On 20/09/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 9/20/06, Delirium delirium@hackish.org wrote:
I guess as a reader I don't see the benefit in *not* covering everything. I agree there is a slant towards more coverage of recent news events, but that's simply because they're easier to cover. The solution, IMO, is not to cover recent events less, but to cover older events more. I want to know the equivalent of this stuff for other time periods! Were there short-lived but at the time massively-covered events in the 1890s, equivalent to today's frenzies over child kidnappings? What about the thousands of political scandals, major and minor, that have at various times shortened governments' tenures, forced cabinet reshuffles, etc., etc.? It's all good info we're missing!
Problem is that a lot of the data that would be useful in answering your question is stored on microfilm and there isn't really a quick way to scan that.
It'll come, it'll come. Dumping everything onto disk scans in the first instance. Just under two years doubling time. You won't be *able* to buy a disk smaller than a petabyte in twenty years.
(Googling "hard disk" "moore's law" leads me to [[Moore's Law]], which points me to [[Kryder's Law]], which is a useful study in hideous self-reference and Wikipedia editorial decisions forming neologisms. I'm so glad [[analogue disc record]] was moved before achieving any currency anywhere else.)
- d.