3 ms·
An archive that takes 30 years to write... What would you write it from?
by thomastjeffery 3y ago
An archive that takes 30 years to write... What would you write it from?
- nine_k 3y agoAny constant stream of data, from seismographs and radio telescopes to surveillance cameras.
- thomastjeffery 3y agoYou have 1GB/sec of that in one place?
- toast0 3y agoWould be useful if you wanted to archive many tv stations at once (and never actually go back to watch them)
- nine_k 3y agoOr maybe go back to them in a rare case, like a criminal case investigation.
- AussieWog93 3y agoThat's what I was thinking. Like the BBC archives. Who really cares if it takes 6 months to unarchive an entire decade of TV history?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- magicalhippo 3y agoCHIME telescope has a raw data rate of 1PB/day[1], or roughly 11GB/s. They use three levels of on-site processing since they can't store that much data. The LHC had a data rate of over 40TB/s and even after the low-level triggers of over 100GB/s back in 2016[2]. Again they're forced to throw away most of it due to lack of storage. This means someone looking for a novel signal can't just scan through the archives. I'm sure science instrument groups like the ones mentioned would have loved to be able to store more data. [1]: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-4357/aad188 https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-4357/aad188 [2]: https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/full/10.1146/annurev-nucl-102115-044713 https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/full/10.1146/annurev-nucl-...
- Already__Taken 3y agoradio telescope arrays can probably pull that much.