31–40 of 53 posts
Pedantic, but the article is talking about the way we structure/organize information, not store it. When I think of the word store, I think of the physical medium. The way we organize the information is only partially related
It's always Markdown. Markdown is the best way to store information. ;)
Pedantic, but the article is talking about the way we structure/organize information, not store it. When I think of the word store, I think of the physical medium. The way we organize the information is only partially related
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not just use WARC and a program that can read them? Do archives need to be human-readable?
The thing about archives is you either parse them now or parse them later. With how much JS and other crap is served in modern social media frontends, I'm not sure WARC is the best format for archiving from them.
With WARC (and good WARC tooling like Browsetrix-crawler) you store everything HTTP the site sent.
The best way to store information depends on how you intend to use (query) it. The query itself represents information. If you can anticipate 100% of the ways in which you intend to query the information (no surprises), I'd argue there might be an ideal way to store it.
This line of thought works for storage in isolation, but does not hold up if write speed is a concern.
The best way to store information depends on how you intend to use (query) it. The query itself represents information. If you can anticipate 100% of the ways in which you intend to query the information (no surprises), I'd argue there might be an ideal way to store it.
This is exactly right, and the article is clickbait junk. Given the domain name, I was expecting something about the physics of information storage, and some interesting law of nature. Instead, the article is a bad introduction to data structures.
"No single best way", meaning "it depends."
But don't let something like literacy get in the way of a opportunity to engage in meaningless outrage.
The best way to store information depends on how you intend to use (query) it. The query itself represents information. If you can anticipate 100% of the ways in which you intend to query the information (no surprises), I'd argue there might be an ideal way to store it.
This line of thought works for storage in isolation, but does not hold up if write speed is a concern.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This line of thought works for storage in isolation, but does not hold up if write speed is a concern.
So long as (fast/optimal) real-time access to new data is not a concern, you can introduce compaction to solve both problems.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimal_binary_search_tree#Dyn...
Pedantic, but the article is talking about the way we structure/organize information, not store it. When I think of the word store, I think of the physical medium. The way we organize the information is only partially related
It's not pedantic, you are correctly using words as we understand them, and they are not. The headline needs a sharp correction. Editing jobs are in very short supply these days.
You're reducing definitions and meaning too far to make an ultimately empty point just to contribute the thread.
If social medias only contribution is language policing, then it really should die off. What a waste of resources so functional illiterate nobodies can project ego.