HUMMEL AND KEMP: Today's digital documents are tomorrow's dinosaurs -
> Washington Times
> While the move from filing cabinets and paper to a form of digital
> preservation is important and necessary, it is much more complex than it
> sounds. The initiative, if it is not done right, could unintentionally be a
> hugely wasteful spending exercise, and vital information, records and
> assets could be lost forever.
>
> Source:
>
> http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/dec/22/todays-digital-documents-are-tomorrows-dinosaurs/
>

Okay so this is gonna be long, so if you plan to read this, make sure
you're comfortable, put a log on the fire, don your Snuggie, pour yourself
a nice hot cup of coffee, cocoa, or a good stiff drink and read on...

An interesting article, some of it thought provoking, some of it sort of a
'sales pitch'.  Turns out this technology they refer to "DOTS" (Digital
Optical Technology System) is ACTUALLY a private for profit organization
out of Florida... it isn't a "technology" at all.

Also, while there have been many assertions that Truman led the way in the
past to modernize record keeping, the fact is that Truman asked Hoover to
lead an effort to investigate the current methods of managing and creating
administrative records in the Federal Government and to head a Commission
to recommend improvements.  In part, that led to the formation of the GSA
and establishment of NARA.... but I digress.  I just find it interesting
that the Presidential memo has got people rattling Truman's ghost and there
hasn't been much said about what he did.

So back to the article?  One comment in the article I think we all agree
with is: "The initiative, if it is not done right, could unintentionally be
a hugely wasteful spending exercise, and vital information, records and
assets could be lost forever."

However, I think we also all understand that there is no ill-will or intent
to NOT DO THIS RIGHT... and one major piece of misinformation being tossed
about is the intent of the memo was that all physical forms of records be
digitized and subsequently discarded, and that henceforth ALL RECORDS would
be managed electronically.  NO ONE in the Federal Government, or even in
most businesses is that ignorant.

There are some records that it makes absolutely NO SENSE to digitize and
there are others that EVEN IF YOU DO digitize them (to make the content
more readily accessible by multiple people in disparate locations
simultaneously) you would NEVER discard the original source materials, you
would simply index them with pointers to their locations and store them in
optimal conditions to protect them permanently. DUH!!

So, the article goes on to state: "One of the challenges facing federal
workers is that long before the complete set of records is digitized, those
workers will be required to start making copies of the records they just
created, a process called migration. Then, in a relatively short time,
workers will need to make copies of those copies. It's a job never
completed, constantly in a state of chaos and confusion, with danger of
losing the very data that is supposed to be preserved."

Again, THE COMPLETE 'set of records" will NOT be digitized.  And yes,
migration and sometimes conversion, is an ongoing process and needs to be
planned for to avoid technological obsolescence and media degradation, but
this is a known fact and a given requirement. Constant care and feeding of
a digital repository is always going to be required to ensure persistent
access to digital assets throughout their life cycle. Everybody here knows
that, and a great number of the people being selected by Federal Agencies
to respond to the challenges put forth in the President's memo do as well.

The article continues it's "the sky is falling" tone by further stating:
"Traditional digital archiving, as it is understood today, is not secure
for the long term. Current methods used, many of which the federal
government will consider embracing as part of President Obama's initiative,
are time-consuming, extremely unreliable, environmentally unfriendly and
expensive."

"As it is understood today..." is ALL WE HAVE- it is clearly known that
this is an ever changing world when it comes to technology- formats change,
media changes, hardware and software used to access information changes
constantly.  The trick is first, keeping up with it and second, moving
forward with it.  And yes, the methods are time consuming and expensive-
but I disagree they are "extremely unreliable and environmentally
unfriendly".

What is the option? Bury our collective heads in th esand and wait around
for someone to develop a fast, cheap, reliable, friendly solution to
resolve this problem while the existing digital content continues to rot,
decay and become inaccessible?  Like the Moon Mission content? Past Census
data? And who knows what else that has been lost and not identified as of
yet.  Enough of the analysis paralysis- the memo isn't calling for
knee-jerk reactions, it's calling for Agencies to identify staff to address
the issues NOW, and in the following 4 months, for them to begin addressing
the challenges they face and concerns regarding existing regulations that
keep them from being able to do this efficiently and effectively... and as
we all know here as well, 120 days WILL NOT be long enough to develop the
laundry list of roadblocks and 'challenges' facing Federal Agencies form
complying with the recommendations in the memo.

The two largest hurdles we face are a lack of funding and a cultural change
in management thinking about the effort required to change the methods by
which records are managed.  It was a sweeping change to embrace creating
things electronically, including the adoption of email and social media
forms, but it has been and may continue to be at a GLACIAL PACE that
management comprehends the difficulty of putting the lid back on Pandora's
Box.  And part of how this will happen successfully will be to give
consideration to deploying new technologies on a "day forward" basis and
then developing plans to address how to deal with Legacy content- in both
electronic and physical formats.  The concept of consuming this entire
elephant in one swallow is ludicrous... but to cage the herd and control
that which is still being created is something do-able.

Now HERE'S where the article gets sales-y: "With sufficient magnification,
DOTS enables digital files to be stored in an easily readable form for
100-plus years, even in conditions of benign neglect, guaranteeing
readability as long as cameras and imaging devices are available. Because
it's nonmagnetic, it's also immune from accidental erasure or an
electromagnetic pulse."   This is laced with a true 'drink my KoolAid'
flavor.  The authors want to convince you there is ONE magic technology
that exists that will give us the answer to all of our problems!  Well,
aside from the fact that they say 'digital' in here, when I read this
(cameras and imaging devices, non-magnetic, immune from accidental erasure)
the first thing that popped into my head was MICROFILM!  Or even better
yet, NORSAM! ( http://goo.gl/YSWqj ) But when you Google up the acronym and
technology they speak of you find out it doesn't exist.. but the COMPANY
does!! =)  So I'm sure we know where this is going... buy OUR Snake Oil !

And here was one of my FAVORITE lines from the article: "No matter which
solution is chosen, it must be one that does not require massive amounts of
power and air conditioning, state-of-the-art computer technologies or
extensive migration. The solution should not fuel worries about data
degradation or failure."  Seriously? I mean SERIOUSLY? (as my good friend
and our colleague Randy Kahn might say) ARE YOU KIDDING ME?  Naturally any
technology adopted now will require the use of state-of-the-art
technologies, because we have nothing from the future and undoubtedly it's
going to require migration... we simply need ot plan and budget both funds
and time for it, and ensure it happens.  THAT is how you gain persistent
access to digital assets with the technologies that exist presently, and
that's the paradigm in which decisions have to be made now.

I don't find any of this fueling worries, instead I find it a calming
influence- the consideration that at the highest levels in Government
SOMEONE finally understands the need to do something and wants to see us
improve upon how we're doing it now.

Lastly, the article poses: "The potential reforms and improvements, while
necessary, need to be built around embracing a solution more robust than
paper but more reliable than the latest computer." And I have to wonder
what is this? Vaporware? Although one of our other colleagues, Steve
Whitaker, doesn't embrace paper, it's pretty doggone robust and reliable,
when properly protected... and if the content is indexed well, not too
difficult to locate.  AND many find it more reliable than the latest
computer!  But what is proposed here as a 'solution' is something that
doesn't exist yet... and choosing something that doesn't exist, doesn't
solve anything.

Larry
[log in to unmask]

With that, I wish a Happy Merry Everything to everyone, may you all enjoy
time with your families and loved ones and we can continue this (and other)
discussions in the New Year.

-- 
*Lawrence J. Medina
Danville, CA
RIM Professional since 1972*

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]