|
Very long term data backup | by SnArL | 2008-08-27 07:43:42 |
|
Very cool, but I wish they hadn't used Genesis | by Arachnid | 2008-08-27 08:19:16 |
|
I suspect it was for that reason it was chosen. | by SaylorA | 2008-08-27 08:23:53 |
|
The disk itself is the reference, though. | by Arachnid | 2008-08-27 08:25:56 |
|
Ah, but we did need the text as a reference. | by SaylorA | 2008-08-27 08:29:49 |
|
I'm reading it now, and I see no mention | by Arachnid | 2008-08-27 08:34:39 |
|
I misinterpreted what you said. You are correct | by SaylorA | 2008-08-27 08:48:04 |
|
Given the number of copies of the bible around | by Arachnid | 2008-08-27 08:52:00 |
| The goal is not to represent ourselves, but |
by SaylorA |
2008-08-27 08:58:33 |
| to save the languages. For centuries no one could understand hieroglyphics though we had thousands of examples. Not until the Rosetta Stone could it be done. These disks are trying to prevent a loss of human knowledge by making sure future generations can understand our current writings. |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
But like it or not, it'll do both. | by Arachnid | 2008-08-27 09:05:00 |
|
Yes the choice could impart some unintended | by SaylorA | 2008-08-27 09:11:19 |
|
It's still a significant choice. | by Arachnid | 2008-08-27 09:13:37 |
|
Significant in what respect, though? | by MatthewDBA | 2008-08-27 09:28:00 |
|
Or, the reaction could be... | by bitflipper | 2008-08-27 09:47:45 |
|
Consider, though, | by dodrian | 2008-08-27 09:58:22 |