You need a machine (hardware and software) to read digital copies, not just the digital copies.

And you need to know how to read to read paper copies. Same thing, essentially. Anyone speaking hieroglyphics fluently? Point is, if you take care of your archive and make sure it remains accessible, it doesn't really matter whether it's digital or analog.

▲

RandomLensman 18 hours ago | parent [-]

Not at all the same thing - what equipment do you need to read hieroglyphs on top of understanding the language (which goes for digital, too)? If you have the paper and understand the language, that's it. We already can see that accessing old digital data isn't necessarily easy if it wasn't always kept on/converted to current media and formats (will we keep that up for millenia)?

And both storage can be broken, needing reconstruction.

If I were to give you a 70y old book in English vs some 70y tape with data on - which one is easier to read?

▲

AndroTux 14 hours ago | parent [-]

For the third time: IF you take care of the data, it’s fine in both cases. If you neglect your beloved book for 70 years and store it under a bridge, it’s going to be completely useless as well. The key part is the taking care of your medium.

	▲	RandomLensman 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		The taking care of the book for 70y does not involve recreating the book over and over again to keep it readable or keeping a reading machine in working condition (or be able to recreate it). It's an entirely different level of care. If the medium isn't destroyed, it is directly readable if it's a book, but not necessarily so in digital because hardware and software is needed - just taking care of the original medium isn't enough in digital over centuries.