3 ms·

What's interesting today to people with money is not necessarily the same as what future historians and researchers will be interested in.

vlovich123 4y ago
The amount of money to require you to record your entire waking moment in full high depth video is about 6 tib / year. The cost of storing that on the commercial cloud is relatively inexpensive. Less than a few hundred a month at most. My point is that the cost is not about what people with money choose to archive, it’s that there’s a curation challenge that is the bigger financial obstacle. Storage costs might also start to skyrocket if everyone starts to record 24/7 video about their lives (already a problem for video cameras).
- tmtvl 4y ago
  Are you certain of that? If we say every waking moment in full high-def means 16 hours per day in glorious 1080p, I'd back-of-napkin that to 17 petabytes.
  - vlovich123 4y ago
    Hmm. Was I off by an order of magnitude? I took 1gib per hour which feels like a reasonable level of quality. 8760 hours per year is 8TiB per year, no? For 17 PiB you’d be using 1TiB per hour which is very very off (uncompressed video?). Is my math off somehow?
    - tmtvl 4y ago
      1GB per hour of high-def video? Which encoder are you using, that sounds really good. ...Actually, now that I am looking up some actual data it does look like many formats come in lower than I expected for an hour, though I don't know whether those formats are: A) Free to use, and B) Full HD (1920x1080, what we in the EU call HD) video losslessly compressed. My back-of-napkin mistake was looking at a random 1080 video, seeing it was 2.2GB for 24 minutes and extrapolating from there. Let's see, Apple Animation (which I don't know whether it's free, but it can compress losslessly) comes in at 597.2 GB/h of 1080p video. I can't find numbers for VP9, but it is patent-encumbered. I can't find numbers for Lagarith, but it is GPL, although as a fork of HuffYUV it's optimized for encoding speed rather than storage. Well, according to Wikipedia, lossless compression can achieve up to 12x compression, so let's call it 80GB/h (I'm back-of-napkining again, bad habit I know), so 640TB/y?

vlovich123 4y ago

The amount of money to require you to record your entire waking moment in full high depth video is about 6 tib / year. The cost of storing that on the commercial cloud is relatively inexpensive. Less than a few hundred a month at most. My point is that the cost is not about what people with money choose to archive, it’s that there’s a curation challenge that is the bigger financial obstacle. Storage costs might also start to skyrocket if everyone starts to record 24/7 video about their lives (already a problem for video cameras).

tmtvl 4y ago
Are you certain of that? If we say every waking moment in full high-def means 16 hours per day in glorious 1080p, I'd back-of-napkin that to 17 petabytes.
- vlovich123 4y ago
  Hmm. Was I off by an order of magnitude? I took 1gib per hour which feels like a reasonable level of quality. 8760 hours per year is 8TiB per year, no? For 17 PiB you’d be using 1TiB per hour which is very very off (uncompressed video?). Is my math off somehow?
  - tmtvl 4y ago
    1GB per hour of high-def video? Which encoder are you using, that sounds really good. ...Actually, now that I am looking up some actual data it does look like many formats come in lower than I expected for an hour, though I don't know whether those formats are: A) Free to use, and B) Full HD (1920x1080, what we in the EU call HD) video losslessly compressed. My back-of-napkin mistake was looking at a random 1080 video, seeing it was 2.2GB for 24 minutes and extrapolating from there. Let's see, Apple Animation (which I don't know whether it's free, but it can compress losslessly) comes in at 597.2 GB/h of 1080p video. I can't find numbers for VP9, but it is patent-encumbered. I can't find numbers for Lagarith, but it is GPL, although as a fork of HuffYUV it's optimized for encoding speed rather than storage. Well, according to Wikipedia, lossless compression can achieve up to 12x compression, so let's call it 80GB/h (I'm back-of-napkining again, bad habit I know), so 640TB/y?