Posted February 23, 2019
Wasn't it Ray Kurzweil made the comparison between earliest recorded data (epigraphy) and the Singularity through in silico artificial sentience?
Whoever is still on the planet will need to evac before the Earth careens into the Red Giant phase of our star, in about 4 billions years.
…
I have a SciAm (?) article somewheres that talks about long-term information storage (if that is the goal), e.g., for the boundary warnings of a nuclear waste dump. (Imagine a far-distant archaeologist exploring the area … without a Geiger-Müller counter).
First the design of the dump is important, with an obvious defence-in-depth approach to the most dangerous area (centrally) blah blah but the interesting bit was making symbols on stone; now limestone will erode (weather and even fungi can (slowly) eat anything, even heavy metals), so there was some messing about with (plastic? that lasts for tens of thousands of years) coating on the stone, or within the lithography, more specifically (a bit like the gold leaf on tombstones, IIRC). I would have thought possibly granite or basalt would be a better choice, but the article went with sedimentary not igneous or metamorphic.
A significant problem is how to interpret ancient marks; Linear A is still lost to modern minds, and it was only three millennia ago. (The Babylonians were using calculus to predict lunar & planetary movements, and that science was lost until the Renaissance.) You would need some sort of primer, a Rosetta stone to aid future retrievers of the data.
Whoever is still on the planet will need to evac before the Earth careens into the Red Giant phase of our star, in about 4 billions years.
…
I have a SciAm (?) article somewheres that talks about long-term information storage (if that is the goal), e.g., for the boundary warnings of a nuclear waste dump. (Imagine a far-distant archaeologist exploring the area … without a Geiger-Müller counter).
First the design of the dump is important, with an obvious defence-in-depth approach to the most dangerous area (centrally) blah blah but the interesting bit was making symbols on stone; now limestone will erode (weather and even fungi can (slowly) eat anything, even heavy metals), so there was some messing about with (plastic? that lasts for tens of thousands of years) coating on the stone, or within the lithography, more specifically (a bit like the gold leaf on tombstones, IIRC). I would have thought possibly granite or basalt would be a better choice, but the article went with sedimentary not igneous or metamorphic.
A significant problem is how to interpret ancient marks; Linear A is still lost to modern minds, and it was only three millennia ago. (The Babylonians were using calculus to predict lunar & planetary movements, and that science was lost until the Renaissance.) You would need some sort of primer, a Rosetta stone to aid future retrievers of the data.