Burning CDs

Can't play those on my portable stereo.

false

Actually a hard drive is more reliable than a cd/dvd who uses organic dye.

If you think that hard drive aren't reliable it's because you didn't respect or read the datasheet of the hard drive.
The most important information in the datasheet imo is the working temperature
Never go above the working temp of an hdd in use.

More reliable than a hdd is the M-disc.

CD/DVD/BD use progressively better ECC algorithms. Assuming both a HDD and BD are kept under their ideal conditions for long term archival purposes I'd bet the BD (even with organic dye) would have a better chance of working in 50-100 years. The data medium of the BD disk is separate from the reader so it can be easily transferred to another reader if the first breaks. The data medium for HDDs are stuck in the same box as the reader (which is more complex then the BD reader) so it's impossible for the independent user to use a different reader.

Why not go all the way archival and go for magnetic tapes?

That leads to an interesting question. What is the most optimal way of storing an optical disc?

Vacuum sealed

In a covered water-tight container in a cold basement. I'm gonna do that so it frees 2TB of space on my backup server and I'll know I'll always have it. It's gonna be a bitch backing up/recovering 100 disks though.

Why not just put them in your refrigerator?

Sound quality.

Because I store food in my refrigerator.
I'm contemplating using dvdisaster for ECC but it's probably overkill.

Forgot to post pics related. The first pic shows humidity (80% RH) and temperature (80°C) accelerated aging on several DVDs over 2000 hours (about 83 days) of test with regular checking of readability of data. First graph is of regular "archive" grade DVDs. Second is standard DVDs. Third is DataTresorDisc and M-disk. Note that M-disk performs worse then some standard grade DVDs. The only advantage M-disk has is that they're highly resistant to light degradation (pic 2).

Standard HTL BDs are just as temperature/humidity resistant as archival DVDs as shown in pic 3 and all BDs are way more light resistant then DVDs as shown in pic 4. If I get cheap LTH BDs and store them properly there shouldn't be any issues for me. After 10 years I bet higher density BDs will be common so I'll get the 50GB disks cheap and move everything to them.

Source: superuser.com/questions/374609/what-medium-should-be-used-for-long-term-high-volume-data-storage-archival#873260

Shit here's the 3rd and 4th images.

Not a bad idea for backup, but it might cause some problems if one of them gets scratched, or if you use torrents/slsk and such.

Why not just get a bigger refrigerator?

How would using slsk cause problems?

Why would using disks as backups cause problems for torrenting?

A bigger refrigerator won't fit in my kitchen.

I never said that hdd was the best solution I just say that it's better than standard cd/dvd if conserved and used properly.

Test and report made by Naval Air Warfare Center China Lake
esystor.com/images/China_Lake_Full_Report.pdf

not really, there is still niche of keeping the data on disks. dvds will probably be phased out by BDs in few years, which are also more reliable as an backup due to superior materials unlike the cheap 0.25$ disks made in third world countries

Cost.

The hardware isn't.

Just use some of Amazon's cloud tape!

I don't think the point is to play them. It's purely for data backup.

Just get a shitton of USB flash drives or microsd cards, if your collection can fit on a CD it can fit on a cheap drive and plug into your phone.

Come on.

What do file systems have to do with the data medium's ECC?
You haven't given any reasons to back up why you think hard drives are better then BDs or even high grade DVDs in their optimal environments.

Enjoy your MLC charge leakage.

Just personal observation over the years I had to much trouble with cd/dvds.
With time I have found out that hdds correctly used (respecting their datasheet) had a better timelife.

Reducing errors and data corruption

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_corruption#SILENT

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Btrfs#Checksum_tree_and_scrubbing

I'll expand my vinyl collection as soon as I can afford to. No matter how you figure it, something is lost when you reduce a continuous wave to a discrete set of points.

You lose the pops, hiss, rumble and loss of high frequencies that vinyl provides. Nyquist theorum.

Fair enough. I haven't had any trouble with my 15 year old backup hard drives nor my 15 year old DVD backups. I'm talking from an ideal point of view.

I'm comparing HDDs vs BDs solely in terms of data mediums, not with additional software over them.
Btrfs alone can only identify silent corruption. You'd need more drives in its Raid 1 setting to recover any corruption, which is a big waste. If I wanted to ensure no data corruption on BDs I could use dvdisaster, Parchive, or pyFileFixity to incorporate a set percent, say 10%, of ECC for the BD. I could store the extra 10% on the same BD or a second BD. That 10% ECC file can recreate any damage to my data (including the ECC file itself for pyFileFixity) which is more then enough to account for silent bit rot.

Only until you modify it. Imagine you're doing it alphabetically. You've started in "A" and you're now in "T", but decided to download that new Metallica album. Where does it go?

My true motivation is that I've never been able to bring myself to trust computers.

Why should the death of CD/DVDs effect OP when it is still a viable backup and organizational method. As for sharing though, he better carry an external CD drive.

Throw the shit on a big ass flash drive idiot

I had a few problems with cd/dvd but my conception of why I don't use cd/dvd for backup is because of normal users.
(because yes I backup shit for other people)

That's why I am interested in the m-disc if the test results of China Lake are to be trusted I think that most normalfags won't have problem in the future.
(except the retards who bend or crush their shit)

You didn't read the OP.

HTL BD-R

Thank me later.