Making
mountain of data
ALL
those e-mails - junk or otherwise - are adding up. In 2002,
people around the globe created enough new information to fill
5,00,000 US Libraries of Congress, according to a study by
faculty and students at the University of California at
Berkeley.
The 5 billion
GB of new data works out to about 800 MB per person - the
equivalent of a stack of books 9 metres high - the study by
the university’s School of Information Management and
Systems found.
That’s a 30
per cent increase in stored information from 1999, the last
time the global study was conducted. The information area with
the biggest percentage increase in data was, unsurprisingly,
hard disk drives. The study found the amount of stored
information on these increasingly high-capacity storage media
rose by up to 114 per cent from the previous study in
1999. The
study also put to rest any lingering myths about the paperless
office. The amount of information stored on paper, including
books, journals and office documents, increased up to 43
percent in 2002 compared to 1999.
"We
thought in our (last) study that film and paper would head
toward digital formats," UC Berkeley Professor Peter
Lyman said.
With paper,
that has not been the case, as people access documents on
their computer, but then print them out, he said. But
photography is fulfilling his initial expectations.
"Individual
photographs are really moving quickly to digital cameras, or
even image-producing telephones," Lyman said. That helped
contribute to a decline of up to 9 per cent in film-based
photographs in 2002 compared with 1999, and fueled the growth
of magnetic storage.
The study
received financing from Intel Corp. Microsoft Corp.
Hewlett-Packard Co. and EMC Corp. technology companies whose
businesses deal with managing information.
In
addition to looking at stored data, UC Berkeley measured
electronic flows of new information at 18 billion GB in 2002,
of which about 17.3 billion gigabytes occurred over the
telephone.
Whether or not that
information has any value is another question. "I couldn’t
come up with a very simple way of understanding quality
because it’s so much in the eye of the beholder," Lyman
said. How, or if, all that information actually ends up being
used will be the topic of his next study, Lyman added. —
Reuters
|