It's like the burning of the Library of Alexandria all over again.
We don't know exactly what was in the library when it burned. We assume it was all great works of intellectualism, but it could very well have been the fanfics of their time.
We don't know exactly what was in the library when it burned. We assume it was all great works of intellectualism, but it could very well have been the fanfics of their time.
- https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2010/06/the-perni...
- https://www.ancientworldmagazine.com/articles/making-myth-li...
- https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/677/what-knowled...
But anyway, no one should delete human littérature, be it inadvertently or by lack of effort.
If anything this would make the analogy even more apt, since only part of Yahoo is being destroyed. :)
Regardless, it's mostly used as a metaphor for the destruction of knowledge at this point.
You don't have to be a Christian apologist to think that it's important for people understand history correctly.
Just looking at the third link, the most upvoted answer agrees that humanity suffered a significant loss of important information. And the 'myth' is just an asinine distinction regarding whether loss was due literally due to fire, or whether the information was lost due to some other cause. I think declaring it a myth in a conversation like this misses the point (it certainly isn't a distinction relevant to the original comparison made here to Yahoo Groups) and just serves to confuse people.
2000 years ago, as a civilization, even if we failed to care enough for the Works stored in the Library, their loss would not have happened if access was not limited, which would have helped in their dissemination and issuing of copies.
Today, as a civilization, if we fail to implement to right process to backup on time what matters to us, we will repeat the same errors as our ancestors.
I guess many historians today would prefer to see those non-existent backups of the Alexandria Library rather than those of Yahoo Groups, but who knows what is more important after all ;)
Their whole Library would probably fit even on a smallest now-available sd card.
https://gizmodo.com/ken-m-is-the-most-epic-troll-on-the-inte...
Not sure why this one kills me so much...
The default corporate posture will be : Delete all the data! It's a liability and figuring out what we can keep is an enormous headache.
That attitude will create a problem - a.k.a. opportunity - for others to come in and solve. Google got rich by scraping the internet and solving the headache of how to find decent content. If there's value in some of this data headed to the dump, it gives a chance for someone to do the same. Who knows, they might even find a way to do in a privacy-respecting manner.
Jury's out on whether it was the right one.
There's a reason why when security is deemed important, the storage is physically destroyed instead.
Will a judge that is clueless about how computers really work consider that as a GDPR violation or not ? As deliberate or not ?