I always hear people say that recording history about our current

I'm not an expert and I'm sure you'll get much better replies in this thread, but you're basically right. Data rot in general is a big problem, particularly data rot through obsolescence. I remember reading something about how so many early pieces of software and documents they created from the early 80s are already completely unrecoverable and lost.

This was developed, so there's hope.

http://www.mdisc.com/mdisc-technology/

But yeah, most of data produced in the last 30 years will eventually disappear.

Wouldn't it be useful, with this knowledge in mind, to create a digital archive? Regulated by the methode of 'the historian' (which is every changung, but has a foundation). Meaning in other words. Does 'the historian' need to be more interdisciplinary (like braudel suggested in regard to social sciences) and work together with IT?

>>2571726
Digital archives are rapidly growing in numbers and records managers are increasingly sought after for that reason. The primary issues regarding digital archiving at the moment are regarding the transitional problems.

>What is the best way to transition between physical and digital?
>Is it worth the money?
>Do we even HAVE the funding to transition?
>If we transition, how long will it be before our archive is obsolete?
>How much will be lost in the transition process?
>Can we even digitize many of these manuscripts without destroying the physical copy?

Unfortunately, the reality is that digital archiving is largely centered around contemporary or recent works and as such you have certain archives that will never be able to fully transition to digital and thus they do not see it as worth it because it is a future problem rather than a present problem.

t. Guy who wrote an undergrad term paper regarding digitization and the Minnesota Method for an Archival Theory & Practice course that got him an internship at the university archive

>>2571874
I agree with your points, it was my mistake that I wasnt clear enough.

I am aware of digital archives and how many there are of them. They are useful for gathering data. And all the points you make, all the problems are valid.

Me, as a history student who is writing a thesis about the place of history in society, sees it a bit different. They (whoever they is) may find it not worthy, but I find it worthy to create a digital archive. Not composed just of data like the historian knows it, but of thoughts, not just comments, but an archive of elebarote, well structured and valid thoughts and opinions.

History is always about placing yourself in the present in regard of the past. How useful would it be for historians of the future (and maybe even for the now, as now we have a first chance to make an elaborate map of the now) to be able to use such a type of archive. Just look at this site. It is filled with thought, but most aren't well structured enough.

And in that sense, does the historian need to work with other disciplines? IT, psychology (because why define humans if time isn't one of your perspectives), sociology etc etc (historians take all this already in account, but we (and excuse my arrogance :p) have a very elaborate notion of time. I, myself, 'float' through time. People ask what is my favorite era. I like them all, but the present is the most real to me.

>>2571967
The problem is money. Archives (generally speaking) rely on state funding and/or charitable donations to keep running. It's easy to say "we should do this." It's not so easy to actually do it when you can barely afford to take care of what you have. The digital problem for present records is that it's largely focused on corporations and the government who are forced by law (in most countries) to keep physical records anyways so it's not AS pressing of an issue for them to maintain a digital archive as the physical record will be on hand for a considerable amount of time. To make matters worse, when data from today (outside of corporations and government) finally becomes a relevant manuscript in the future, it likely won't exist as it will be tossed aside and deleted because it wasn't relevant at the time and/or the space just wasn't existent to justify keeping it. Just think of how many manuscripts YOU have personally created and destroyed. This is actually an issue with archiving on the whole. We're producing unprecedented amount of records and archives simply don't have the funding nor manpower to keep up. You should set up a tour of your university archive sometime if possible. I went to the UNM archive a few years ago and there were three sub-basements completely full of shit that has yet to be processed. We're talking a space larger than my house, twice over, full of manuscripts with a place where the manpower is literally free (unpaid internships) or is had for pennies on the dollar (work-studies). If you're actually interested in archival work, I HIGHLY recommend you go on to get an MLS. It's absolutely necessary to break into the field these days if you don't have a hook up.

>And in that sense, does the historian need to work with other disciplines?
You're a history student and you don't know that we work extensively with other disciplines?

>>2572030
Agreed agreed. Mmh there is truth in your realitycheck. Money is one of the mayor issues, besides willingness. I do know there is coorporation between history and many other disciplines. I used them extensively as well. But ( and that is what I mean with braudel) he opted that time is missing as focus in other disciplines. He tried to get a discussion started, you can't force that perspective on people. You got to make it your own. Communication should be extensive (in almost utopic sense). Other things you said I need to read up more.

Could you make a beginning to filter bullshit from argument by, lets say, looking at number of words. Words use. Etc you name it. And I am speaking about theory, would that be possible and what would be criteria to do that. Teach me! Thatis what braudel opted with interdisciplinarity, at least that's what Ithink.

I mean, 4chan ( among others) showed the power of the internet. Why not use it? Not in anonimity, but as a nuanced but structured voice. 4chan is useless if you just post questions, but don't do anything with the answers you get. :-) Now, the guidelines prohibited us to do anything here, but talk. So lets talk.

>>2570832
that's why there are archiving projects for new media
also it's less and less of a hassle as time goes on because things become more standardized

File: 1463454886725.jpg (105KB, 448x640px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 448x640px

>get a black box type container
>put in a laptop with a solar charger, external harddrive and m-discs containing the entire wikipedia
>bury it in the ground for a thousand years

is this feasible?

>>2573451
Batteries last what, 5 years?

>>2572030
This happened with parchment too though

The amount of salvageable data will be far greater.