Photos not seen by humans again, but plenty of value for the AI overlords to examine. These things have value again.
Didn't Facebook start to move most of their least-used data onto optical arrays a long time ago?
Data centers contain 90% crap data
21–30 of 146 posts
Re: Data centers contain 90% crap data
#22> One organization I knew of had 1,500 terabytes of data, with less than 2% ever having been accessed after it was first stored. On a related note, probably a similar percentage of people claim on their car insurance. If only the rest realised they had "crap insurance" and were paying for nothing, they could save so much money! This is obviously sarcasm, but I think it's important to remember that much of the data is…
I have ~2.5TB of photos in iCloud, via Apple Photos. Excluding the various sized previews, I doubt many originals have been accessed in quite a while. I also have about 1TB Lightroom library archived to a different service; representing countless hours of photo processing work spanning over a decade. Haven’t touched that one in years. Neither are crap. (Yes, both have other backups and, yes, I’ve probably forgotten to sync one of them).
Re: Data centers contain 90% crap data
#23[dead]
Re: Data centers contain 90% crap data
#24Storage being cheap enough that it's not worth policing doesn't seem very consistent with it being expensive enough to include much energy use (what I assume the "destroying the environment" hyperbole is referencing).
Re: Data centers contain 90% crap data
#25> One organization I knew of had 1,500 terabytes of data, with less than 2% ever having been accessed after it was first stored. On a related note, probably a similar percentage of people claim on their car insurance. If only the rest realised they had "crap insurance" and were paying for nothing, they could save so much money! This is obviously sarcasm, but I think it's important to remember that much of the data is…
I have ~2.5TB of photos in iCloud, via Apple Photos. Excluding the various sized previews, I doubt many originals have been accessed in quite a while. I also have about 1TB Lightroom library archived to a different service; representing countless hours of photo processing work spanning over a decade. Haven’t touched that one in years. Neither are crap. (Yes, both have other backups and, yes, I’ve probably forgotten t…
Crap is in the eye of the beholder...
Re: Data centers contain 90% crap data
#26> Having to deal with senior managers has always been the most unsavory part of my job, because when it comes to technology, these managers exist on a whole other level of stupid vanity and narcissistic pursuit of their own selfish agendas.
Whoever sent this dude made a mistake. People who don't share your worldview need to be persuaded, not insulted! Some dude stomps in, thinks all the snaps in the cloud are crap, things the big bosses are stupid for not instantly deleting the pictures they saved into the cloud.... and then what? Download Lisp? Thought we got over this, pal.
WORSE IS BETTER.
P.S. do not erase our porn. WORSE IS BETTER.
Re: Data centers contain 90% crap data
#27> One organization I knew of had 1,500 terabytes of data, with less than 2% ever having been accessed after it was first stored. On a related note, probably a similar percentage of people claim on their car insurance. If only the rest realised they had "crap insurance" and were paying for nothing, they could save so much money! This is obviously sarcasm, but I think it's important to remember that much of the data is…
This is exactly the problem. Consider an order processing system that processes a million orders a day, and retains them for ninety days. What percentage of those 89-day-old orders are actually needed at 89 days old? It could be quite low, maybe a couple thousand out of a million.
But if those orders aren't there, shit hits the fan. PCI compliance audits fail. The ability for customers to reconcile their charges with their purchases breaks. In that 0.01% of cases where the order was fraudulent, placed by mistake, or just didn't have what the customer thought it had in it, not having that data makes the order processor read as, if not malicious, at least incompetent.
The real question is, how much data do we need to store inefficiently, in a way that uses a lot of power and space?
Re: Data centers contain 90% crap data
#28Isn't this just a specific case of sturgeons law? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon%27s_law
Yeah it seems like Sturgeon's law combined with a bit of Pareto principle.
Re: Data centers contain 90% crap data
#29Make the cost of operating data centers reflect the damage to the environment and see how quickly people optimize. I don’t know how damaging storage is, but that’s the only way to make a difference.
Re: Data centers contain 90% crap data
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's probably deduplicated on the server though, so the millions and millions of messages with that logo likely share the same piece of disk space. Probably one reason why free providers don't tend to offer End-to-End encryption. It prevents deduplication (and otherwise compressing redundant information).
Nope. Back in the day Exchange offered SIS but in 2010 they ditched it. It's plainly not effective any more. Even regarding the OP' "the jpg signature logo" - it's a part of multipart in the message, not a separate file. And one more thing - you can't just turn the dedup and be dandy, now you need to check against the hashes to determine if this chunk is unique or you already have it. And with TBs of data you need TB…
Not sure about Microsoft solutions, but modern file systems like zfs and btrfs can do this on the filesystem level, no support from the mail server needed.