this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2023
38 points (97.5% liked)

United Kingdom

4062 readers
30 users here now

General community for news/discussion in the UK.

Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.

Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
tom@feddit.uk
GreatAlbatross@feddit.uk
38
Ministry of Justice plan to destroy historical wills is ‘insane’, say experts (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 10 months ago by GreyShuck@feddit.uk to c/unitedkingdom@feddit.uk
8 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

“Sheer vandalism” and “insane”. This is how leading historians on Monday described government plans to destroy millions of historical wills to save on storage costs.

The Ministry of Justice is consulting on digitising and then throwing away about 100m paper originals of the last wills and testaments of British people dating back more than 150 years in an effort to save £4.5m a year.

But Tom Holland, the classical and medieval historian and co-host of The Rest is History podcast, said the proposal to empty shelves at the Birmingham archive was “obviously insane”. Sir Richard Evans, historian of modern Germany and modern Europe, said “to destroy the original documents is just sheer vandalism in the name of bureaucratic efficiency”.

Ministers believe digitsiation will speed up access to the papers, but the proposal has provoked a backlash among historians and archivists who took to X, formerly Twitter, to decry it as “bananas” and “a seriously bad idea”.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] troydowling@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago

Yeah, it certainly can go that way unfortunately. I'm in favour of digitisation generally, but at a minimum it relies on:

  1. Redundant storage (always), hosted and paid for by the government (in this case).
  2. Published and documented open file formats.

I believe that, in general, things lost to time on the net violate one of those two rules. They either resided on a single privately held server which was discontinued, or the data was locked up in some proprietary file format which was inevitably replaced for the sake of selling the new software product.

The benefits of pulling this off correctly are enormous:

  1. Data lasts a very long time.
  2. Documents can be authenticated and change-controlled.
  3. Documents can be shared with any number of users simultaneously.