A response to Multiple Perspectives
For the original post I am responding to see http://www.chnm.gmu.edu/staff/josh/courses/AU377/students/boyle. The techies vs. preservation dichotomy is somewhat of a false one. While techies are out to create the “next big thing,” one of the more important next big things are devices which can store more data and be more stable in that storage over the long term. People in general, not just historians, want to know that their documents will still be around when they need them without having been corrupted in the meantime. Furthermore, they want to be able to save as much as they will need without having to get rid of something important due to lack of storage space. That drive for greater storage and stability is in essence a drive for preservation by means of new technology. So, there is a progression from storage just on floppies to harddrives and floppies to CDs and DVDs to key drives and on and on, all looking to preserve more data in a more stable way. Furthermore, digital data is frozen, or preserved if you will, in a way that analog data is not. The digital data will be exactly the same 100 copies down the line. Whereas, both the analog original and the copies will deteriorate the more that copies are made. The desire by techies to create storage media which is less easily corrupted is an attempt to further ensure data will be frozen or preserved for longer periods. Obviously, as noted by our readings, there is and probably will never be a perfect method especially for those who are under a budget. After all, not all historians or groups can afford argon gas storage for ion beam created nickel disks. But what is now available can buy more time to deal with the problem of digital preservation.