Posted by Gene on 02/09/07 23:40

Sorry if I confused you with someone else:-)

Thanks, I agree with everything you said, except that
by keeping the original tapes in 100gt ice coolers inside
the house, and burning them to DVD-Rs, gives me a
random access library that allows me to go to specific
DVD-Rs & copy off a clip. This is a nightmare with the tapes
in the storage coolers. It is SO much easier having a numbered
and dated DVD dup library - even with a lower quality product.
In my case, I will have the tapes in coolers, as well as DVDs
to copy & use. The previous thread had to do with uploading
the copies to my ISP, etc. - vs. making DVD copies at home.

My current tapings are going to only DVDs, that is, I'm converting
MiniDv tapes directly to DVD-Rs via firewire. I then rewind the tape
and use it again & again. I may ultimately regret this. However,
my plan is to use an automated DVD burner at the first sight of
DVD deterioration. At present, I have not seen, or heard of, anyone
having a problem with the coatings, etc. of the earlier DVDs. I am of
the opinion that the coatings are of superior quality today - but really
will not know until folks start having decay problems. Everything seems to
be theory & speculation as of today. I have not talked to anyone that
says that their DVD collection is going bad. If my DVDs make it 5 or so
years, I'm ahead of the game. Considering what I'm saving by using high
quality DVDs, and not buying & storing MiniDV tapes - I can just hire
someone to make me DVD dupes every 5 years or so. :-) Additionally,
I can go directly to a clip on the random access DVDs - which is a real
pain with archived tapes. Like I said, I may regret just keeping two copies
on DVD-R, with no tape backup. Only time will tell. I have only one real
worry at present, and that's not keeping the data in AVI, vs VOBs.
This may come back to haunt me. I'm betting that we will see good software
in the future that will reconstruct the VOBs to near AVI
quality - again, time will tell.

Gene




"Richard Crowley" <rcrowley@xp7rt.net> wrote in message
news:534arlF1rajt8U1@mid.individual.net...
> "Gene" wrote ...
>> Sorry, I REALLY am not trying to be argumentative - I just
>> do not understand what you are saying.
>>
>> I do not think you fully understand the history of the internet,
>> or how it is currently structured. The internet was initially
>> funded to send a message (in parts) via telephone line
>> links so that it would be secure.
>
> I was there. I worked in the scientific computing center
> of a university which had a link to the original ARPA net.
> The network did not use "telephone lines". It used very
> expensive data lines. There were no "modems" at the
> time except very slow (55-110 baud) things for teletypes.
>
> The network was not secure, either. Unless the sender
> explicitly encrypted something anybody could read any
> of the traffic. The "internet" came several years after
> this experimental network, and is no more "secure" today.
>
>> The internet is nothing more than a lot of computers connected together
>> via telephone & other links. My ISP is one, your ISP is one, if I had an
>> old PC in my back room connected to the internet, it would be a node.
>> The nodes usually have hard drives attached, some have tape drive
>> backup(s), there are a lot of data storage possibilities.
>
> There are NO data storage possibilities unless you
> explicitly arrange for them yourself.
>
>> When I hit return on THIS text message, it will go to my ISP, and from
>> there "who knows" where it will be routed.
>
> It went to sisna.com's NNTP server which has peering
> arrangements with other NNTP servers which have
> peering arrangements with yet other NNTP servers.
> Within seconds (or minutes?), it ended up at the NNTP
> server I subscribe to and I was able to read it.
>
>> If I am not mistaken, they still break up this text message into at least
>> two parts, for security. THIS text message will be spread over the
>> internet, in pieces - who knows where. However, it will eventually be
>> patched back together and displayed in this newsgroup as a string of
>> text.
>
> NNTP (Network News Transport Protocol) is essentially
> an ancient (pre-"internet") voluntary, peer-to-peer
> message sharing system that was developed back in
> the days of ARPA/DARPA. Messages may be broken up
> into packets (as all internet traffic is), but not for security
> purposes. Indeed there is NO security for NNTP news
> postings unless you personally encrypt it before you
> send it. Messages are not "broken in half for security"
> except in espionage fiction.
>
>> Bits and pieces of THIS text message may remain on certain nodes for some
>> time - never looked into how long each node retains said pieces.
>
> NNTP servers may retain messages for as long (or short)
> as they wish. There are no requirements at all. Some
> (like Google) retain them "forever" as an archive. Others
> may keep them around for only a few minutes hours.
> I doubt that many of them deal with "pieces" of messges.
>
>> What I "thought" you initially suggested was that I place my family A/V
>> data onto the internet as a better solution to my burning the MiniDV
>> tapes onto DVD-Rs at my home for permanent storage.
>
> It must have been someone else who suggested "internet
> storage". The idea sounds daft to me.
>
> It certainly could have been me that said that I have ZERO
> faith in field-burnable optical disks as any kind of "archival"
> storage medium. I have no more faith in hard drives for
> "archival" storage. My only faith is in digital mag tape.
>
>> If I placed my camcorder data on the internet, (other than FTP it to some
>> place like my ISP or other computer) then it would be scattered all over
>> the USA and possibly the world.
>
> The "internet" is only a transport medium. The "internet"
> does not "store" anything except for a few seconds during
> transport.
>
>> How would you ever retrieve the pieces tomorrow, let alone 20 years from
>> now? My A/V data would presumably make it to a final destination, like
>> my ISP's hard drive(s), etc.,
>
> If you actually wrote data to your ISP's hard drives.
>
> You can't "place data on the internet" any more than you
> can just "send a letter" They both need an explicit destination.
> In the case of our Usenet postings, the explicit destination
> was our respective NNTP providers new servers. The news
> servers then shared the messages with all the other NNTP
> servers on the planet.
>
>>or some company that provides storage space.
>
> Yes, indeed, there are providers on the internet who
> will store data for you. Some will allow you to share
> still and even video images with your friends (or even
> with the planet). Some just provide raw disk space
> for you to use as backup, or transfer or whatever.
> Some provide automated backup service where they
> will back up data of your choice over the internet to
> their servers. They then provide a way of retreiving
> those files back. But the "internet" is only the connection
> between you and them.
>
>> All of the packet data on the internet would eventually be erased, except
>> for the data at the final destination.
>
> Within seconds.
>
>> There is no enormous storage space out there called the www or internet,
>> or whatever that permanently stores your data for 20 years.
>
> Exactly.
>
>> Your data goes to a storage device, presumably at your ISP, or other
>> computer that you choose. There, it gets archived onto disk, tape, or
>> whatever storage media for storing for the 20 years. It would have to be
>> stored on random access media to be easily down-
>> ded for your use, else you would have to send in a request for certain
>> data to be copied from your archive tape to hard drive, so you could
>> download a video clip.
>
> This only happens if you pay some particular provider (your
> ISP, some backup provider) explicitly for this service. This
> is not some automatic mechanism that happens "on the
> internet".
>
>> I do not believe that any company can stay in business providing 1GB of
>> data storage for 20 years for a total of $0.06/USD, which is my current
>> cost to burn a high quality DVD-R at my home.
>
> INHO, your 25-cent DVD will be mush in 20 years and you
> will have wasted your time making the disks, and then be
> dissapointed (or devestated) when you can't read them.
>
> OTOH, I guarantee that if you keep your DV tapes cool,
> dry, and away from strong magnetic fields, the bits will
> be recoverable in 20 years sufficiently well for the DV
> error detection/correction mechanism to function well.
>
>> Sorry if I misunderstood what you were initially suggesting,
>> I'm really confused by your comments.
>
> You may have confused which remarks came from who.
> I agree with you that there is currently no inexpensive
> vendor of bulk (> a few GB) archival storage online.
>
> However, the notion that field-burnable optical discs are
> "archival" is just silly IMHO. Sure, I have a lot of data
> archived to CDR and DVDR, but I re-write them to new
> discs every 2-3 years. If ANY CDR or DVDR discs from
> today are readable in 20 years, I will be very pleasantly
> surprised.
>
>> Hmmmm - I'm not sure if FTP breaks the data into packets or not? I just
>> assumed that it was packets
>> too, just never thought ~ it until today:-)
>> Academic, but anyone know?
>
> ALL network traffic is broken up into packets. That is
> how "the internet" (or even your home LAN) manages
> to handle everyone's traffic at the same time. Some
> small messages fit within a single packet. Most don't.
>

[Back to original message]