4 ms·

I doubt it but it would be an irony if it were not digitized.

• Viper007Bond 9y ago
  It wasn't.
• cm2187 9y ago
  Which to me is the main story. Document scanners are really fast nowadays, they could have lined up a few of them, hired some temp worker, and it could possibly have taken them just a week to scan the whole thing with a modest budget. We should really do that with any paper archives and books that matter. The physical document usually doesn't have much value, outside of some really ancient documents. The content has. Digitizing also makes it more accessible and searchable. Countries must be sitting on massive archives of paper documents.
  • LeifCarrotson 9y ago
    > Countries must be sitting on massive archives of paper documents. Which are currently safely in locked rooms. If they're digitized, they become much less likely to stay private in the hands of most government contractors. I agree that they should be digitizing this content, but they also need to work on establishing basic competency in securing it once it's digitized. Also, in preserving it - it's easier to just leave documents intact in a long row of boxes and file cabinets than it is to dispose of them, but it takes effort and maintenance to keep them alive on hard drives.
    • cm2187 9y ago
      Locked room or some dodgy basements. I remember watching a documentary many years ago on the transfer of the archives of the french republic where many were lost to rats and other fungus. But I agree with your point that if we scan anything confidential, it will need to be stored in a lock room very much in the same way than the paper originals (as opposed to anything connected to the internet). But it will still be easier to have multiple copies in multiple locations.