I've sounded off before on why I think it's ridiculous to have a retention
period called 'permanent'. My argument is based on two factors:

1. 'Permanent' is a lazy way out of really thinking through what you need
or mean

2. In 4.5 billion years or so the Sun goes red dwarf and we all get fried.

It now turns out my second factor is wrong. The Sun doesn't just flick a
switch and change overnight, it's a gradual process, exacerbated by our
capacity to screw up the environment. A recent report suggests we don't
have 4.5 billion years, we may have as few as 1.7 billion.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/09/20/habitable_zone_study_determines_earths_lifetime_exoplanet_intelligence_candidates/

At least it puts a shorter limit on how long we'll have to keep migrating
stuff as systems become obsolete over time, Adjust your business case
costings accordingly.

Cheers

Glenn

Glenn Sanders
[log in to unmask]
Australia
0467 740 161 (new mobile number)
These views are mine alone. They may or may not be those of any
previous or present employers or clients. I don't know. If I'd asked and
they'd agreed, I would have signed it "Harry Peck and Co and Glenn".
Or whatever. But I haven't, so I didn't.

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]