[HN Gopher] Make It Ephemeral: Software Should Decay and Lose Data
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Make It Ephemeral: Software Should Decay and Lose Data
        
       Author : BerislavLopac
       Score  : 21 points
       Date   : 2024-10-31 09:53 UTC (2 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (lucumr.pocoo.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (lucumr.pocoo.org)
        
       | maxbond wrote:
       | The physical world does impose itself on software in some ways.
       | Software is prone to going out of fashion, becoming disused and
       | unmaintained, and eventually forgotten. Peering at a long dead
       | document format in a hex editor is the digital equivalent of
       | wiping dust and grime from the wall of a forgotten tomb.
        
       | Arainach wrote:
       | This is a strange and awful take. Physical objects decay to the
       | fundamental forces of nature, but that is a flaw, not something
       | we should emulate.
       | 
       | Software is a tool. Software is infrastructure. Degradation is
       | desirable in neither.
       | 
       | Data has metadata - creation time, access time, etc. - that can
       | power workflows to identify and deal with old data if that is
       | desirable, but in most cases they are not desirable. I haven't
       | looked at the directory full of my wedding pictures in a decade,
       | but I don't want my photo editing software to decide they're
       | irrelevant and delete or hide them.
       | 
       | Having access to old documents and data is often important and
       | beneficial. It's why people look at inscriptions in old books,
       | why they keep photo albums, why finding a forgotten item when
       | moving furniture can be delightful. It's why we're able to
       | identify trends.
       | 
       | Most crucially, it is incredibly difficult to predict in advance
       | which data will be useful in the future. Proactively discarding
       | things when storage is incredibly cheap is a net negative.
        
         | rpmisms wrote:
         | You can view software as tools or art, it is arguably both.
        
         | TZubiri wrote:
         | Disagree, I'm with Kay on this one, life is much more powerful
         | than current machines.
         | 
         | When was the last time your mind ran into an out of storage
         | issue and crashed?
         | 
         | You talk about metadata being important, yet more than half of
         | the storage used today isn't used to store books, or medical
         | records or whatever business case, but traffic logs and
         | virtualized package dependencies and shit like that.
        
           | fragmede wrote:
           | It's called a senior moment, and you'll have them too if
           | you've never had one before. In a middle of a conversation,
           | you'll just forget what you were saying because you got
           | distracted.
        
             | TZubiri wrote:
             | First of all that's memory, not storage.
             | 
             | And second, it's a graceful decay, you are not completely
             | shut down from storing imporant information for later use.
             | If in that moment something memorable happens, you will
             | remember that.
        
           | castwide wrote:
           | The disagreement here seems to be about what kind of data
           | should be considered ephemeral. Traffic logs from a decade
           | ago? A ten-year-old package lock? I'm sure I don't care
           | anymore. Documents I wrote in the 90s? Yeah, I might still
           | want them. I might not need them everyday, but I can say from
           | experience that I've needed to track down files that are more
           | than a decade old, and I'm glad I was able to find them.
        
             | TZubiri wrote:
             | We strictly talking documents? It's very unlikely they will
             | suffer from any decay since they are so lightweight. And to
             | the extent that it's important you probably accessed it or
             | shared it sometime in that period.
             | 
             | A video from the 90s that you never read or accessed in
             | that period? Yes, a candidate for deletion, or at least a
             | decay. For example, if it was a video, the transcript might
             | be saved, but the video might be lost. We may also get some
             | written interpretation on the visual elements of the video.
        
               | castwide wrote:
               | I'm talking documents in a very general sense. It might
               | be a text file, audio, video, a software installer,
               | source code, or anything at all.
               | 
               | > A video from the 90s that you never read or accessed in
               | that period? Yes, a candidate for deletion, or at least a
               | decay. For example, if it was a video, the transcript
               | might be saved, but the video might be lost. We may also
               | get some written interpretation on the visual elements of
               | the video.
               | 
               | My point is that the video shouldn't decay, either. It
               | might not be playable in modern media software for a
               | variety of reasons, but that doesn't automatically make
               | it a candidate for deletion.
        
             | erik_seaberg wrote:
             | If you're trying to rebuild or upgrade ten year old
             | software, it's very important to know exactly what its
             | dependencies were, because there are too many other
             | versions to choose from and most of them won't work. New
             | software only needs a lockfile because it will eventually
             | get old (if useful).
        
         | the_mitsuhiko wrote:
         | Author here.
         | 
         | > Physical objects decay to the fundamental forces of nature,
         | but that is a flaw, not something we should emulate.
         | 
         | That is explicitly called out in the article and I do not agree
         | with you. Useful information is replicated, less useful
         | information tends to die out. That we threw away that concept
         | entirely in the digital world without a good replacement has
         | some pretty strong downsides from my experience.
         | 
         | And if you read what I wrote in more detail you can see that
         | I'm very open to the idea of soft deletes and intentional
         | information hiding.
        
           | CyberDildonics wrote:
           | Please don't write inflammatory headlines then chastise
           | people for not reading every word so they can find out you
           | back peddled and walked back what made a crazy title
           | outrageous in the first place.
        
       | totallykvothe wrote:
       | Methinks the mindfulness cult has gone too far
        
       | TZubiri wrote:
       | Thought about this. I agree 100%. The incumbent belief in
       | software that machines should always remember (embedded in
       | postgresql logo for example) has a dystopian sense of inmortality
       | desires.
       | 
       | I would like to play with the idea of a filesystem layer solution
       | that tiers out information based on staleness. The closest I've
       | seen to this is AWS S3 tiers, you've got standard S# at 2.2 cents
       | per GB month, then infrequent, then glacier and some tiers in
       | between.
        
       | tracerbulletx wrote:
       | I mean, retention policies exist.
        
       | donpark wrote:
       | Decay and losses are just two of the many constraints that could
       | be mixed like paints to create new systems.
       | 
       | Limitations, artificial or not, are not always bad. Walls, for
       | example, can be seen as limitation or protection depending on how
       | it's used.
        
       | paulproteus wrote:
       | For this reason, my browser's Downloads folder is /tmp.
        
       | orbital-decay wrote:
       | That's a very feel-good "why" that doesn't answer on "how", which
       | is 99% of the work. How exactly do you select what to forget?
        
         | batch12 wrote:
         | The attempts I've seen at this are usually in support of a
         | corporate data classification and retention policy and are
         | pretty hard to pull off successfully. The attempts I've seen
         | usually involve adding metadata or tagging the data either
         | manually or using automated classifiers.
        
       | crabmusket wrote:
       | What are some concrete examples of this?
       | 
       | - Linear automatically cancels tickets which haven't been touched
       | in 6 months
       | 
       | - Trello would visually "age" cards, making them increasingly
       | yellow and tattered
       | 
       | - Datadog dashboards have a "popularity" score based on usage
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-11-02 23:00 UTC)