You're revealing a pretty heavy bias there. Maybe the submitter thought it would be helpful to convert the figure to exibytes and call it exabytes. The submitter messed up two of the basic details of this story - the number is actually , not , and this value is as of , rather than the implied present day.
Maybe it was and after all of the meaningless comments on slashdot about it, it actually increased to ? You think either of those numbers is close to the actual value?
It's just someone's crude estimate, one could say or or EB and be just as correct. Data processed may turn into information. Information when consumed by an individual may turn into knowledge. The sum of the world's knowledge is therefore not measurable since it resides in the minds of individuals, not in books or other recorded material.
The number is just addressing storage capacity potential available, not as unique meaningful data. All its saying is that the average person has access to x terrabyes of digital storage. That number is just taking manufacturing numbers for electronic hardware, and dividing by number of people. It's not addressing the actual complexity generated or used by people. It's not actually addressing any actual people or what they do. There is, however an interesting deeper meaning behind a number like this - the more this number multiplies, the harder it is going to be to control information, as people have more and more diverse options for storing and transferring data.
This means that even as processing power multiplies - it becomes even more impossible to police all the data of the world for improper uses. Only to people who don't understand SI units or the meaning of the word "approximation. No, to anyone other than SI fanatics.
Metric megabytes are hopelessly painful in the IT world where everything is measured in powers of two: saying my laptop has 6 binary gigabytes of RAM is far more useful than saying it has 6. It's my understanding that each human brain can store roughly PentaBytes entheogen. Go see the fucking SI-prefixes. Then think at least 20 times before ever posting again. This is just too stupid. Yes, I know the fucking article you're talking is just as dumb, but that doesn't excuse you for being a dimwit.
One bit requires an area of 2 Planck lengths [wikipedia. So 'all the information in the world', multiplied by 1,, would require an area about 2 femtometers on a side. Replying to self - yes, I know I'm playing fast and loose with the terminology. IANA physicist. But the concept stands. See black hole entropy. You're giving Slashdot too much credit. Many submissions here are knowledge neutral - and a fair number appear to remove knowledge from the universe.
But wait, now that we know this hasn't the sum of stored knowledge increased? And now that we know it has increased, doesn't that make it increase again?
And wait, now that we know it increased again, doesn't that make it increase again? When will it ever end? Another good chunk of what would be considered "knowledge" Call me crazy, but "the sum total of the world's knowledge" doesn't imply just "some form" of it; it pretty much states boldly that it's the works.
From TFA: " The researchers calculated the figure by estimating the amount of data held on 60 technologies from PCs and and DVDs. Data, not knowledge. Nice to see we can fit all of the info on one piece of paper, as a number and say ok, if we need to back up the internet, this is how much space we need.
Technically I don't need any storage either. The real question is how many bytes would a bush tribesman want if he could get them. Say no to XKCD! There may be more comments in this discussion. Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to turn on Classic Discussion System in your preferences instead.
The algorithm for finding the longest path in a graph is NP-complete. Try the CryptoTab Browser. It works like a regular web browser but mines Bitcoin for you while you browse! Works on all devices. Do you develop on GitHub? You can keep using GitHub but automatically sync your GitHub releases to SourceForge quickly and easily with this tool and take advantage of SourceForge's massive reach.
Follow Slashdot on LinkedIn. Perhaps more interestingly, the total amount of data broadcast is 2 zettabytes exabytes annually. In theory this means that the sum of the world's knowledge is broadcast 8 times a year, but I bet mostly that's just a lot of American Idol reruns. This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted. Full Abbreviated Hidden. More Login. And a lot of it is free Score: 4 , Informative. Share twitter facebook. Re:And a lot of it is free Score: 4 , Insightful.
I love how the first thing you see, when you click the link, is that the article says exabytes, not Parent Share twitter facebook. Re:And a lot of it is free Score: 4 , Funny. Re:And a lot of it is free Score: 4 , Informative. Just so long as they don't Score: 2. Just so long as they don't keep it all in one place.
Part of the sto. Re:And a lot of it is free Score: 5 , Interesting. I swear I read the first time I read the article. I must be getting blind as well as old. My apologies. Although I grant, one would have hoped the editors would take the trouble to read the article and catch it. Re: Score: 2. Something I'd like to know is Score: 4 , Funny. Pete Sucheski No one can know everything all the time—but we humans sure like to pretend we do.
Natural history 3. Original Encyclopedia Britannica 3. Sara Chodosh Sara is an associate editor at PopSci where she writes about everything from vaccine hesitancy to extreme animal sex. Spring Like science, tech, and DIY projects? Doing these instructions by hand would take 2, times the period since the Big Bang. However, while the natural world is mind-boggling in its size, it remains fairly constant. In contrast, the world's technological information processing capacities are growing at exponential rates.
More from Computing and Technology. Use this form if you have come across a typo, inaccuracy or would like to send an edit request for the content on this page. For general inquiries, please use our contact form. For general feedback, use the public comments section below please adhere to guidelines.
Your feedback is important to us. However, we do not guarantee individual replies due to the high volume of messages. Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email.
Neither your address nor the recipient's address will be used for any other purpose. The information you enter will appear in your e-mail message and is not retained by Phys. You can unsubscribe at any time and we'll never share your details to third parties. More information Privacy policy. This site uses cookies to assist with navigation, analyse your use of our services, collect data for ads personalisation and provide content from third parties.
By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. Share Twit Share Email. Home Technology Computer Sciences. Lead author Martin Hilbert. Explore further. More information: M. Hilbert and P. Lopez, "The world's technological capacity to store, communicate and compute information," Science Express : Feb. Provided by University of Southern California. Citation : How much information is there in the world?
0コメント