amazon's powers that be might have just gotten sloppy and lumped reviews for BOTH LTH and non-LTH discs together. Amazon really sucks about doing that. Either way, if you DO buy the discs from Amazon, my advice is to 1) MAKE SURE there's something in the listing that UNAMBIGUOUSLY indicates that the discs are non-LTH (preferably, a SKU or UPC that you've independently verified via the manufacturer's web site), 2) check the discs when they arrive, and don't be shy about demanding a refund if they end up being LTH after all.

      Newegg is a little better. At least, as long as you stick to items that are literally sold by Newegg itself (the last time I checked, they

    7. Re:Hoarder, or preservationist? by luminate · · Score: 1

      Broadly speaking, the cheapest non-LTH discs are usually going to be at least twice as expensive as the most expensive LTH discs. Of course, you might always get lucky and trip over a liquidation sale or something, but most of the time, you can just ignore the cheapest discs entirely and take for granted that they're going to be LTH. [...] Likewise, store-brand and non-major brand discs are almost ALWAYS going to be LTH.

      This hasn't been my experience at all. I've bought several packs of the cheapest generic discs available on Amazon (Optical Quantum, Plexdisc, ValueDisc...), and all were definitely HTL. LTH discs seem to be rather uncommon and, strangely enough, more expensive (at least on Amazon). I guess it could be different in retail stores.

    8. Re:Hoarder, or preservationist? by Miamicanes · · Score: 1

      If you wouldn't mind, can you read the MID codes from those discs & post them here? (You can use a tool like CDspeed to read the MID code -- http://www.cdspeed2000.com/ ).

      Ultimately, the MID code is the final authority on whether or not a disc is HTL or LTH, because it's how the drive determines its writing strategy.

      My guess is that the manufacturer of the discs you bought just decided that it didn't even HAVE to identify its discs as "LTH" on the packaging anymore, and didn't.

      I suppose it's not inconceivable that things might have changed... but absent a low-key industry-wide move to abandon LTH and return to HTL, I think it's MORE likely that the manufacturers just found a loophole that allowed them to stop disclosing on the packaging that a given pack of discs are LTH.

      My own personal Amazon experience the last time I bought non-LTH discs ~2 years ago was that nearly all of the discs listed there said nothing whatsoever in the listing about whether the discs were HTL or LTH, and NONE of the non-Verbatim discs were HTL when I looked up the UPC or SKU number online.

    9. Re:Hoarder, or preservationist? by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Yahoo categorization method was a good fit for the time. Altavita sucked, because we couldn't find what we were looking for. Google Applied better technology and helping categorize information better.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    10. Re:Hoarder, or preservationist? by jon3k · · Score: 1

      If it is actually a hard drive that means it has something other than an a USB interface. Remove it from its enclosure and copy using that IDE or, more likely, SATA interface. But at USB 1.1 speeds of either 1.5Mb/s or 12Mb/s ("Low Bandwidth" or "Full Speed" in USB parlance), assuming the disk is full, it would take between 2-10 days to copy all of the data.

      But this illustrates a good point in digital preservation. It requires upkeep. You need to continue to move data to new formats as they become available.

  6. “Cloud backup” by ruddk · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I was just looking for another way to backup my NAS. I had been using CrashPlan on Linux but as I have approached 7TB I’d data, mostly unedited video, and lost my baseline, it has become way to slow.
    It is interesting that if I want to backup 10TB, the cheapest solution I have found is to place a small QNAP (1 or 2 drive) at a friends house and run run sync backup between them. It has a break even at 1 1/2 year, power bill included. Since we are on 100 megabit internet it is fast enough.
    Was looking at backblaze b2 as alternate solution.
    I am not aware of any other backup provider than CrashPlan that offers unlimited space using a Linux client. The speed issue seems to be a single threaded java program that does client side deduplication. It will take me 7 months to reestablish baseline. 2 months when I exported the VM with the backup client and ran it on a cpu with faster single core performance. :)

    1. Re:“Cloud backup” by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I use Spideroak, but the client has similar performance issues. It's at least not Java but it uses an Sqlite database and a hell of a lot of disk/RAM thrashing.

      I don't think any of them have a decent client app.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:“Cloud backup” by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      I was able to backup a bit more than 8TB with Backblaze Personal ($5/mo. for unlimited storage) in about a week. That said, I'm backing up from a Windows box with a direct-attached RAID enclosure, just because I wanted to avoid issues like limitations on backing up network drives or client platforms. I know it's possible to backup a NAS on Backblaze Personal via iSCSI (since it appears to be a local drive to Backblaze), but the people I've heard who use iSCSI for that purpose don't seem to recommend it. Even so, it seems like you could toss a Windows VM together that'd let you do those backups.

    3. Re:“Cloud backup” by GuB-42 · · Score: 1

      Deduplication is a problem with CrashPlan on large datasets. You can disable it here.

      https://support.code42.com/Cra...

      It says "don't do it" every two lines but it sped up my backup speed by more than 10 times after a few TB.

    4. Re:“Cloud backup” by sheramil · · Score: 1

      It is interesting that if I want to backup 10TB, the cheapest solution I have found is to place a small QNAP (1 or 2 drive) at a friends house and run run sync backup between them.

      Is that a cheaper solution than unplugging the drive and walking over to your friend's house with it?

    5. Re:“Cloud backup” by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      I backed up with BackBlaze as well. In my case, it was about 4TB, but it took me over a month to complete the first full backup thanks to poor upload speeds. (Not BackBlaze's fault. My local ISP.)

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    6. Re:“Cloud backup” by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Dual qnap boxes, one at a remote location with an openvpn tunnel from the remote qnap to my home router is the route I went too. So much cheaper and the data stays under your own control so long as you trust where ever you have chosen to keep your remote qnap. Use the full disk encryption with an unstored key and if the remote qnap were ever stolen it's data is inaccessable. You can get cheap older qnap nas units off ebay, They don't need to be exceedingly fast newer units. I just rsync my local qnap to the remote qnap on a nightly basis, takes maybe an hour for rsync to compare the contents of the two, longer if there is data to send over. If I ever get to the point that I need to retrieve a significant amount of data from the remote qnap, ill just drive over, pick it up, bring it home and retrieve with the thing plugged into my local LAN. Both my local and remote qnap are of similar config. 4 4TB disks in a RAID5 config, so just a bit under 12TB of remote backed storage for a one time fee of the hardware

    7. Re:“Cloud backup” by ruddk · · Score: 1

      Thanks, I'll give it a whirl since I am about to cancel it anyway. Better do a restore test though. :D
      There isn't any huge gain anyway since it is video anyway.

    8. Re:“Cloud backup” by ruddk · · Score: 1

      I think it is like most cloud solutions(backup, mail, office solution etc). It is fine for "regular" PC backup $5 a month and you have a backup of your computer without having to muck about with it. But special use cases require a bit more.

    9. Re:“Cloud backup” by ruddk · · Score: 1

      No you are right, I guess the cheapest solution is the Adidas net with a 12TB USB drive.
      But I still want to geek out a bit I suppose. :D

    10. Re:“Cloud backup” by jon3k · · Score: 1

      I am in the same boat, tons of raw video from iphones and various devices that I want to keep. What I recommend is just taking an external USB HDD, encrypt it with LUKS and stick it in your desk drawer at work. Then for me, once or twice a year, bring it home, mount it, rsync it, take it back to the office. This is "good enough" for me. My house is a few miles from the office so the likelihood of some event destroying both, for me, is very unlikely (nowhere near a hurricane or a fault line, tornado hitting both is basically impossible).

  7. This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by WankerWeasel · · Score: 2

    CrashPlan closed their consumer-facing unlimited storage cloud backup option because of people like this. It wasn't the 98% of the people using the service but the small minority of folks that backed up terabytes of data in collections like those here that made it unprofitable for them to continue operating. The digital hoarders really killed that service, ratter than the regular users.

    1. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by Virtucon · · Score: 1

      Then what did they mean by unlimited?

      --
      Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    2. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by LostMyAccount · · Score: 1

      It sounds to me like an engineering problem, not a gross profitability problem. They probably engineered their storage environment for any one customer blob to not exceed some size, and when it does it deducts from the efficiency of the whole system incurring dramatically higher costs.

      You would think generally one guy with 10 TB is offset by dozens of people buying plans who have mere gigabytes of storage consumed if you're just thinking in terms of their cost per TB of storage.

    3. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by WankerWeasel · · Score: 1

      They offered unlimited storage, and these hoarders took advantage of it.

    4. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by geekmux · · Score: 2

      CrashPlan closed their consumer-facing unlimited storage cloud backup option because of people like this. It wasn't the 98% of the people using the service but the small minority of folks that backed up terabytes of data in collections like those here that made it unprofitable for them to continue operating. The digital hoarders really killed that service, ratter than the regular users.

      STOP making bullshit excuses for a company already. Anyone who is wiling to offer an "unlimited" plan should be prepared for exactly that. And if you can't manage to be profitable off "the 98%", then you didn't stand a chance anyway. Your business plan was fucked from Day 1.

    5. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by WankerWeasel · · Score: 1

      It was always unlimited as promised, until it hit the point of being financially unprofitable for the company and they closed the service for all consumers. At the end of the day, that cloud storage costs CrashPlan money to buy from Amazon, Microsoft, etc. They never went back on the unlimited claim, but as very frequently happens, a small group of users really taking advantage of things, ruined it for everyone.

    6. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by WankerWeasel · · Score: 0

      And they did offer just that. They never limited things. It was when a small group of users pushed things to the point it was unprofitable for the company that they closed their consumer business. AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, Comcast, and others never would have put in caps on their own service if it weren't for those that go far and away above the general user. It's those users that cost all of us.

    7. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't even understand the context of your point - what sort of loss of efficiency would you even be talking about here versus gross storage size? Once it goes over, say, 1TB, then coders have to manually code each bit? There's a manual copy to some other storage system? There is ... what?

    8. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by geekmux · · Score: 1

      And they did offer just that. They never limited things. It was when a small group of users pushed things to the point it was unprofitable for the company that they closed their consumer business. AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, Comcast, and others never would have put in caps on their own service if it weren't for those that go far and away above the general user. It's those users that cost all of us.

      The end result of offering "unlimited" plans should come as no surprise to anyone in any business at this point. And if you can't manage to be profitable off the other 95%+ who don't abuse your service, then your business model was doomed anyway. Stupidity deserves to be rewarded with bankruptcy in that case, and I'm not about to make excuses for the fucking morons who refuse to account for human behavior or learn from history.

    9. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by imrahilj · · Score: 1

      If most of us come in under the caps, how is having the caps costly to anyone other than the few who exceed the caps? Crashplan could have just decided to institute a cap, and most of their customers would have never noticed.

    10. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by lgw · · Score: 1

      Then what did they mean by unlimited?

      They meant "but don't be a dick". Now it means "this is why we can't have nice things".

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    11. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm, maybe you're right, but the way you describe it, it sounds like that company was failing to charge people in proportion to the expenses needed to serve them. Did they happen to charge a flat amount that wasn't a function of the amount of data? If they did, then that would also explain the whole failure and put the blame on Crashplan, rather than on the customers they were mysteriously undercharging.

      Flat rate is usually either a scam (where everyone gets horrifically overcharged) or something a business does to die (because they're stupid). Major red flag.

    12. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In short, they were dickholes using false advertisement.

      Unlimited means unlimited. Period. The only ones who ruined CrashPlan were CrashPlan.

    13. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by WankerWeasel · · Score: 1

      Take that stance all you like. The point is to stop crying that companies are putting caps in place. If some didn't choose to be abusive of them, we'd all still be enjoying things without any caps, should there be times when our usage is more than normal.

    14. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So, really, they were offering 1 TB (or 2 TB etc) service but they got the benefit of lying and saying their service was unlimited, which attracted more customers. Cry me a river that they'll have to accurately market what they are offering.

      It's one thing to say "unlimited" when there is an inherent cap on the cost you could incur per customer (e.g., if you offer "unlimited long distance calling" there are a finite number of minutes in a month) and you can decide that it actually makes sense to offer an "unlimited" product.

      If you're selling an "unlimited" amount of online storage you are obviously lying and should be called out for it.

    15. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by Virtucon · · Score: 1

      so using their service of "unlimited" means that I'm abusing it? clearly there needs to be some clarification in their business model. It's like the old Flip Wilson story about the Lemonade stand:

      As a kid, I used to have a lemonade stand. The sign said, "All you can
      drink for a dime." So some kid would come up, plunk down the dime, drink a
      glass, and then say, "Refill it." I'd say, "That'll be another dime." "How
      come? Your sign says--" "Well, you had a glass, didn't you?" "Yeah." "And
      that's all you can drink for a dime."
      -- Flip Wilson

      --
      Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    16. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by lgw · · Score: 1

      Yes. It's like any resource that's obviously shared with other people. Even if you can technically take all you want, you probably shouldn't. Life is not a game to be exploited for maximum personal gain without regard to others. Not to say that it would violate any TOS, just to say "don't be a dick".

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    17. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by Virtucon · · Score: 1

      it's a virtual resource, I can't tangibly hold it therefore I don't care how much I use; end of story.

      --
      Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    18. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm skeptical that "a small group of users" could actually make the company unprofitable.

    19. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by lgw · · Score: 0

      Do you feel the same way about electricity?

      Backend storage is a tangible resource. Bandwidth (well, routers) is a tangible resource.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    20. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by geekmux · · Score: 1

      Take that stance all you like. The point is to stop crying that companies are putting caps in place. If some didn't choose to be abusive of them, we'd all still be enjoying things without any caps, should there be times when our usage is more than normal.

      There you go again, making pathetic excuses for companies who fail to understand human behavior. Stop doing that stupid shit already. The actual point here is understanding and accepting human behavior. If you don't like it when even 1% of your user base takes FULL advantage of your "unlimited" offering, then STOP being that idiot who offers unlimited plans.

      And no, I'm not one of those 500TB hoarders who abuses the shit out of these offerings. I barely have a couple hundred GB stored in the cloud in total. I just hate it when companies utterly fail to understand human behavior, and then constantly bitch about it. Fuck those idiots. They deserve bankruptcy at this point.

    21. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by WankerWeasel · · Score: 1

      You seem to have a total inability to understand why companies offer "unlimited" options. It's all about marketing, but that point seems to be so far over your head that you can't even begin to comprehend. But keep crying about it, it's pretty funny.

    22. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by geekmux · · Score: 1

      You seem to have a total inability to understand why companies offer "unlimited" options. It's all about marketing, but that point seems to be so far over your head that you can't even begin to comprehend. But keep crying about it, it's pretty funny.

      I don't care if it's defined as mere marketing or not; stand behind your product and offering, or shut the hell up.

      1 - 10% of your user base "abusing" an unlimited plan should never be enough to destroy your product. If it is, then you were stupid enough to allow it in the first place. Don't bitch about gambling if you can't afford to lose.

    23. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd bet that 1% of your user base could easily destroy your product if they are those type of people who try uploading 500 TB of data to your file sharing site just to see if they can. You gotta put some sane limits into your product to product yourself from abusers like that.

    24. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by Virtucon · · Score: 1

      your examples are still not fully opaque. Electricity is traded as a commodity, routers and networks could be but aren't. If you don't charge me for my usage but charge me bulk pricing that disregards patterns of usage then what do you care how much of it that I use? I think we've now transcended into a net neutrality debate. I'll use my unlimited bandwidth on my unlimited storage in an unlimited way, after all that's what I pay for.

      I have no pity for business that promises and prices "unlimited" services and then is suddenly shocked when somebody says "hold my beer."

      --
      Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    25. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. If it's not meant to be unlimited then don't pretend that it's unlimited. Call it x GB max. Call it y GB max, but you can only upload/download so much a day. Call it whatever you damn well want, but *be honest and upfront about precisely what it is that you are offering*.

    26. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And how am I supposed to know how much is too much unless they spell it out? To you, maybe going above 1TB is considered being a dick. But to another person, anything above 10GB is considered being a dick, and to a 3rd, that limit is 700MB.

    27. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by lgw · · Score: 1

      The flip side is there's no justification for outrage when the "unlimited" plan is suddenly cancelled. Tragedy of the commons, really.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    28. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by Virtucon · · Score: 1

      1) Build Services that allow for "unlimited"
      2) ???
      3) Profit!

      the essential business model for E business and why they fail.

      --
      Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    29. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      They meant "but don't be a dick". Now it means "this is why we can't have nice things".

      At what number does "unlimited" turn into "being a dick". Is someone's 500GB collection of dickbutt drawings more or less dickish than someone else's 2TB photo library they have amased over the years?

      You want me to not be a dick, stop being arbitrary and tell me at where you draw the dick in the sand.

    30. Re: This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There will always be edge cases that exceed "built for unlimited". They should make up a new marketing term that means 99% of folks will have plenty for a nominal fee, while the extreme users will pay exponentially more.

    31. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then they over sold their abilities. If they couldn't handle everyone using an unlimited amount of space, they shouldn't have advertised that. They could have advertised "everyone gets X and if you go over X then you draw from the pool of XXXXX. Once XXXXX is gone it's gone. As of timestamp we have XXX of XXXXX left. Our XXXXX pool is larger than everyone else in the industry!"

      In another post you mention it's about marketing, which is correct. Companies lie about what they can offer in an attempt to trick users into signing up with them over the honest companies. Blame the companies, not the users. Clearly CrashPlan was unable to offer unlimited storage to everyone. In fact, the use of "unlimited" should be made illegal since it's impossible to store an unlimited amount of data. It should have been considered fraud right from the start.

    32. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by fafalone · · Score: 1

      "Being a dick" should mean things like storing others peoples files, giving out the password so others can download/upload to the account, etc. Or using it as your file server to store data you don't retain a local copy of. If it's really your files, you should be able to use it in a manner that backs up all your files, without limit if offered as such. It's like an all-you-can-eat buffet. It's a dick move to get food for someone else, or take a bunch of food home... but you have to reasonably expect a fat guy or competitive eater is going to come through the door and use more than the average person by quite a margin. That's the benefit of the bargain. You wanted to gain the marketing benefits of calling it unlimited, you need to honor that as long as nobody is using the service in a way that's actually abusive (and merely having a larger collection of files than someone else is not).

    33. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by fafalone · · Score: 1

      Oh bullshit. Those caps are to enhance profitability only. If it was a congestion issue, *current bandwidth* would be throttled *when congested*. Total bytes per month is unrelated to their cost structure; it's not how bandwidth is priced. They're incurring no extra cost from someone saturating their connection from 2-6AM every night when they're at a tiny fraction of peak capacity.

    34. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by LostMyAccount · · Score: 1

      It's not like they store your data file by file. It goes into some kind of database/filesystem organizational structure which in turn is stored on a filesystem at the OS level to provide operational redundancy/virtualization. The underlying storage system itself is stored on the storage system's LUNs which need to also be able to be replicated or mirrored elsewhere.

      At some level of data storage consumption, the amount stored by a "data archivist" exceeds one of these defined storage sizes, like data entry exceeding the defined size of variable or record. They can't just truncate the data, so they probably end up having to "rebalance" where the archivist data is stored, possibly dedicating a storage device or some other unit of storage that would otherwise be shared.

    35. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by Headw1nd · · Score: 1

      This is absolute FUD. If it was a problem of a few people backing up massive amounts of data, then they could have instituted a data cap. If these terrible "digital hoarders" were the only people backing up TB of files, then it shouldn't have impacted any of their other users, correct?

    36. Re:This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things by geekmux · · Score: 1

      I'd bet that 1% of your user base could easily destroy your product if they are those type of people who try uploading 500 TB of data to your file sharing site just to see if they can. You gotta put some sane limits into your product to product yourself from abusers like that.

      You're likely right for a lot of companies out there. And there's a rather simple answer to that pseudo-problem.

      Stop offering "unlimited" bullshit.

      When the default human response to "idiot-proof" is to build a better idiot, it tends to justify that sane limits are necessary to combat against human behavior, which is as predictable as the wind.

      We can have nice things. But obviously trying to change human behavior is akin to bending the laws of physics.

  8. People collect everything! by foxalopex · · Score: 2

    People pretty much will collect anything and everything if possible. So it shouldn't be a surprise that there would be folks who collect data. The interesting part is going to be what happens to that data when they pass away?

    1. Re: People collect everything! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I collect the wax they use to hold cheese

    2. Re:People collect everything! by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      People pretty much will collect anything and everything if possible.

      Thus confirming the conspiracy theory that were seeded on Earth as a mining solution to gather up a bunch of shit by some really low-effort aliens.

    3. Re: People collect everything! by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      You can make candles with that. They don't smell good.. but they work.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    4. Re:People collect everything! by Penguinisto · · Score: 1

      People pretty much will collect anything and everything if possible. So it shouldn't be a surprise that there would be folks who collect data. The interesting part is going to be what happens to that data when they pass away?

      Same thing that happens to the book collection(s) of folks who pass away - someone else might pick it up (books with any actual value at a yard/estate sale, data by way of "...oh, a pile of disk drives for a buck? Sure, what the hell? I can make a cheap NAS out of it or something..." at the same estate sale.)

      Similarly, the kids/heirs might scrounge through that data if they see value in it (hypothetical: "oh shit - DeadGrandpa mentioned that he had mined quite a bit of $RandoCoin back in the day, and it's worth $3k a coin now! Quick, honey, kids! Go through the *entire* effing house - grab every geek stick, mSD-Card and disk drive you can find, and don't forget to check all the outlets for Raspberry Pis!" ... Okay, a more realistic hypothetical? No problem: Scrounging DeadGrandpa's storage media for photos, legal documents, etc.)

      Either way, again, it'll be like books and other paper documents - a lot of it will be scrounged and saved by the kids if they find worth in it, dumped off into the trash (or ether) and destroyed if not.

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    5. Re: People collect everything! by imrahilj · · Score: 1

      I've done that before! Ahhhh, to be a bored kid again...

  9. Not just hoarding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I kept copies off all email from the late 80's until I retired. Any conversation that started with "I didn't order you to do that ..." ended with "... here is the email exchange where you did. Is your memory improving now?"

  10. Storage is cheap, cheap storage leads to bad stuff by Virtucon · · Score: 1

    There used to be the notion of data retention, it was embedded in mainframes and OS stacks dating back to the 70s to prevent this kind of thing. Data owners had to take proactive steps to ensure retention. I myself have found that a few DROBOs filled up act nicely to preserve all that ancient knowledge, like my old MSDN CDs that had all the C++ documentation before they purged it in favor of C# and my Leisure Suit Larry collection. So don't call us hoarders, call us digital monks of the digital monastery saving history for future generations.

    --
    Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
  11. Modern day librarians and historians... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    TFA calls these people "hoarders," but I'd liken them to modern day librarians/historians. Preserving and maintaining old data is a noble endevour in my opinion. I still come across and enjoy listening/discovering old music that was created before I was even born. When I was a child, there were tons of video games advertised that I did not have the money to buy nor the hardware to fully run it on. Nowadays, I can download many of those old titles for free and run them in fairly good emulators on modern hardware. It's great!

    1. Re:Modern day librarians and historians... by Hylandr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This right here. However it's important to print out and distribute the survival stuff and how to rebuild our technology as the electricity required to access the repository of knowledge and culture is the first thing to go during a disaster.

      --
      ~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
    2. Re:Modern day librarians and historians... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stop replying offtopic just to game the comment sorting algorithm. You and your ilk are disgusting creatures.

    3. Re:Modern day librarians and historians... by Kjella · · Score: 1

      TFA calls these people "hoarders," but I'd liken them to modern day librarians/historians.

      Like in the real world, I think most are actually just hoarders dragging in any old junk without any time or interest to sort it out and certainly not put it on display or give it out again. Yes, some people are genuinely collectors trying to preserve a piece of history but most are just trying to dump the Internet to disk. I was there a while and I think I still have old CD/DVD folders with MP3s and DVD rips laying around somewhere, none of it worthy of preservation. It used to grow in leaps and bounds from MB to GB to TB but now I just take a spring cleaning on the biggest items every once in a while. Those directory visualization tools are really great to let you know what's 20MB and what's 200GB, so I don't sit all day clearing up 1% of my drive.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    4. Re:Modern day librarians and historians... by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 2

      It is rather ironic that pirates preserved the digital culture of old 8-bit games and apps on the Apple ][, C64, Atari, etc.

      Many of these software titles are so obscure that they would have been lost to the annals of time otherwise.

      It's fun to reverse engineer the copy protection, Virtual Machines, and p-code that some of them used. Yes, people were using VMs in the 80's such as Zork.

      Sometimes old classics like Oregon Trail are better then the shitty pay to win remake.

    5. Re: Modern day librarians and historians... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *I spend much time tinkering with my 900TB storage array, I never have time to enjoy the collection.*

    6. Re:Modern day librarians and historians... by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      Ha. I finally junked my CD cases and stuffed a few binders full of CDs and liners. Yes, I loved some of those liners.

      And I have multiple libraries of rips, some .WAV, MP3 at two different rates, AAC, and OGG. If I could I would have ATRAC5 also. And a shameful amount of 'free' music downloaded from wherever, 'music' being a term not well suited to a lot of it. Free music is a lot like free fish, don't smell it.

      I have all my emails from multiple accounts from 1996 to 2004, and most everything from 2004 on. Most in MBOX format, some in nasty text formats. Only my CompuServe stuff I'm missing much of. I do have some old FidoNet archives, and a few scraps I love, kept from a PLATO system I had access to for a while. Much of my post-2004 email is actually in three or more active accounts today. I stopped saving spam in 2004.

      Keeping track of photos is worse, I've got spotty archives from around 1998-2006, and after that way too many files with way to many dupes, thank you so much Google Drive, HTC, and iCloud.

      Today I have a sharing device online with most of this, 2 different USB drives with most of this one and all on the other of them, and an old DLT cartridge with this that is probably useless, since I bet I cannot find a drive for it, and software would be a painful search. Just can't throw it. I can't guess how much data this comprises, and I really don't care,

      Beyond that I've got a manageable library of MiniDiscs, and a player/recorder that works great, and possibly 2 cassette tapes from the old days of all that, and I've lost 2 record collections in my lifetime, so I think I maybe have 2 LPs hidden away, because my wife would throw those out. Feh.

      And I'm my personal librarian. No one else will do it. So yes, the difference between librarian and hoarder is intent. Maybe. And I'm keeping it as long as I can, not because anyone else will ever read it, and I may not, but just in case.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    7. Re: Modern day librarians and historians... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree the mp3s aren't worth keeping. They pop up like ants. Every so often I do a sweep and delete all.

      The flacs, on the other hand...

      No, I joke. I don't keep anything of pop-culture interest to me. Instead we stream everything, because if there's one thing I've learned in half a century as a consumer, it is that Sony and Disney ARE to be trusted.

    8. Re:Modern day librarians and historians... by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

      I still have the Windows 1 and Windows 2 executables that I downloaded years ago when I had a second hand 1200 baud modem. My first 1200 baud modem had a 2500 set grafted on the side connected by a cable.

    9. Re:Modern day librarians and historians... by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      I finally trashed my copy of Balance of Power. Could not find a way to make it run on anything.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  12. It's not hoarding... by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

    What these people are doing is preserving or archiving information to share with people. As other's have posted, also known as data retention.

    Someone who hoards, hides away what they accumulate.

    The two are not the same. But since the term "hoarder" is en-vogue people want to use it for notoriety's sake. Morons.

  13. _NSA_ by stooo · · Score: 2

    Hoarder No 1: NSA
    Hoarder No 2: Google
    Hoarder No 3: Facebook
    etc...

    --
    aaaaaaa
  14. A reason to now visit reddit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Honestly this story will now be the only reason I'd own an reddit user account, I've maybe visited once or twice but never anything fancy going on! Now there is!

    If I'm honest I still use efnet and others in order to download materials I need or am researching but now, reddit too for finding others!

    Awesome story, they ain't really grubby shut-in hoardors though, I'd reach for fluent archivists, digital librarianship ain't new though..

    wisecorp

  15. Many will roam about. Knowledge will increase. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For this reason, God sends them a powerful delusion(operation of wandering)(planet) so that they will believe the lie.

    Mystery Red of the Great American Eclipse
    It has blood on it!
    ABCNews: Eclipse makes pendulum wander
    Sun researchers find strange eclipse reading

  16. Ever terabytes should not matter by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    It wasn't the 98% of the people using the service but the small minority of folks that backed up terabytes of data

    It sure seems like 1-3% of customers storing many terabytes of data would come off as a rounding error in how much storage you would actually need to store hundreds of thousands of customers worth of data anyway...

    They would also be doing you a bit of a service by stress-testing everything for extreme cases.

    If that much more data is seriously a problem, then why not offer tiers like 0-2 TB (normal people), 0-20 TB (digital hoarders or serious photographers), and "unlimited" which reflects the true cost of storing a petabyte of data on average? You could migrate from unlimited plans to that structure, affecting almost no-one and shedding the customers you didn't like anyway (or making them pay reasonable costs).

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Ever terabytes should not matter by WankerWeasel · · Score: 1

      Clearly it was more than as simple as a rounding error, as they shut down the consumer service due to the abuses. If you have a small group that cost your company a disproportionately large chunk of the total cost, that's an issue. They're certainly not stress testing as they provide such services to huge businesses on their commercial size which are doing that for them already. Nothing is truly unlimited and those that can't recognize that and see it for the marketing move it is are only kidding themselves and setting themselves up for disappointment. At some point those that take advantage of these things to the max will cost all of us such offerings.

    2. Re:Ever terabytes should not matter by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

      Clearly it was more than as simple as a rounding error, as they shut down the consumer service due to the abuses.

      Or maybe they only wanted larger customers and not have to deal with so many smaller customers that could each generate support requests.

      As I said, if cost was an issue they could have just implemented tiered pricing.

      In a way they did - they just have only the upper level tier now, and provided free migration to the small business plan. As it is, that plan is still only $10 / device / month, not that unreasonable!

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  17. Tumblr archives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There was an effort to save the adult tumblrs to some external archive before the porn ban.
    Don't think it was successful though.

  18. It would be interesting.... by LordHighExecutioner · · Score: 1

    ...to invite them to dinner, isn't it ?!?

  19. What about logging/retrieval? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hoarders often forget what they have due to the size of their catalog, and effectively finding something isnt easy or even possible sometimes.

    Did they resolve this digitally? Or is a sea of the unknown part of the allure?

  20. Petabytes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have petabytes of Hentai stored on blu rays so that after the Trump presidency we can rebuild the world supply of cartoon titties.

  21. I've been collecting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Digital media since before the mp3 but I've never bothered with protecting the data. Despite my piecemeal approach, the collection has grown to truly staggering size.

    Every crashed hard drive is like a black hole in my collection. Movies_Drive_VII No longer exists. Same with APPS_TUNES_III. It's OK at this point though, as I've gotten so good at finding this stuff on the net that it's like I already have everything.

    Eventually, I just nuked my entire GAMES series, as those are so available on so many legit platforms already, and my collection all was dated first releases riddled with malware anyway. I replaced this series with CONSOLE_GAMES, and proceeded to track every file I could find. Vindication came when Nintendo went on it's crusade against the ROM sites, which made it a little bit harder to source their games.

    Sources are all over the place. Of course there are torrent trackers, and usenet, but most of the time, the best collections are found hosted on an open directory, or loaded into file sharing sites. The later can actually be miles faster than torrents if you do it right.

    I used to do this like it was some sort of crusade against the media companies; like I was taking my revenge for every time copyright was extended and public domain got the shaft. Now I'm more honest with myself. I do this because I can.

  22. THERE ARE ALWAYS CONSEQUENCES NAZI FAGGOT KEN DOLL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    THERE WILL ALWAYS BE CONSEQUENCES FOR YOUR LIES AND PROPAGANDA NAZI FAGGOT KEN DOLL UNTIL TRUMP HANGS AND YOU ARE HUNTED FOR SPORT TRAITOR.

    Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING. Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING. Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.

  23. I'd be afraid to by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    Hoard random data in the terabytes.

    I remember Paul "Pee Wee" Herman got hit for having Child Pornography he'd bought in a massive lot of vintage photos. He was wealthy enough to fight it off and win, but he also won because it was physically in sealed boxes so when they raided him he could legally say he's never set eyes on the stuff. With digital you can't really do that, so unless you're so rich folks look the other way (like Epstein) your life is over.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  24. Digital Velum by Lodragandraoidh · · Score: 1

    So this is what Vint Cerf meant by 'digital velum'...sort of.

    --

    Lodragan Draoidh
    The more you explain it, the more I don't understand it. - Mark Twain
  25. Re:Digital Vellum by Lodragandraoidh · · Score: 1
    --

    Lodragan Draoidh
    The more you explain it, the more I don't understand it. - Mark Twain
  26. Becoming more important by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As more sites turn to memory hole policies designed to erase the existance of people and thoughts, archives will be our only saving grace (no pun intended). Question is what of value should be. There are certainly things around the US Elections I'm sure both parties would love to remove. But it's the little things you likely will never notice. If Merriam-webster.com redefined or worse removed a word, most people wouldn't notice. They don't publsh change logs and their "top words of the year/whatever", are usually biased.

    I hope one day ipfs becomes mature enough to use.

    Capatcha: eclectic

  27. What would Brewster say? by bferrell · · Score: 1

    the wayback machine anyone?
    Maybe they should talk about that too.

  28. Pron by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm 99% sure these guys are hoarding porn, and claiming to hoarding everything else is what they tell their mom.

  29. We either need to redefine the term "hoarder" by Babel-17 · · Score: 1

    Or we need to have an intervention for all those museum curators who accept donated collections only to store them away in their sub-basement for decades at a time. Oh wait, that's more about being a disproportionate tax deduction for the donor, rather than hoarding. Never mind!

  30. look what I just found in my files ... by epine · · Score: 2

    Look what I just found in my extensive digital records:

    Digital Hoarding Can Make Us Feel Just as Stressed and Overwhelmed as Physical Clutter, Research Suggests — 8 January 2019

    And, no, I don't feel stressed in the least.

  31. i.e. mental disorders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Archivist-hobbists are hoarders without the restrictions on floorspace that physical hoarders have.

    It's time we grew up and learned the ephemeral nature of reality.

  32. Misunderstanding the problem: blaming wrong party. by jbn-o · · Score: 1

    The digital hoarders really killed that service, ratter than the regular users.

    No, the unsustainable terms of service ("unlimited") were the problem and that was always strictly under the control of the service provider, in fact that offer predates any of the clients using the service for what it was said to be. Microsoft made the same bad choice with its storage system which was once offered on an "unlimited" tier. Nobody has unlimited quantities of anything so offering such is unrealistic. It's not a client's fault for taking a service provider at face value and using what is on offer. It's the service provider's job to offer something they can sustain. Blaming the client for maintaining the provider's business is either a gross misunderstanding of who is in charge of the service or an attempt to shift blame and hold a service provider harmless for their unsustainable ideas.

  33. great idea by sad_ · · Score: 1

    collect all those rare files and put them on a cloud, because, you know, then they will be saved forever!

    --
    On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
  34. I have a rule-If you want it, get it while you can by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My rule is to download and save anything I see that I want - because it can and often does disappear from the Internet. I have a disk full of things that you couldn't find anywhere now, going back decades.