[edmundsauto]

I've been thinking about this topic after I got married, and realized that I wanted to back up my wedding photos for 100+ years so my great-great-grandkids have the originals.

I wonder if this is a good use of blockchain technology. The company sets things up in such a way where there are resources and mechanisms to keep things running after the company collapses. Theoretically, as long as the s3 bills are paid, things keep running - the money pool pays for that, getting annual refreshes from data owners. Then money also exists for maintenance - s3 will shut down some day, but with money in escrow, developers can create proposals for maintenance that the token owners vote on.

Just a lot of hand waving away problems on my part, but I think it's an interesting question: how do people store data for 100+ years?

[imhoguy]

> how do people store data for 100+ years?

Print it.

[ROTMetro]

Don't do this. I somehow ended up with all the pictures of family going back to the 1800s. I have 5 suitcases full that I now have to scan.

Find the best representative photos, and upload them to Geni.com, Ancestry.com, MyHerritage.com, 23andme, etc. They are bound to survive from one of those sources.

[vasco]

Why don't you just pass on 6 suitcases instead of adding the risk of losing digital media. The current process has worked for your family for 200 years.

[fomine3]

Color inkjet printing wasn't a thing 50 years ago

[NateEag]

That's why you pick the best five from each year and print them in a small acid-free paper book.

You keep the gigantic digital repository as long as feasible (I burn to M-Discs), but for accessibility and long-term, pick your favorites in a way we have good reason to think can last for hundreds of years.

[soperj]

> print them in a small acid-free paper book

any good recommendations for printers?

[NateEag]

Shutterfly's interface is (was? been a while) kind of painful, but we've gotten good results from them.

Chatbooks makes it fairly brainlessly easy to produce books regularly (and had a hilarious ad a few years back focusing on the ease of use compared to other options: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mF2eKaOc3wo).

I can't swear to the longevity of the books - I never dug into the details of how they're printed, because I'm not especially concerned about making sure they last a hundred years.

It's the right strategy in principle, though, if that is your goal.

[AnimalMuppet]

On acid-free paper.

[edmundsauto]

I disagree - digital is the only route. Printouts will get lost, bent, fires, floods, and lost.

The broader idea that I find interesting however is how to preserve digital content for > 100 years. It's okay if other people don't care about that - I do, and I think it's an interesting set of problem constraints, and was just wondering if anyone else has thought about it.

It's difficult to suggest an actual use case for blockchain, and I am far from an expert, but I think this could be an interesting innovative options for actually using distributed databases to control assets and make collective decisions in a decentralized fashion.

[eurasiantiger]

Looking at 200 year old photos is easy.

Trying to find hardware to access a 30 year old hard drive is not.

[courgette]

In a decent box.

[aaronbrethorst]

With archival quality pigment inks

https://keithdotson.com/blogs/news/how-long-will-your-photog...

[vermilingua]

Do you have any insight on whether NeverTear would be good media for long-term archival? Waterproof and damage resistant is a big plus, but I wonder if they come at the cost of pigmant durability.

[aaronbrethorst]

I can’t say for sure. I’ve never used the product you mention, but it is made out of polyester, which is supposed to be great for archival purposes. So…probably yes?

[random_kris]

Arweave