On 6/26/24 12:36 AM, Lars Brinkhoff wrote:

Dan Cross wrote:

Allen was a man dying of cancer. LCM+L was important to him, but he
neglected to leave explicit instructions to set up an endowment for
it; that's unfortunate, but it was an oversight: he had other
concerns.

The oversight would be that it was done too late.  Such paperwork was in
progress, but it was not completed before his death.

There's a lesson in here somewhere.

I was always skeptical of the LCM-L's approach to curation, not that I had any specific reason for it other than finding it difficult to access some of the digital materials. However, I would hope that we would be more careful with how we contribute materials going forward. It's important that when you donate an item for posterity, that it be made accessible and available to that posterity... in perpetuity. This isn't a simple endeavor, it takes planning... as in ahead of time, beforehand, in advance of :). Of course that's easy to say, now, in this particular case. But, now that we know one way things can go awry, we should be more careful going forward.

Which brings me to my topic - how is TUHS set up for the future? and a corollary what's the deal with Bitsavers (I see mirrors including content on Archive.org)?

Of late, I've seen quite a few "reliable" retro sites going off the air and more and more, I'm relying on Archive.org's wayback machine to locate the materials on those sites. To my mind this is a problem in that Archive used to make a lot more digitial content available at higher resolution, without gatekeeping, but now, not so much... as in, practically anything is freely accessible.

Is TUHS set up in such a way as to weather the sands of time or do we need to do something to ensure its sustainability (similarly bitsavers/gunkies/beebe's bib/etc).

Will