I'm a bit turned off by the "humanity's needs" for storage in this article, where humanity would probably be more respected in an environment where longer term storage would be scarcer and curated. Hovering up every byte ever produced and storing it forever undoubtedly serves someone's [n|gr]eed, but it ain't "humanity's".
What on earth do you mean? Yes, MS is of course a for-profit company, but the long-term storage situation in academia alone is dire. I know from experience that most research data at my university exist as a single copy on a single external hard drive in a drawer (with a partial disorganised copy currently in processing on a laptop drive somewhere). This may be anything from the only records of a now dead language, or medical research data. Add to this that many seem to "forget" their data when it has been published on. Archiving is a contract with future generations and we are horribly prepared. The storage medium of the rosetta stone, handily beats the flimsy, digital solutions the vast majority use. Or did I completely misunderstand your point?