It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
StarChan: The problem with your argument is the 'infinite number of times' statement, as it would presuppose an infinite number of physical media, and it is a bold claim to maintain that there will always be new physical media available. There is also a problem with constancy. Don't forget that data loss actually occurs.
In the situation where digital media ceases to be available, I don't expect computers to be available either.
avatar
StarChan: The problem with your argument is the 'infinite number of times' statement, as it would presuppose an infinite number of physical media, and it is a bold claim to maintain that there will always be new physical media available. There is also a problem with constancy. Don't forget that data loss actually occurs.
avatar
Sarang: How about having giant metal sheets where we print the code in binary under an electron microscope? Would that suffice under your data loss concerns?
It would require that whoever read that code had the key to interpret it. This is more than a theoretical problem, as systems become redundant and are replaced with new ones. It creates a need to translate one type of code into another that can be read by new media.

That said, the data loss mentioned is not 'my concern' but should be the concern of whoever adheres to a theory of infinite duplication of code.
avatar
StarChan: The problem with your argument is the 'infinite number of times' statement, as it would presuppose an infinite number of physical media, and it is a bold claim to maintain that there will always be new physical media available. There is also a problem with constancy. Don't forget that data loss actually occurs.
avatar
SirPrimalform: In the situation where digital media ceases to be available, I don't expect computers to be available either.
Then we agree, because we no longer have a situation where we need to relate to an overly generalizing theory.
Post edited April 23, 2019 by StarChan
Starchan

There is something to be said for a small amount of factories being community owned to continue to produce some parts or devices where there is still a demand. That may not be enough to satisfy a for-profit enterprise but it's enough under a not for profit.
This would help mitigate and prevent people from having to migrate from 4K to something as unnecessary as 8K.
avatar
StarChan: Then we agree, because we no longer have a situation where we need to relate to an overly generalizing theory.
And in the situation where we have no computers, the longevity of digital media becomes irrelevant. In the situation where we do have computers, there will be a supply of digital media onto which we can make 1:1 copies.

For all intents and purposes the digital data itself lasts forever. Which, I believe, was Amok's point.
avatar
StarChan: Then we agree, because we no longer have a situation where we need to relate to an overly generalizing theory.
avatar
SirPrimalform: And in the situation where we have no computers, the longevity of digital media becomes irrelevant. In the situation where we do have computers, there will be a supply of digital media onto which we can make 1:1 copies.

For all intents and purposes the digital data itself lasts forever. Which, I believe, was Amok's point.
So forever then means "forever". I'm taking notes.
avatar
Sarang: Starchan

There is something to be said for a small amount of factories being community owned to continue to produce some parts or devices where there is still a demand. That may not be enough to satisfy a for-profit enterprise but it's enough under a not for profit.
This would help mitigate and prevent people from having to migrate from 4K to something as unnecessary as 8K.
I agree. I just recently bought a vinyl record, it's awsome that they still make those.
avatar
StarChan: So forever then means "forever". I'm taking notes.
What it means is that this discussion is circular, it will also go on forever. For all intents and purposes.
avatar
StarChan: So forever then means "forever". I'm taking notes.
avatar
SirPrimalform: What it means is that this discussion is circular, it will also go on forever. For all intents and purposes.
If forever still means "forever" it will probably not last all that long.
avatar
StarChan: If forever still means "forever" it will probably not last all that long.
Forever means forever. The fact that it would end when one of us dies doesn't mean that the argument itself wouldn't go on forever. ;)
avatar
StarChan: If forever still means "forever" it will probably not last all that long.
avatar
SirPrimalform: Forever means forever.
That, at least, is circular. If not square.
avatar
CymTyr: I digressed here, but we have two potential outcomes on this path we're taking as consumers: We can either support digital only with no right of resale, or we can prolong the life of disc based systems. Your choice. They already got pc users to forget about disc drives in a lot of modern pc builds.
Both Microsoft and Sony have shown indications of bringing in resale/trade options for digital games. Microsoft stated outright they are working on a system. Sony haven't said anything official, but a year ago they did file a patent for a technology that allows the building in of an ownership portion into digital games- meaning that ownership could be transferred.

Anyway, despite having discs- the current generation has shown a huge increase in people buying digital on consoles, even higher than 50% in some markets. People are going that direction, the purpose of the Xbox SAD is simply to give people a $50 cheaper option if they only buy digital...plus there are now people that are using primarily Game Pass to play- the SAD is great for them. Yes you can buy bundles of the standard model for cheaper- when it gets out there the SAD will still be $50 cheaper than whatever the S can be sold for. And the SAD had a bigger HD as well.
avatar
Sarang: My question is will the PS5 be bc with PS3?
Sony have only confirmed PS4 backwards compatibility at this point. We don't know other than that. My guess is that emulating the PS3 is too hit and miss, they probably have something but it only works well with a few games.
Post edited April 24, 2019 by CMOT70
avatar
amok: not really, as code can be duplicated perfectly. it can just migrate from medium to medium, and if stored in cloud / online....

yes, exactly....
avatar
StarChan: Why, exactly? In case you just chose to ignore my reply to the poster you agree with, I'll repeat it here: Regardong infinite duplication, duplicated from what, and onto what? Theoretical physical media?
to anything.... it is digital and you can migrate it indefinitely to any media from any media. and keep it in the cloud, if you want
avatar
StarChan: Why, exactly? In case you just chose to ignore my reply to the poster you agree with, I'll repeat it here: Regardong infinite duplication, duplicated from what, and onto what? Theoretical physical media?
avatar
amok: to anything.... it is digital and you can migrate it indefinitely to any media from any media. and keep it in the cloud, if you want
I'm sorry but we're closed. Check previous posts.
avatar
StarChan: I'm sorry but we're closed. Check previous posts.
Hey, just because I gave up on trying to get through doesn't mean you should deny amok the chance to try. After all, you didn't believe me about forever being forever. :P
avatar
StarChan: I'm sorry but we're closed. Check previous posts.
avatar
SirPrimalform: Hey, just because I gave up on trying to get through doesn't mean you should deny amok the chance to try. After all, you didn't believe me about forever being forever. :P
I'm certain that Amok can fend for himself. But you seem all eager to be publicly humiliated once more.