One of our golf buddies, who is an engineer, sent this over today.  It really illustrates why we should think about the future with a nonlinear framework.  Simply amazing!

 

Hat tip to James M.!

 

(click here if photo is not observable)

 

Category: Technology, Think Tank

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

11 Responses to “Nonlinear Thinking: Perspective!”

  1. raholco says:

    Never underestimate the bandwidth of an Antonov AN-225 filled with SanDisk 64GB microSDHC’s.

  2. raholco,

    toward your point..”Why do you think FedEx is, still, in Business (and, yes, please don’t tell me about “FedEx ‘Freight’”..)

    though, really, you think the Antonov is, really, necessary?

    I’d say, given a 128 GB SD ‘card’, one, if, also, given ‘half a Clue’, could pack it with sufficient info to ‘Start a New Country’…
    ~~~

    100 Gigabytes: Library floor of academic journals on shelves; large ID-1 digital tape

    http://www.jamesshuggins.com/h/tek1/how_big.htm

  3. raholco says:

    Compare the volume displaced of a 128GB SDXC and 64GB microSDHC-for your single card I can pack double the storage in the same space. True, latency is an issue, but you also need backup, redundency and logging as well-which can far exceed the storage of an operational data store, not to mention retention requirements. Also, any kind of image (and especially video) consumes storage orders of magnitude greater than previous generations of such algorithms.

    Sure it may be just a tad absurd right now-but with data creation and consumption growing logarithmically, even with advances in storage technology, it may not be enough.

  4. deanscamaro says:

    In a way, it demonstrates the evolution of business operations at Amazon (your previous post). Everything changes and we just need to adapt.

  5. Jojo says:

    Here’s another past/present storage size comparison:
    http://i.minus.com/inPvp5ZpmN1BM.png

    Whew.

  6. bear_in_mind says:

    Interesting. Digital data are volatile in a way that paper-based records are not. Both have benefits and advantages over the other. I can do keyword searches over large swaths of digital data infinitely faster than I can with books, but that is only part of the equation.

    Having done professional research, the thing that data-based searches frequently lack versus paper-volume searches / research is: CONTEXT. You can physically scan (with your eyes) a book for a paradigm or idea in a way you simply cannot do with the same efficiency you see with computer-based searches.

    So, some may say, “The book is dead!” I say, “Long live the book!”

  7. CitizenWhy says:

    Looking at this linear illustration from a non-linear perspective, I find today’s information gathering and storage abilities to be linear with those old IBM cards. The Cards started the process of breaking information into data units. From there there was an inevitable, linear process of improvement. While we were still using those cards at college, I got a tour inside the IBM computer in Manhattan. It took up an entire floor (based on a city block) in an office building. We had to wear protective suits to avoid dust contamination. We talked about how one day not too far off all the data on that floor would fit on something the size of a quarter. Within 20 years you could buy a home computer with more storage than that floor of data. Those home computers were pikers by today’s standards.

    The big change was the abandonment of the data languages used along the way, especially COBOL. Big banks were hiring a lot of graduates just to learn that business computer language. Later at work I never bothered to learn DOS (all the rage) because I bought an affordable, potable (14 pounds) Japaneses WYSIWYG computer that had a built in printer and used those old small hard disks, not floppy disks. Everyone else devoted huge amounts of time to DOS, which disappeared about two years later.

  8. bear_in_mind says:

    @CitizenWhy: You’ve made my (and I think your own) point — namely, the miniturization of data does not equal the concentration of knowledge into a drop of condensation on the petal of a rose. Power is not contained in the possession of data, but rather, the synthesis of it into wisdom.

  9. formerlawyer says:

    @bear_in_mind Says:

    One way to obtain “context” is proximity searches. Google uses AROUND.

    http://philbradley.typepad.com/phil_bradleys_weblog/2011/01/proximity-search-in-google.html
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proximity_search_(text)

  10. Rick Caird says:

    Which brings us to another problem. Any valid data stored on punch cards is pretty much irretrievable data. There are no machines left to read the data. Anything stored on 8 track tape cartridges is no longer retrievable. Sometimes, though, it is not just hardware, it is also the software.

    For example, when you buy a CAD system, you buy two things. First, you buy ability to manipulate geometry, but second, you buy the ability to store and retrieve the data. Most of those CAD systems were proprietary and the data storage technique was considered a trade secret. So, you might well have had to archive the data, the program (by version), and the hardware it ran on.

  11. gloppie says:

    Big Data Companies are in the business of holding your business data and it’s associated metacontent hostage on their proprietary medium.