As a History major, the idea of not digitizing archives fills me with dread. How much knowledge have we lost to fires, war, floods, pests? How many libraries have been burned down in Syria in the past five years? How much of their knowledge is lost forever because it wasn't digitized? Also, what kind of archive lets users actually touch the physical document directly to "feel the texture"? Cos if people are using their greasy fingers to hold papers that are centuries old, let me tell you those documents won't have a very long life, and THEN you'll regret not investing time on digitizing. I do love her voice though, I wish she made more videos like this ETA: Also, "a digital image is often black and white and not very detailed"???' This video is from 3 years ago, but it seems she's living 15 years ago. You can get a full color, good quality image with regular office equipment.
Lia Tsukishima You make a good point re Syria losing undigitized historical documents. I think about all of the great TV movies I recorded on beta and VHS tapes that are now lost forever because that technology dead ended. So if we lose paper documents AND we lose digitized documents, maybe that’s the way the universe planned it.😁
It's not like it's impossible to convert Beta and VHS to DVD. Even in my neighborhood there was a shop that would do that for fairly cheap. Information on floppy disks can be transfered to contemporary mediums too unless the disk itself is damaged. Digital is a very flexible backup that is way easier to preserve than the physical item. They don't even HAVE to make it accessible to the public, just have a backup in case something happens and their invaluable historical documents aren't lost forever
Lia Tsukishima I may be as outdated as she is but in the 1980’s at the university I worked at, our research papers were done on our first PC (which had a 640 gb memory) and saved on 5” floppy disks then later 3” floppy disks. As we moved offices, the hard copies moved with us and the floppies went in the garbage. The technology to convert didn’t exist and we had no idea that it would ever be “Invented”. We were in the business of pursuing new research - not archiving the old.
I think that's completely unrelated though. Your old research wasn't lost because the technology was unsavageable, but because you chose to dispose of it. The data on those floppy disks could've easily been copied to a hard drive or a CD-Rom. The technology itself is not an obstacle to conservation, nor does upgrading to newer technology require huge knowledge or amount of work. And in the case of historical archives, I'd say the work is worth it for the sake of having a backup of the documents in case a disaster happens and the originals get damaged or lost. And I don't expect her originals to have super long lives given how she handles the one in 1:12 -bare fingers, paper unprotected and folded, no regards for its existing damage
Lia Tsukishima you are speaking of the technology from the perspective of 2018 and I’m guessing you are a young person who has grown up with computer technology. The 1980s were different to now and computer technology was in its infancy. We struggled with word processing software that frequently mixed up our input and even deleted sections that we didn’t ask it to. We had to carefully proofread everything not just for the accuracy of our research but also to ensure that the software wasn’t screwing up. Technology was not what it is today. We were research scientists, specialized in our own fields, not computer techs and there were few people, even in the university, who had ANY understanding of computers so “technical support” was nonexistent. So by today’s standards, to change from floppy disks to CD-roms may be a simple process. Not so then. As I said previously, we had no idea that technology would one day be invented that would make conversion from one medium to another possible. It’s a different world.
The channel this is taken from seems to have made most of their videos in around 2003, then uploaded them a couple of years ago. So perhaps the arguments for not digitising historical documents are less compelling now than they were when this video was recorded.
I watch these things to relax, but if only she knew what technologies we would have for her “indexing” and “accessibility” through digitization of the texts. Her voice is so relaxing, but her words make me so fired up. What a rollercoaster of emotions...
EthnoCentrist I don’t think it’s about their *intention*. I think it has to do with real authenticity as opposed to contrived ASMR. That’s simply my opinion however. 🤔 Don’t get me wrong, I still watch the contrived or should I say “premeditated “ ASMR, I just respond better to the real deal.☺️🤤
She’s using that voice we all use in our heads when we’re alone, pottering around the house, practising an answer for a question we’ve never been asked but wish someone would.
As someone who worked for a company that specialized in digitizing physical documents, this lady has a wild idea of what digitizing files is like lmao it’s not nearly as complicated as she’s making it out to be
The argument could be made in the reverse as well. You need people, money, space, time and equiment to maintain physical documents. And then there's the potential of those documents being destroyed forever. Digitizing is a monumental task, but well worth it. I'd rather have multiple ways and sources of viewing said document. Instead of one, which takes time, money, and people just to retrieve and view it.
For whom? If no one touches it what does it matter if we keep it? Obviously there’s a balance here, but the idea of information for the public and not just specialists is one that were rapidly losing
@@tehamill1 it doesn't matter if we keep it, because it will disintegrate one day, which is why we must digitize. Isis destroyed ancient cities, we cannot undo that but we have them well photographed at least
Relaxing, but she's just scared of digitization. Digitization is the greatest thing to ever happen to data storage. You can, quite literally, immortalise data these days. Even the average layperson can do it. No, its not the same as looking at the original document, but it doesn't replace it either.
The average layperson can scan a few things, but when you scale up to the size of a major university archive... they can't. You need massive storage and metadata standards to make anything findable. If you can't find it you may as well never have scanned it.
No, that's not the case. If you have the time to read it, you have the time to digitise and archive it. There's no reason not to digitise every data resource you use. Archiving digital data is infinitely easier, and faster, than archiving physical copies. Just because you have finished archiving one format, doesn't mean you shouldn't start doing another. If you think 100 terabytes of solid-state digital storage is expensive, compare it to how much the real estate to store that physically costs.
If you think 100 TB is enough to even begin touching a single university archive, you just don't have a clue. Also, you still need the real estate for originals plus data center. I'm not saying digitization shouldn't happen, only that laypeople just don't have the technical chops to make it happen.
This. Also Universities, and organisations dedicated to archiving in whatever form, are already struggling with underfunding and poor decision-making about the best way to use that money from governing bodies. It's not a case of just scanning everything in, there are strict rules about transferring documentation onto the internet. They just don't have the resources to check the copyright of everything in there and navigate the long and dreary process of getting that copyright, just so that a full comprehensive list of the divorces that happened in Kent over the last fifty years can sit on the internet with nobody giving a shit about them. Digitisation is great, but it should be saved for stuff that people actually might want to access that would be worth the time and money doing not just 'everything'.
@@backtothebooks9201 being digitally stored and being on the internet are two completely different things. An archive of this nature stored digitally should not be publicly accessible.
I half-agree with her. It is much more satisfying to be able to hold an old or ancient document, much like it feels to hold a book instead of just buying one through a phone or tablet and scrolling page-by-page. But only a minority of people will ever have access to them, so yes, they should be made digital, but they should also stay as they are now as well for that privileged few that can see them. But putting them in harms way out of pride is just silly. It's not worth possibly losing that information.
I think that a lot of what she's saying is that it's usually not worth the cost to digitize e v e r y t h i n g in the archive as well. Personally I think a case-by-case basis would be good. If a researcher or someone else needs to read a document but either can't physically get to the archive or would like a copy, I think having the ability to digitize would be helpful; but transitioning the main storage of archives to digital is not the right answer. She brings a few good points beyond how it's good to be in the physical presence of the texts. Namely, that 1. They are the original. They are artifacts and are always going to have precedent over digital recreations, thinking of them as, say, a work of art or a museum artifact. and 2. Digital forms of storage are often just as if not more volatile than physical ones. Technologies change, an emp pulse or a hack or a server malfunction or a sledgehammer to a computer could destroy all these digital recreations. Digitization is helpful, but personally, and respectfully of course, I think physical preservation should stay a priority. My... maybe a bit more than 2 cents. haha
She refers to digitized documents as "images" however with text recogniziton technology these images can be converted in to information which can be stored, manipulated and displayed very easily. Also, there's very inexpensive technology available to get the images required for tdoing this. It need not be a supremely quality image, but just enough for the recogniztion software to do its job. This would preserve the documents information for all time.
Not really. Read up on Long term preservation (OAIS-Standard etc.). It is quite a huge task for archives. Also images with ocr are normally saved as PDF/A in archival context. As an image just in tiff or PNG format.
As someone who was been using Tolkien's annotated map for nearly 6 months before I found a digitized version with typed writing. I was amazed at what details I missed simply because I hadn't spent enough time studying his hand writing to correctly see what was written. Someone who had was able to read it and put into a standard print. The Rosetta Stone is a prime example of what happens when someone who has the knowledge to teach future generations is capable of making it accessible to future generations.
A £60 EPSON printer/scanner will scan high res documentation at 300dpi with detailed colour spaces. You can have a small staff team who digitize the entire archive over a couple of years. You can transfer data to newer technologies over time. The thing is no one can escape technological advancement, the simplest of software ever written can organise and specialise searches far more efficiently than any human being.
@Johannes Liechtenauer You don't seem to understand what digital is. Copying something digital even billions of times absolutely does not and will not degrade. Digital is binary bits of information represented in clusters of ones and zeros. Each bit is represented as either an "on or off". It can be copied to infinity. Digital is logical data.
I’m unintentionally learning about archiving through this unintentional ASMR video.😃🤔 I, first, stumbled upon this video because of the ASMR, but finished it with soooo much more! Lol 😆👏🏽
Yet by avoiding the sun, she has avoided sagging skin and age spots. Ultraviolet radiation being the main cause of skin aging. Vampires are known for their long lifespans and appearance of eternal youth.
Redfield 100% Thanks for the laugh, I am Canadian, but was named after Prince Philip, I am not actually certain as to how the name relates to archival processes, but I will accept it.
I'm on the fence here. There is a strong case for the preservation of physical artefacts, and it's the same for paintings in museums. There really is a difference in how objects make you feel when you're with them, and everybody reading this knows I'm right even if we're not eloquent enough to explain why. However, we're getting to the point where we're not even creating physical documents anymore. So digital archiving will have to exist if we want to retain information at all. And if we're doing that anyway..no reason to not digitise physical media too.
Love that people dont realize that she is just simply laying out the tedium present in changing the format of hundreds of millions of documents. Doesnt matter if they are MP4s or floppy discs
I love her voice, however what she's describing are mostly immediate costs to a long-term benefit. I read another comment that she's clinging to her job, and I think that's pretty evident.
@Ouro Boros As someone with little knowledge on this topic I agree with you here. Everything can be edited, manipulated, changed, removed so easily, I mean people are getting statues removed and everything it's not like digital media would be safe at all.
The comment section on this video is pure gold. I used to be a Records & Information Management Assistant. She speaks like the engineers I used to deal with "You won't make me use your system". Then you go to their desk and you understand why valuable records are lost. The CHAOS at their desks!! smh Embrace change guys. Don't be scared.
The thing for me about changing storage formats is that, yes this is true, evolving storage mediums could have caused issues, but that seems to have resolved itself at this point. It doesn't get much simpler to store than literally non-existent, and updating things like Hard Drives to SSD is as simple as drag and drop. Albeit, we may not know what comes after that, but I doubt it'll be much more difficult.
"Disks" is one of those ASMR words where the S's are too close together, but that is a good thing. Like "crisps". If you whisper it, it sounds wrong, but the wrongness is ASMR in itself.
This lady is a size queen: "I can speak about my job at length (goes wide eyed)... Size matters... First of all you have to consider the shape and the size..."
Just before my last move, I looked in to digitizing my library. If you're willing to sacrifice the books, it's quite easy. You get an industrial guillotine, chop the pages out of the book, and feed them into an auto-digitizer. Each book would only take 2-3 minutes, and there are all sorts of programs to help you organize and read your books. I couldn't bring myself to do it, though. I love my paper books.
I actually would probably have asked her that question if I knew about her work, to be perfectly honest, since I've handled and organized thousands of documents dating back years for nonprofits before. It takes a lot of time and I would be interested if they had any steps in place to start (or continue) that process.
*This is the most relaxing rant ever*
Haha, that would have been a better title!
As a History major, the idea of not digitizing archives fills me with dread. How much knowledge have we lost to fires, war, floods, pests? How many libraries have been burned down in Syria in the past five years? How much of their knowledge is lost forever because it wasn't digitized? Also, what kind of archive lets users actually touch the physical document directly to "feel the texture"? Cos if people are using their greasy fingers to hold papers that are centuries old, let me tell you those documents won't have a very long life, and THEN you'll regret not investing time on digitizing. I do love her voice though, I wish she made more videos like this
ETA: Also, "a digital image is often black and white and not very detailed"???' This video is from 3 years ago, but it seems she's living 15 years ago. You can get a full color, good quality image with regular office equipment.
Lia Tsukishima You make a good point re Syria losing undigitized historical documents. I think about all of the great TV movies I recorded on beta and VHS tapes that are now lost forever because that technology dead ended. So if we lose paper documents AND we lose digitized documents, maybe that’s the way the universe planned it.😁
It's not like it's impossible to convert Beta and VHS to DVD. Even in my neighborhood there was a shop that would do that for fairly cheap. Information on floppy disks can be transfered to contemporary mediums too unless the disk itself is damaged. Digital is a very flexible backup that is way easier to preserve than the physical item. They don't even HAVE to make it accessible to the public, just have a backup in case something happens and their invaluable historical documents aren't lost forever
Lia Tsukishima I may be as outdated as she is but in the 1980’s at the university I worked at, our research papers were done on our first PC (which had a 640 gb memory) and saved on 5” floppy disks then later 3” floppy disks. As we moved offices, the hard copies moved with us and the floppies went in the garbage. The technology to convert didn’t exist and we had no idea that it would ever be “Invented”. We were in the business of pursuing new research - not archiving the old.
I think that's completely unrelated though. Your old research wasn't lost because the technology was unsavageable, but because you chose to dispose of it. The data on those floppy disks could've easily been copied to a hard drive or a CD-Rom. The technology itself is not an obstacle to conservation, nor does upgrading to newer technology require huge knowledge or amount of work. And in the case of historical archives, I'd say the work is worth it for the sake of having a backup of the documents in case a disaster happens and the originals get damaged or lost. And I don't expect her originals to have super long lives given how she handles the one in 1:12 -bare fingers, paper unprotected and folded, no regards for its existing damage
Lia Tsukishima you are speaking of the technology from the perspective of 2018 and I’m guessing you are a young person who has grown up with computer technology. The 1980s were different to now and computer technology was in its infancy. We struggled with word processing software that frequently mixed up our input and even deleted sections that we didn’t ask it to. We had to carefully proofread everything not just for the accuracy of our research but also to ensure that the software wasn’t screwing up. Technology was not what it is today. We were research scientists, specialized in our own fields, not computer techs and there were few people, even in the university, who had ANY understanding of computers so “technical support” was nonexistent. So by today’s standards, to change from floppy disks to CD-roms may be a simple process. Not so then. As I said previously, we had no idea that technology would one day be invented that would make conversion from one medium to another possible. It’s a different world.
Imagine asking her that question at a party and getting this answer.
You wouldn’t be able to hear her?
I'd drift to sleep in the middle of her answer.
You would feel honoured to receive such a detailed and comprehensive answer.
I’d mess my pants on on purpose just for the excuse to leave.
My reaction: th-cam.com/video/wZUtEOWXHgc/w-d-xo.html
The channel this is taken from seems to have made most of their videos in around 2003, then uploaded them a couple of years ago. So perhaps the arguments for not digitising historical documents are less compelling now than they were when this video was recorded.
It couldn’t be that long ago because she’s talking about cloud storage in the video, which wasn’t a thing for most people before the last few years.
Video quality is too good to be recorded in 2003
I'd probably say the very late 2000's
You heard it guys. Size does matter.
I just read this when she said it...wtf
Hahahaha
Her eyes at the word "length" 🤔
Well duh stuff a turkey with a highlighter then with a beer can LOL
It writes the copy with a pen or else it gets the hose again.
Lmfao 😂💀🔥
Gold
Oy vey!
Legendary
yes!!
I watch these things to relax, but if only she knew what technologies we would have for her “indexing” and “accessibility” through digitization of the texts. Her voice is so relaxing, but her words make me so fired up. What a rollercoaster of emotions...
Perfect for relaxation! Unintentional ASMR is so much better
DoloresButtons I TOTALLY agree!!!👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽
Agreed. Hate the whispering
It is way better... kinda doesn't make sense though when you think about it... like how does *their* intention change *my* feeling?
EthnoCentrist I don’t think it’s about their *intention*. I think it has to do with real authenticity as opposed to contrived ASMR. That’s simply my opinion however. 🤔 Don’t get me wrong, I still watch the contrived or should I say “premeditated “ ASMR, I just respond better to the real deal.☺️🤤
Hell yeah. ASMR started as unintentional
She’s using that voice we all use in our heads when we’re alone, pottering around the house, practising an answer for a question we’ve never been asked but wish someone would.
This is asmr gold!! I’m going to archive this 🙃
Yeah but...digitally?
That takes time, people, and money
@@PACIFICBboy it's actually a Mammoth task.
It’s a mammoth task just give up.
And space
....so you're saying there's a chance
Jeffrey Brandt 😂😂😂😂I actually said that in my head like Lloyd Christmas
Michelle Caruana xD
Jeffrey Brandt OMG!!!! Awesome!!!
😂 I read it like Lloyd Christmas,too 😂
Best comment on here. 🤣🤣
This woman is the Bob Ross of archiving! Never thought I'd use those words in 1 sentence till just now!
Bobette Ross.
Also check out the Bob Ross of woodblock printmaking!
th-cam.com/video/IuQBOhf9ewI/w-d-xo.html
Its about time for a Signatur.
How dare you compare the great Bob Ross to this absolute bore
bruh she sends carrier pigeons instead of email
This is the best comment on this video omg 🤣🤣🤣
You have no idea how grateful I am for this channel not having ads for every video. Thank you
I love the detail of her thoughts
Considering what just happened to the museum in Rio, digitisation might be a necessary evil :(
Except that it's not an evil
Not a necessary evil. Time changes stuff. So you change too. And almost all the time, change comes with a trade-off. It's the world.
She was a quiet woman. An archivist...
lol
😂😂😂
Glad to see the John butler memes
Everywhere I go, I see his face.
she grows tomatos in her backyard to save $1.33 at the store
this is so specific yet so true
@@ao1fe your reply is so unspecific yet so true
@@moatasemkassab4517 your reply to a reply is so unspecific yet so true
@@dumb_is_fun your reply to a reply to a reply is so unspecific but true
@@s_amin your reply to a reply to a reply to a reply is so unspecific yet so true
Getting an archivist by day, dominatrix by night kind of vibe from her right now...
She wants to hurt you and nobody will photograph it.
Jackpot
roquefortfiles even less digitize it
I knew I wasn't the only one feeling a raw sexual energy emanating from her
Stop playing with my emotions.
I imagine a lot of her lunch breaks being spent eating grapes by herself
I wonder what type of grapes she eats...
Digitised grapes
@@AustrasmrASMR no no, traditional, original grapes
big _ oof agreed. Who has the time/money/space for digitised grapes
But what WILL happen to those grapes?
She has such a calming and nice voice ! I really like her british accent too. She talks so gentle and polite..
As someone who worked for a company that specialized in digitizing physical documents, this lady has a wild idea of what digitizing files is like lmao it’s not nearly as complicated as she’s making it out to be
This video was filmed in 2003, before TH-cam even existed go the public. Much has changed in that time.
I would hope it is, they way she talks nothing would be worth digitizing!
Jim!! I am a librarian not an archivist.
@@BabsChannel around 3:47 she mentions "cloud storage" so I don't think it was recorded in 2003 but much more recently.
I think you are lying about your qualifications
An archivist explaining that she’s not a librarian
Honestly I love the you people in the comments you are one of the few reasons I smile in life.
The argument could be made in the reverse as well. You need people, money, space, time and equiment to maintain physical documents. And then there's the potential of those documents being destroyed forever. Digitizing is a monumental task, but well worth it. I'd rather have multiple ways and sources of viewing said document. Instead of one, which takes time, money, and people just to retrieve and view it.
By the way, when you digitize, people only touch the digital copy. The less the originals are touched, the better.
For whom? If no one touches it what does it matter if we keep it? Obviously there’s a balance here, but the idea of information for the public and not just specialists is one that were rapidly losing
@@tehamill1 it doesn't matter if we keep it, because it will disintegrate one day, which is why we must digitize. Isis destroyed ancient cities, we cannot undo that but we have them well photographed at least
What a saucy minx
Goran Stanic 😂
Most likely an unchained tigress in the sac.
Fucking right! She’d throw me around like a rag doll
You anit gonna get up if you with her
Relaxing, but she's just scared of digitization. Digitization is the greatest thing to ever happen to data storage. You can, quite literally, immortalise data these days. Even the average layperson can do it. No, its not the same as looking at the original document, but it doesn't replace it either.
The average layperson can scan a few things, but when you scale up to the size of a major university archive... they can't. You need massive storage and metadata standards to make anything findable. If you can't find it you may as well never have scanned it.
No, that's not the case. If you have the time to read it, you have the time to digitise and archive it. There's no reason not to digitise every data resource you use.
Archiving digital data is infinitely easier, and faster, than archiving physical copies. Just because you have finished archiving one format, doesn't mean you shouldn't start doing another.
If you think 100 terabytes of solid-state digital storage is expensive, compare it to how much the real estate to store that physically costs.
If you think 100 TB is enough to even begin touching a single university archive, you just don't have a clue. Also, you still need the real estate for originals plus data center. I'm not saying digitization shouldn't happen, only that laypeople just don't have the technical chops to make it happen.
This. Also Universities, and organisations dedicated to archiving in whatever form, are already struggling with underfunding and poor decision-making about the best way to use that money from governing bodies. It's not a case of just scanning everything in, there are strict rules about transferring documentation onto the internet. They just don't have the resources to check the copyright of everything in there and navigate the long and dreary process of getting that copyright, just so that a full comprehensive list of the divorces that happened in Kent over the last fifty years can sit on the internet with nobody giving a shit about them. Digitisation is great, but it should be saved for stuff that people actually might want to access that would be worth the time and money doing not just 'everything'.
@@backtothebooks9201 being digitally stored and being on the internet are two completely different things. An archive of this nature stored digitally should not be publicly accessible.
00:58 I thought she was going to start tapping, why why, I'm too addicted to this shit
1:30
Ben Mitchell she is a size queen
HA HAAAAA. Ya got me.
God dammit
The linguistics division from Brazils national museum would like a word.
I half-agree with her. It is much more satisfying to be able to hold an old or ancient document, much like it feels to hold a book instead of just buying one through a phone or tablet and scrolling page-by-page. But only a minority of people will ever have access to them, so yes, they should be made digital, but they should also stay as they are now as well for that privileged few that can see them.
But putting them in harms way out of pride is just silly. It's not worth possibly losing that information.
I think that a lot of what she's saying is that it's usually not worth the cost to digitize e v e r y t h i n g in the archive as well. Personally I think a case-by-case basis would be good. If a researcher or someone else needs to read a document but either can't physically get to the archive or would like a copy, I think having the ability to digitize would be helpful; but transitioning the main storage of archives to digital is not the right answer. She brings a few good points beyond how it's good to be in the physical presence of the texts. Namely, that 1. They are the original. They are artifacts and are always going to have precedent over digital recreations, thinking of them as, say, a work of art or a museum artifact. and 2. Digital forms of storage are often just as if not more volatile than physical ones. Technologies change, an emp pulse or a hack or a server malfunction or a sledgehammer to a computer could destroy all these digital recreations. Digitization is helpful, but personally, and respectfully of course, I think physical preservation should stay a priority. My... maybe a bit more than 2 cents. haha
She refers to digitized documents as "images" however with text recogniziton technology these images can be converted in to information which can be stored, manipulated and displayed very easily. Also, there's very inexpensive technology available to get the images required for tdoing this. It need not be a supremely quality image, but just enough for the recogniztion software to do its job. This would preserve the documents information for all time.
Not really. Read up on Long term preservation (OAIS-Standard etc.). It is quite a huge task for archives. Also images with ocr are normally saved as PDF/A in archival context. As an image just in tiff or PNG format.
She's referring to extremely old and ornate handwritten documents, not 8x12 sheets from Staples that came out of a laser printer.
When you’re relaxing as fuck, you can afford to be boring as fuck.
She's a natural at ASMR.
Her unfolding that paper gave me more chills than her voice
Unintentional asmr is the only asmr that gives me tingles anymore.
It’s all that’s ever worked for me, other than a handful of Gentlewhispering videos.
As someone who was been using Tolkien's annotated map for nearly 6 months before I found a digitized version with typed writing. I was amazed at what details I missed simply because I hadn't spent enough time studying his hand writing to correctly see what was written. Someone who had was able to read it and put into a standard print. The Rosetta Stone is a prime example of what happens when someone who has the knowledge to teach future generations is capable of making it accessible to future generations.
A £60 EPSON printer/scanner will scan high res documentation at 300dpi with detailed colour spaces. You can have a small staff team who digitize the entire archive over a couple of years. You can transfer data to newer technologies over time. The thing is no one can escape technological advancement, the simplest of software ever written can organise and specialise searches far more efficiently than any human being.
dannywithnuggets
Very well, YOU do it all.
It would take decades, not years.
@Johannes Liechtenauer You don't seem to understand what digital is. Copying something digital even billions of times absolutely does not and will not degrade. Digital is binary bits of information represented in clusters of ones and zeros. Each bit is represented as either an "on or off". It can be copied to infinity. Digital is logical data.
All I’m hearing are excuses
Ethan Boss hilarious!!!!!!!!
Then put your money where your mouth is and volunteer to help.
@@ApartmentKing66 and what "help" is there to be done?
@@gooniesneversaydie3699 she explains at length in the video. did you even watch? lol
fr where do I volunteer
I’m unintentionally learning about archiving through this unintentional ASMR video.😃🤔 I, first, stumbled upon this video because of the ASMR, but finished it with soooo much more! Lol 😆👏🏽
Dani P. Unintentional ASMR where I learn something is my very favorite kind 😊
Dani P. Hjj
She looks like shes been inside out of the sunlight archiving for too long. The vampire archivist.
King Darthrog if I understood what the relationship is between wrestling and archiving I would happily answer your question.
Yet by avoiding the sun, she has avoided sagging skin and age spots. Ultraviolet radiation being the main cause of skin aging. Vampires are known for their long lifespans and appearance of eternal youth.
Omg the way she handled that manuscript piece!!! Shocking!!!!!!!!
Nobody is saying this! She manhandled that manuscript and then threw it back down.
Just watched this all the way through. She's oddly quite smug considering how boring the topic is .
Redfield 100% I actually found this of interest.
+Philip Berthiaume with a name like Philip I'm hardly surprised ; )
Redfield 100% Thanks for the laugh, I am Canadian, but was named after Prince Philip, I am not actually certain as to how the name relates to archival processes, but I will accept it.
+Philip Berthiaume named after Prince Phillip?? Your parents never gave you a fighting chance did they.
Think she's at the end of her tether to be honest...
A roundabout way of saying I can't be arsed
I don't think a copyright is needed if you're just digitizing for safety back up
it is cause intentions dont matter in the land of copyright
If you’re making a copy you’ll need it.
Don't copyrights expire after 50 years?
Came for ASMR.
Got a boomer rant instead.
What's up negative Nancy? This woman is making digitizing a record much more complicated than it is.
So, why don’t they digitize?
Dank Happenings Productions Lol
A shoe string budget and time
That’s a lot of words for “I don’t want to loose my job of hovering and obsessing over this collection like Gollum with his ring”
I'm on the fence here. There is a strong case for the preservation of physical artefacts, and it's the same for paintings in museums. There really is a difference in how objects make you feel when you're with them, and everybody reading this knows I'm right even if we're not eloquent enough to explain why.
However, we're getting to the point where we're not even creating physical documents anymore. So digital archiving will have to exist if we want to retain information at all. And if we're doing that anyway..no reason to not digitise physical media too.
I really wanted her to say “mic drop” at the end.
I’m an analogue girl in a digital world! Lol 🙌🏼
She, also could get it. All up in her archive.
You know what's funny? We digitize, but then we print out our own copies again.
I was shook when she measured the amount of boxes in kilometres
An enjoyable, informative and relaxing video.
Love that people dont realize that she is just simply laying out the tedium present in changing the format of hundreds of millions of documents. Doesnt matter if they are MP4s or floppy discs
She looks like she is turning into a book.
haha thanks for the big lolz
wtf 😂😂
thats hilarious omg
😂😂😂😂😂
HAHAHA
She dreads the question , her listener dreads the answer !
I get it’s a mammoth task but there’s these things called “fires” and “floods.”
I could write a report and perform it in front of my class like this and my professor would still give me an 80%
And next, Bob Ross will take 7 and a half minutes to explain why he refuses to use Photoshop.
Bruh just flash drive that crap.
*lights a match and casually flicks it into the archive*
If only they made digital copies...
I don't have a clue what she is even talking about, but I love how she is saying it.
Anyone else see her eyes open up as soon as she says “length” I bet she loves it
you know she rides the pipe
She clearly loves the sesh! Love to chat archiving with her at a dnb rave...
I find this lady very relaxing, does she have anymore videos. ?
This channel needs to join the tingles app so I can turn my screen off lol
Swc xo tingles app?
I knew it “size matters” 😏
Well your screwed then aren't you, or, rather, you aren't because size matters
This video is pissing too many people off 🤣🤣 this is pure gold
This has become one of my favorites
That is why we have converters from a format to a format. That is why we have metadata informing about the author, whereabouts of the document etc.
I love her voice, however what she's describing are mostly immediate costs to a long-term benefit. I read another comment that she's clinging to her job, and I think that's pretty evident.
What she says would be true in 1990 but not in 2020
Ya
@Ouro Boros As someone with little knowledge on this topic I agree with you here. Everything can be edited, manipulated, changed, removed so easily, I mean people are getting statues removed and everything it's not like digital media would be safe at all.
The comment section on this video is pure gold. I used to be a Records & Information Management Assistant. She speaks like the engineers I used to deal with "You won't make me use your system". Then you go to their desk and you understand why valuable records are lost. The CHAOS at their desks!! smh
Embrace change guys. Don't be scared.
YES! I've been looking for new tingles!
The thing for me about changing storage formats is that, yes this is true, evolving storage mediums could have caused issues, but that seems to have resolved itself at this point. It doesn't get much simpler to store than literally non-existent, and updating things like Hard Drives to SSD is as simple as drag and drop. Albeit, we may not know what comes after that, but I doubt it'll be much more difficult.
i understand the comments but she does have a point as far as copyright
"Disks" is one of those ASMR words where the S's are too close together, but that is a good thing. Like "crisps". If you whisper it, it sounds wrong, but the wrongness is ASMR in itself.
The comment section on these videos are funnier than some comedy shows, I howled
This lady is a size queen: "I can speak about my job at length (goes wide eyed)... Size matters... First of all you have to consider the shape and the size..."
"Quackenbush"...Sounds a bit rude, doesn't it?
@@Valkonnen Jesus christ. Do you just not have any sense of humor, or fun, or anything even remotely enjoyable? How do you function?
This should be a loop as it is way too short ❤
This Archivist makes some great points. Also, she is gorgeous ❤
I don't agree with her viewpoint but I listen to her opinion anyway because it makes me feel the tingles lol.
Are they going to digitise my sandwich breath?
she does look like an archivist, who spends all day doing archivist things, indeed.
came for the asmr. stayed for my curiosity
I find her strangely attractive.
ummmm
@@coppertop9365 Sup?
Maybe you have a thing for older women
@@siu281 I do.
For sure bro
I’m going to archive this video until I find nothing else better to watch
Great ASMR!
1:29 NOOOOOOO 😭😭
Her voice is relaxing, but this lady is out of her mind.
Just before my last move, I looked in to digitizing my library. If you're willing to sacrifice the books, it's quite easy. You get an industrial guillotine, chop the pages out of the book, and feed them into an auto-digitizer. Each book would only take 2-3 minutes, and there are all sorts of programs to help you organize and read your books. I couldn't bring myself to do it, though. I love my paper books.
Nobody asks that question
I actually would probably have asked her that question if I knew about her work, to be perfectly honest, since I've handled and organized thousands of documents dating back years for nonprofits before. It takes a lot of time and I would be interested if they had any steps in place to start (or continue) that process.
I worked in archives for years. A day didn't go by when we didn't talk about this.
She could do audiobooks for a living as well
Those are digital. She'd never.
I didn't get tingles at all but I found it informative and interesting.
31 mice clicked on this video.
Storing the digital copies is actually really easy now and transferring the files to newer storage devices is really easy
I am oddly attracted to her and I don’t feel comfortable with it
I feel the same way. Even being anonymous I'm embarrassed.
@@LegendofLaw ended up sleeping with her in October, was great
@@vp5633 no shot
@@vp5633 why are you lying online?
@@axr6327 it’s funny