Obelix Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 Well I guess in my non-technical way, I'm trying to say, will there ever come a point when the amount of data being generated A) Won't be worth keeping (by anyone) because it's drivel. B) Won't be worth keeping because of data overload. I think (B) has already been addressed, but it just 'appears' to me, that each day there must be billions of extra chunks of data generated somewhere on the planet! Some thoughts for you.... When I first started seriously playing on the WWW I downloaded it all. And I do mean all - there were about 230 websites in the world and they are stored somewhere on a clutch of CD's. Wish I could lay my hands on them. That was 1992. In terms of data - we have collected as much data in the last 2 years as in the entireity of preceding human history. Half the worlds data was collected in the last two years.... We are not apparently worried about where to put it. If you want to look at bandwidth, then the London internet exchange has figures for you.... •698 member ASNs •16 new applications in 2016 •1653 connected member ports •876 member-facing 10GigE ports •62 member-facing 100GigE ports •over 3.155 Tb/sec of peak traffic •15.43 Tb of connected capacity •673 members •Members based in 66 countries LINX is the largest of the internet exchanges. More numbers.... https://stats2.linx.net/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted February 16, 2016 Author Share Posted February 16, 2016 Some thoughts for you.... When I first started seriously playing on the WWW I downloaded it all. And I do mean all - there were about 230 websites in the world and they are stored somewhere on a clutch of CD's. Wish I could lay my hands on them. That was 1992. In terms of data - we have collected as much data in the last 2 years as in the entireity of preceding human history. Half the worlds data was collected in the last two years.... We are not apparently worried about where to put it. If you want to look at bandwidth, then the London internet exchange has figures for you.... •698 member ASNs •16 new applications in 2016 •1653 connected member ports •876 member-facing 10GigE ports •62 member-facing 100GigE ports •over 3.155 Tb/sec of peak traffic •15.43 Tb of connected capacity •673 members •Members based in 66 countries LINX is the largest of the internet exchanges. More numbers.... https://stats2.linx.net/ Thank you for the stats, and obviously I wouldn't begin to dispute your interesting post. However, in a post earlier, I reminisced, or rather recalled a day when we had a nice shiny new computer with 10 gig of storage space and I remember actually saying (yes out loud) that I'd never need any more than that, as it was considered to be HUGE at the time. Now look where we are! Do you think people 'might' be saying that today too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 Only people that refuse to learn from history. ---------- Post added 16-02-2016 at 10:04 ---------- You said something ridiculous and now you are creating a strawman to get out a hole. Just accept you are wrong, move on, look in the mirror, take your right hand and slap yourself firmly round the face. You've not only wasted my time, you've wasted you're own time & the time of every single forumer who's bothered to read your trifling posts. Err, no, what I said is correct, was correct and will still be correct tomorrow. You're the one who's trying to claim that the way we search has fundamentally changed, when it clearly hasn't. ---------- Post added 16-02-2016 at 10:04 ---------- Y Just the way we search and archive information is much more sophisticated now. The bit in bold, still wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted February 16, 2016 Author Share Posted February 16, 2016 Only people that refuse to learn from history. We do it all the time in all walks of life, so why should this issue be any different? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 Thank you for the stats, and obviously I wouldn't begin to dispute your interesting post. However, in a post earlier, I reminisced, or rather recalled a day when we had a nice shiny new computer with 10 gig of storage space and I remember actually saying (yes out loud) that I'd never need any more than that, as it was considered to be HUGE at the time. Now look where we are! Do you think people 'might' be saying that today too? No I don't. In the not to distant future people won't be storing things at home, it will all be on the cloud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 Thank you for the stats, and obviously I wouldn't begin to dispute your interesting post. However, in a post earlier, I reminisced, or rather recalled a day when we had a nice shiny new computer with 10 gig of storage space and I remember actually saying (yes out loud) that I'd never need any more than that, as it was considered to be HUGE at the time. Now look where we are! Do you think people 'might' be saying that today too? I recall getting a server commissioned with a whopping big set of nine 1GB SCSI drives in a RAID array and thinking that it'd be a long time since I filled it as well. Now that was back in probably the mid 1990's as I recall. I buy 40GB movies on Bluray now and watch them in under 2 hours. It's madness lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 We do it all the time in all walks of life, so why should this issue be any different? So people will keep saying it (this is more space than we'll ever need) and they'll keep being wrong. ---------- Post added 16-02-2016 at 10:28 ---------- No I don't. In the not to distant future people won't be storing things at home, it will all be on the cloud. Only foolish people will rely on data only held in the cloud. Lose connectivity, no data, company goes bust, your data has gone as well... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 Only foolish people will rely on data only held in the cloud. Lose connectivity, no data, company goes bust, your data has gone as well... I'm talking about things like that take up the space on a hard drive such as music, movies photos etc. I just think that the days of everyone having cupboards or hard rives full of DVDs/Cds are going. I'm not even sure that in the future people will even buy their music/movies rather than subscribe to a streaming service like Apple music. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted February 16, 2016 Author Share Posted February 16, 2016 So people will keep saying it (this is more space than we'll ever need) and they'll keep being wrong. Why will they keep being wrong? Yes when I said it, I was wrong! Are 'you' saying that there will always be an infinite amount of useable storage?...Always?...Forever? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 Well infinite is a very big number, but since storage is likely to be on solid state before long, and since that's made from sand, there isn't really that big a shortage. It just depends on how fast we can make the flash memory... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now