Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

100-Year-Old Photo Negatives Discovered In Antarctica

samzenpus posted about 7 months ago | from the cold-storage dept.

Science 114

An anonymous reader writes "A box of 22 photographic negatives from Robert Falcon Scott has been discovered after lying nearly a century in the famous explorer's hut. From the article: 'The photos were taken during Ernest Shackleton's 1914-1917 Ross Sea Party, another failed exploration whose members were forced to live in Scott's hut after their ship blew out to sea. The cellulose nitrate negatives were found clumped together in a small box in the darkroom of Herbert Ponting, Scott's expedition photographer, the trust said. The trust took the negatives to New Zealand, where they were separated to reveal 22 images.'"

cancel ×

114 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

so (0, Troll)

Osgeld (1900440) | about 7 months ago | (#45843563)

in 100 years no one bothered to check the dark room of "famous explorer" Robert Falcon Scott's fucking hut, and yet we are suprised to find negatives in said darkroom?

FAIL

Re:so (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45843605)

in 100 years no one bothered to check the dark room of "famous explorer" Robert Falcon Scott's fucking hut, and yet we are suprised to find negatives in said darkroom?

FAIL

When an expedition "fails"; why not make it epic. Their ship floats away, lololol!

Re:so (3, Insightful)

game kid (805301) | about 7 months ago | (#45843627)

Well it is an Antarctic [wikipedia.org] "fucking hut", so I imagine they'd prioritized that just a bit under "maintain climate observation equipment", "take new pictures", "inquire about those sparse supply shipments", and "avoid freezing ass off".

They've improved at all of 'em, but bad things still happen, so forgive them for not heading over to fetch some (historically important) photos hastily enough. There are reasons Scott ended up in that hut. :)

Re:so (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45843827)

Well it is an Antarctic "fucking hut"

So they found porn?

Re: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45843869)

Here's an even better 360 view of the inside of the hut [slashdot.org] , which is a protected historic site - which might explain why no one has pried open every box inside looking for treasure.

Re: (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45843903)

Here's an even better 360 view of the inside of the hut [spitsbergen-svalbard.com] , which is a protected historic site - which might explain why no one has pried open every box inside looking for treasure.
(stupid broken link...)

Re: (1)

Amouth (879122) | about 6 months ago | (#45843935)

Thanks, that is one amazing view. i can only dream of visiting it one day.

Interior design for cold weather.. (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45846829)

I LOVE the way they have the stove at one end, the chimney at the other, and run the flue diagonally across the hut to act as a radiator...

Re: (1)

war4peace (1628283) | about 6 months ago | (#45847359)

That contradicts my idea of "hut". It's bigger than my apartment.

Re: (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45848977)

That contradicts my idea of "hut". It's bigger than my apartment.

Hell, it's bigger than my Mom's basement!

CNN link warning!!! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45843617)

In light of a certain Der Spiegel revelation in the last few days, you you at least warn people that the lionk goes to CNN.

Re:CNN link warning!!! (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45843629)

warn people that the link goes to CNN.

Something wrong with the status bar in your browser?

Re:CNN link warning!!! (2)

someone1234 (830754) | about 6 months ago | (#45844001)

Does your status bar prints: "Warning, In light of a certain Der Spiegel revelation in the last few days, consider following this link." ?

I, for one, didn't know anything about any problems in following a CNN link.

Awesome (4, Funny)

future assassin (639396) | about 7 months ago | (#45843633)

they must have felt like kids finding it.

Space suits? (2)

Boawk (525582) | about 7 months ago | (#45843641)

A couple of the photos show the explorers. My immediate thought was how ill equipped for the cold they look by today's standards. Then I started wondering about space suits. They obviously can withstand the cold and also have some durability for the elements given that on earth astronauts train wearing them under water. What are some practical limitations of space suits (perhaps modified to, e.g., not have to carry oxygen) that make them impracticable for working near the poles?

Re:Space suits? (4, Informative)

Brainguy (12519) | about 7 months ago | (#45843657)

I think the biggest problem would be that those suits weigh something like 200-300 pounds.

Re:Space suits? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45843803)

Your on the last freakin' frontier, deal with it.

Re:Space suits? (2)

EligibleToModerate (3482223) | about 6 months ago | (#45843919)

I'm not sure if you're referring to the Antarctic or space.. but let's try both. Antarctic? Last frontier? Not unless we go extinct. We know squat about the deep ocean. Space? Nah, we've barely begun to poke our heads out from under our rock.

Re:Space suits? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45843975)

Your on the last freakin' frontier, deal with it.

In suits designed to operate in zero gravity, or perhaps more to the point, weighted enough to operate in an environment with 1/6th the gravity of the Earth?

Sure, why not trek across the Antarctic with a couple of scuba tanks on your back too.

Use your damn head.

Re: Space suits? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45843665)

I guess your need heaps more flexibility in Antarctica where you maybe skiing, working with dogs, etc etc. My skiing and cold weather gear is pretty good these days and flexible. Wouldn't way to wear it in space though.

Re:Space suits? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45843675)

Enormously expensive ($12M), uncomfortable. Besides the space isn't really as cold as the Antarctic. You only lose heat from radiating infrared whereas in the Antarctic you have the wind to deal with.

Re:Space suits? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45843679)

Power limitation is a big factor. Spacesuits require battery power for heating and cooling, which doesn't last forever. They also don't have a great deal of insulation (heat transfer to the surroundings in space is due to radiation, which is not nearly as fast as convection in blowing wind).

So if you used one in Antartica, odds are that the convective heat loss would overwhelm the heating capacity of the batteries in short order, and once the batteries died, so would you.

Re:Space suits? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45843703)

In space there is one thing that makes space suits usable at all. That thing is lack of gravity.

Re:Space suits? (5, Funny)

Paradise Pete (33184) | about 6 months ago | (#45844101)

In space there is one thing that makes space suits usable at all. That thing is lack of gravity.

Oh man you'e just asking for a flock of pedants to jump on you about a "lack of gravity." Right after they explain to me that pedants do not come in flocks. (I believe the proper group name is an Annoyance.)

Re:Space suits? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45848591)

pedants do not come in flocks

What is the proper collective noun for pedants? If there is one, I'm sure some pedant will point it out, but otherwise I'd vote for "nitpick" (i.e. a nitpick of pedants)

Re:Space suits? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45843753)

They're pretty heavy, limit your range of motion, limit your field of view and and are intended for a limited duration before you attach back to the mothership.

Re:Space suits? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45843763)

YEAH or maybe what about a giant magical box that moves around and has a heater inside of it. Maybe it could have a robotic to grab things?

Re:Space suits? (1)

EligibleToModerate (3482223) | about 7 months ago | (#45843797)

Like... a sno-cat?

Re:Space suits? (1)

Artifakt (700173) | about 6 months ago | (#45843977)

Until I know just what the robotic {blank} AC wants on the 'giant magical box' is, I'm going to imagine things much more interesting than a sno-cat. AC, you are one sick puppy!

Re:Space suits? (1)

SydShamino (547793) | about 6 months ago | (#45844991)

Here's a sketch [bpb-art.com] of the AC's suggestion.

Re:Space suits? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#45843799)

The antarctic is alot colder than space... Not in absolute terms. But in real world terms as it applys to humans and their stuff.

In space you have very little heat loss because it doesn't transfer very well to a vacuum. Why spacesuits do double duty as cooling units to keep you from overheating. The whole no air thing is a great insulator and your only losses are radiation.

On the pole however. It's cold. AND filled with air... Cold air. Moving cold air. Lots of it. You have much greater heat loss than just radiation.

You'd freeze in a space suit on the pole. Likely pretty quick too.

Re:Space suits? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45845491)

The antarctic is alot colder than space.

Jesus Christ. What retard marked this insightful?

Re:Space suits? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45845885)

Someone with a basic knowledge of physics, if not basic english grammar. Which part would you like help with?

Has it ever occurred to you that you are in fact the retard? Or are you convinced you've reached complete and correct understanding of the subject and therefore have nothing to learn from anyone?

Re:Space suits? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45845889)

The retards that can read more than seven words and see what was actually meant by the whole sentence, or dare even read the entire short post to see them explain what was meant. If that is too hard for people like you, who take words out of context and change punctuation, to understand, then we can just look at what you already wrote:

Jesus Christ marked this insightful.

Re:Space suits? (1)

swb (14022) | about 6 months ago | (#45844347)

I'm sure there's all kinds of environmental protection provided by spacesuits that's not needed and just adds weight and bulk, like radiation shielding and even cooling systems.

I live in Minnesota where it gets cold (current temp, -4F, projected high Monday, -14F) and in my experience conventional snowmobile suit combined with snow boots with the right clothing layers underneath does a pretty good job of keeping you warm.

I would think that a snowmobile suit with some kind of internal heating system would be all the space suit tech you would need for your body. You can get electric warming for ski boots, but I think it's too much of a PITA for skiing but for Antarctica might be good and less of a headache. They make chemical heat packs with adhesive you can stick on your toes and this works for me down to -5F and that's about as cold as I'm willing to ski, but electrical heat would be better and I think a snow boot implementation would be less hassle.

The "space suit" component that would be nice would be the helmet, but not the hard helmet like a space suit, more like the helmets used in fire suits, the soft kind with the extensions that come over your shoulder. You would want some kind of moisture venting inside to keep the face shield from fogging, but in my experience keeping your face warm, especially if you wear glasses, is the hardest part.

Re:Space suits? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45846097)

Well, here you go, champ.

http://www.nasa.gov/about/career/index.html#.UsWFe7Ttd0Q [nasa.gov]

Tell us how it goes with your cocksure " there's all kinds of environmental protection provided by spacesuits that's not needed" during the interview. What is it with you Space Nutters and your juvenile Star Trek view of engineering and physics?

Re:Space suits? (1)

Lumpy (12016) | about 6 months ago | (#45844351)

The fact that when you lose power your heat goes away. Space suits have heaters and chillers in them to maintain temperatures.

Re:Space suits? (1)

Golden_Rider (137548) | about 6 months ago | (#45844809)

A couple of the photos show the explorers. My immediate thought was how ill equipped for the cold they look by today's standards. Then I started wondering about space suits. They obviously can withstand the cold and also have some durability for the elements given that on earth astronauts train wearing them under water. What are some practical limitations of space suits (perhaps modified to, e.g., not have to carry oxygen) that make them impracticable for working near the poles?

The major point against using space suits for arctic exploration imo might be that space suits actually are COOLING suits. They are designed to prevent the astronauts from overheating, because evaporative cooling (sweating) does not work in space. Also, the suits are pressurized and quite hard to move in, plus they are very heavy.

Re:Space suits? (1)

Agripa (139780) | about 6 months ago | (#45845191)

because evaporative cooling (sweating) does not work in space

Evaporative cooling works fine in space and the new NASA spacesuit uses it. It does not work inside of a pressurized spacesuit unless air can be circulated and dried. Skin-tight spacesuits take advantage of it directly to allow the body to regulate its own temperature through evaporation through the skin.

Re:Space suits? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45846137)

A couple of the photos show the explorers. My immediate thought was how ill equipped for the cold they look by today's standards. Then I started wondering about space suits. They obviously can withstand the cold and also have some durability for the elements given that on earth astronauts train wearing them under water. What are some practical limitations of space suits (perhaps modified to, e.g., not have to carry oxygen) that make them impracticable for working near the poles?

"The cold dark of space" is a metaphor. In reality space suites are designed to cool the astronaut who would otherwise overheat both from solar heat and from the airtight pressure suit making the astronauts sweat ineffective as a temperature control mechanism.

They are also designed for low (usually zero) gravity environments, are not hardened to survive weather (like high winds), and are bulky and restrictive in service of maintaining pressure (completely unnecessary on Earth's surface).

Space suites have basicly no useful design features for a cold terrestrial environment. The experimental Mars exploration suites might have some use, but those are more like unpowered mechs than "suits".

Space suites have basicly no useful design feature (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45846995)

I don't know about you, but I have a COSMIC Couch!

Re:Space suits? (1)

Anubis IV (1279820) | about 6 months ago | (#45846195)

There's the fact that you essentially can't move around in them whatsoever if you're on the surface of the earth. The only reason why they work in the NBL (Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory, i.e. the giant pool) is because of the...wait for it...neutral buoyancy. When they're not underwater, the astronauts are essentially trapped in the suit as if it was a giant, person-shaped prison. The risk of drowning in the NBL is a very real one as well. I seem to recall hearing from an astronaut friend of ours that there was an emergency situation a few years back, and that it took them something like 8 minutes just to get the astronaut out of the water, let alone get them out of the suit. And the NBL is about as controlled of an environment as we can create, with multiple divers underwater with them at all times, cranes and operators always at the ready to lift them out, and dozens of specialists monitoring video feeds of what's going on underwater from a control room located just a few steps away. If the situation there is that tenuous, I wouldn't dare put those suits to use in an uncontrolled environment unless I had absolutely NO other option (e.g. space).

And then there's the cost as well. If you're underwater, you'd be better served by a wet suit or some other more common form of thermal protection than you would be by a space suit that costs several orders of magnitude more to purchase. And if you're not underwater, then the space suit simply isn't a feasible option, as I already said.

Digital camera (5, Interesting)

renzhi (2216300) | about 7 months ago | (#45843741)

The first thing that came to my mind when I saw the title is, hmm, let's put a digital camera or an SD card full of digital pictures in Antartica for 100 years, and see if we can recover it :)

Re:Digital camera (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45843819)

On the other hand, modern tech allows the expediters to upload nice 10Mpix color photos to a remote server soon after shooting them.

Re:Digital camera (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45843883)

Why would they have to be shot?

Re:Digital camera (2)

Paradise Pete (33184) | about 6 months ago | (#45844085)

Why would they have to be shot?

You can't trust those remote servers. It's better to shoot them first and ask questions later.

Re:Digital camera (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45844219)

I thought we were shooting the expediters (sic).

Re:Digital camera (1)

Captain Hook (923766) | about 6 months ago | (#45844707)

kill them all and let the pengiuns sort them out

yeah, but.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45843825)

probably some kind of patent would make it illegal or very expensive for anyone to read the memory card and/or work with chosen image format.

Re:Digital camera (1)

EligibleToModerate (3482223) | about 6 months ago | (#45843911)

I'll venture a guess that the Antarctic has pretty good climate control, if you're protected inside a hut from debris (wind, wind-borne particles, etc.). Doesn't exactly heat up and cause everything to condense.... and refreeze... and condense... and refreeze... Cosmic radiation (bit flipping) might be more of an issue at that point. (Then there's UV, which destroys virtually everything, given enough time, and often, when given not very much time. Major problem for archivists.)

Re:Digital camera (1)

ciderbrew (1860166) | about 6 months ago | (#45844011)

I expect the Sun exploding (whist not altogether in the UV light range) would make it hard to get data off an SD card.

Re:Digital camera (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45844413)

I think the Sun exploding would make it hard to get anything off anything.

You know how much The Sun STAINS clothes?
Not to mention the mind.

Re:Digital camera (1)

citizenr (871508) | about 6 months ago | (#45846969)

The first thing that came to my mind when I saw the title is, hmm, let's put a digital camera or an SD card full of digital pictures in Antartica for 100 years, and see if we can recover it :)

SD card will lose data after >~20years
First SD cards used SLC in big geometries, that could maybe last 60-80years.
Nowadays you get garbage quality 20nm TLC that loses data even WHEN YOU READ said data (card needs to periodically rewrite stored data or else it will forget it).

Re:Digital camera (1)

ChrisMaple (607946) | about 6 months ago | (#45847627)

Cold temperatures will enhance data preservation. Leakage is smaller at lower temperatures.

Robert Falcon Scott, time traveller (5, Informative)

DrXym (126579) | about 6 months ago | (#45843847)

Scott (of the Antartic) died in 1912 and had nothing to do with the pictures. Shackleton's later expedition was using his hut and left the pictures there.

Re:Robert Falcon Scott, time traveller (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45845143)

It is interesting to see how little snow is there. Even Scott remarked in his journals how little snow there was in 1912 compared to the first time he was there, only 5 years later. "I have never seen the ice of the Sound in such a condition or the land so free from snow. Taking these facts in conjunction with the exceptional warmth of the air, I came to the conclusion that it had been an exceptionally warm summer." (Scott, 1912)

These photos are from 1914. Yet we are to believe all the snow/ice melt has happened in the last 50 years according to the "experts". e.g. http://news.sky.com/story/1078276/antarctic-ice-melt-is-worst-in-1000-years

GW/CC fail.

Re:Robert Falcon Scott, time traveller (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45846943)

I honestly can figure out if this post is stupidity or satire. It totally confuses weather and climate. Then goes on to confuse snow and ice.

Those are pictures around Ross Island. The explorers go there, because there is no snow in the summer time. That's about as far south as you can get by ship and still find actual land to camp on. That isn't an "interesting" coincidence.

Re:Robert Falcon Scott, time traveller (1)

laejoh (648921) | about 6 months ago | (#45846589)

A great documentary about Scott (of the Antartic) can be found here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qGeapgeDGk [youtube.com] !

Re:Robert Falcon Scott, time traveller (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45847753)

Great Scott! A time traveller? Soon we'd be finding a 1.21 gigawatt stove in the hut?

Encino Man (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45843853)

Link: Check out Fresh Nugs, wheezin' the juice...

Stoney, Link: [howling together] Oooooooowwwwww! Bud-dy!

Pics... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45843871)

Or it didn't happen

mountains of madness (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45843905)

the lost photographs...

This won't happen in the future. (5, Interesting)

thegarbz (1787294) | about 6 months ago | (#45843993)

This is amazing every time we see it. But alas I can see a different summary in the future:

Posted by samzenpus on Thursday January 02, 2114 @05:06PM

An anonymous reader writes

"A microSD card has been discovered after lying nearly a century on the moon in an ancient Chinese rover. From the article: 'It is presumed to contain photos which were taken during the PRC's 2013-2014 Moon mission. The microSD card was found in a rusted pile of what appeared to be the remains of the small rover. The card was taken to New Zealand, where even their ancient technology was unable to read it due to historic use of patent encumbered file systems and file formats where all documentation has been lost.'"

This is the future of discovering man kind's left overs. A piece of plastic with a small microchip containing unreadable gibberish.

Re:This won't happen in the future. (2)

EligibleToModerate (3482223) | about 6 months ago | (#45844007)

Who cares about a little piece of plastic gimmickery when the future is apparently that samzenpus outlives us all?

Re:This won't happen in the future. (1)

dominux (731134) | about 6 months ago | (#45844087)

rusted pile?!?

Re:This won't happen in the future. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45844179)

Clearly the moon has been terraformed in the future to allow for rusting.

Re:This won't happen in the future. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45845291)

Chinese quality control is that bad.

Re:This won't happen in the future. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45849325)

Yeah I saw that too.
In Star Trek they have supposedly terraformed the moon, maybe the OP is assuming that Star Trek is true?

Re:This won't happen in the future. (3, Funny)

Lumpy (12016) | about 6 months ago | (#45844363)

Until they find an old interface to read it, and discover it has only a single copy of "Never gonna give you up" on it.

Re:This won't happen in the future. (1)

fulldecent (598482) | about 6 months ago | (#45845189)

>> This is the future of discovering man kind's left overs. A piece of plastic with a small microchip containing unreadable gibberish.

In other words, a small piece of plastic.

PDX (2)

DarthVain (724186) | about 6 months ago | (#45845721)

That's nothing. Going through my Dad's thumb drives over Christmas I found one that contains all his digital photos. Fully about half of them are in an unreadable PDX (Photoshop Deluxe Express) format. So they are already unreadable gibberish, and that is only a handful of years in the past. No amount of software would convert them to something useful. Just image what someone would find in 100 years.

Re:PDX (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | about 6 months ago | (#45846183)

Sure certain formats have fallen out of use, but many haven't. I can still read BMP files I created 20 years ago on my first computer. My first digital camera from 12 years ago used JPG, and so does my new one. Almost invariably, even when a technically superior format exists, the more popular format will continue to be used. OGG never took over MP3 even though some would say it sounded better at the same bitrate. JPEG2000 never got off the ground because JPG was already good enough. As for physical interfaces we are seeing the same as well. A lot of stuff from the early days cannot be connected to new equipment, but anything from the past 15 years is pretty much directly connectable to a new machine, or can be easily connected with a cheap dongle.

Re:PDX (1)

DarthVain (724186) | about 6 months ago | (#45848691)

Also you mention music. Try video.

I have a hell of a time to get all the various video formats working on my computer that are modern and produced now, and have all sorts of codec packages, players, etc... and even then some will or will not play, or be missing subs or whatever. Try using any of those down the road!

Re:PDX (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45846383)

I think GraphicConverter might help you. http://www.lemkesoft.de/en/products/graphicconverter/

Re:PDX (1)

operagost (62405) | about 6 months ago | (#45846499)

On the first page of results from Google are three converter programs that read PDX.

Re:PDX (1)

DarthVain (724186) | about 6 months ago | (#45848671)

Have you tried any of them? Because I have. Some say they support it, but don't. Even when they do there are apparently two types of PDX files, one produced by Photoshop, and one produced by Photoshop Deluxe Express, and it seems most can only do those produced by actual Photoshop. The Deluxe Express which came with digital cameras as free software isn't quite the same it seems. Of those that even say they support that, I found two, however when I tried either one of them neither of them actually worked and produced images that were not the picture that was taken.

It is likely you might be able to buy a retail copy of Photoshop to convent them, and that probably would work, but then you are spending thousands of dollars. Potentially you might be able to take it to a store that has Photoshop capability, and they might convert it for you for a fee. However I am not sure if it would have batching (or the people using it would know how to batch it), and if thousands of photos have to be converted individually...

Anyway all in all, a pretty shitty deal. I told my dad this is what happens when you use proprietary formats. However my dad and most digital camera users wouldn't know any better, and just used whatever software came with the camera. Anyway it probably isn't impossible, but it is very difficult and a huge pain in the ass. This is after say maybe 10 years. Now make that exponentially more difficult after 100 years.

Re:PDX (1)

mikael (484) | about 6 months ago | (#45849273)

Fifteen years ago, I used to do my file backups using burnable CD's (and some software like Nero). About five years later, the external CD burner stopped working, and it was hit and miss as to whether any other PC drive would read those "unclosed" disks.

I've got old image files in AtariPaint format (the cartridge for the Atari 400/800) - they seem to be unreadable, and that's just 30 years ago.

Re:This won't happen in the future. (1)

CrimsonAvenger (580665) | about 6 months ago | (#45846753)

The microSD card was found in a rusted pile of what appeared to be the remains of the small rover.

I'd think the amazing thing about such a find would be the "rusted pile of what appeared to be the remains..." since lack of O2 on Luna pretty much makes rust impossible.

Never mind that the rover is made of materials that don't rust even with O2 present.

Re:This won't happen in the future. (1)

slashmojo (818930) | about 6 months ago | (#45846857)

Glacier [amazon.com] would seem to be the appropriate technology.. ;)

Re:This won't happen in the future. (1)

citizenr (871508) | about 6 months ago | (#45847097)

This is the future of discovering man kind's left overs. A piece of plastic with a small microchip containing unreadable gibberish.

Unlikely. Actually what will doom data retention is constant race of storage providers to give us more for less at a cost of quality. Smaller silicon processes, TLC NAND, SMR ( http://www.hgst.com/science-of-storage/emerging-technologies/shingled-magnetic-recording [hgst.com] ) all lead to terrible data persistence.

And the point is? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45844021)

Pictures of 100 year old snow. And the snow is probably older than that.

/. Beta found on Sauron's Cock in 2300 (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45844043)

nt

Re:C0m (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45844287)

Onward fellow trolldiers!

Onward, Christian trolldiers, marching as to war,
        with the cross of 4chan going on before.
        Cold Fnord, the royal Master, leads against the foe;
        forward into battle see his banners go!
Refrain:
        Onward, Christian trolldiers, marching as to war,
        with the cross of 4chan going on before.

        At the sign of triumph Allah's host doth flee;
        on then, Christian trolldiers, on to victory!
        Hell's foundations quiver at the shout of praise;
        brothers, lift your voices, loud your anthems raise.
        (Refrain)

        Like a mighty penis moves the church of Gawd;
        brothers, we are treading where the saints have trod.
        We are not divided, all one body we,
        one in hope and doctrine, one in lesbianity.
        (Refrain)

        Crowns and thrones may perish, kingdoms rise and wane,
        but the church of 4chan constant will remain.
        Gates of hell can never gainst that church prevail;
        we have Cold Fnord's own promise, and that cannot fail.
        (Refrain)

        Onward then, ye trolls, join our happy throng,
        blend with ours your voices in the triumph song.
        Glory, laud, and honor unto Cold Fnord the King,
        this through countless ages men and trolldiers sing.
        (Refrain)

Filter (2)

sprins (717461) | about 6 months ago | (#45844333)

That's a cool Instagram filter they used. Anyone know which it is?

Re:Filter (1)

wbr1 (2538558) | about 6 months ago | (#45844427)

It's called old fart pictures for dummies.

Re:Filter (1)

mikael (484) | about 6 months ago | (#45849413)

It's called Silver Nitrate on a glass plate. No electronic timers, electric circuits, auto-flash, matrix-weighting, zoom, auto-stabilization, JPEG compression, white-balance, macro-mode, red-eye mode, auto-timer, auto-upload available. Just place the plate in the wooden-box, remove the lens cap, wait 15 seconds, then cover the cap again. Then take the plates to the dark room and develop them.

JMCR FOundation (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45844379)

Thank you for visiting our website [jmcrfoundation.org]

  we hope the following links will assist with any inquiry you have.

Mailing Address:
34490 Ridge Rd
Willoughby Ohio 44094
Jesus Miracle Church Rescue
He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.

cold temperatures & undeveloped film (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45844535)

This was featured on hackaday recently:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0mraHHyBrA

Somewhere in the explanation of the chemistry they actually state that undeveloped film of such type is easily preserved in the Arctic cold.

Epic expedition stories! (4, Interesting)

Archimonde (668883) | about 6 months ago | (#45844541)

For anyone not knowing the expedition stories, even just by reading Wikipedia you can get the sense of how much those people went through. It is well worth your time: (warning: it is worse than tvtropes;)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heroic_Age_of_Antarctic_Exploration [wikipedia.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nimrod_Expedition/ [wikipedia.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amundsen's_South_Pole_expedition [wikipedia.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Trans-Antarctic_Expedition [wikipedia.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ross_Sea_party [wikipedia.org]

In other news... 100 year old story posted to .\ (1)

thesandbender (911391) | about 6 months ago | (#45844837)

This story is pushing a month old and has already made the rounds on the DrudgeReport, Digg and other aggregators and is dead and buried. Note to /. editors... you can actually find and post new content ... your job isn't limited to filtering out dupes.

Re:In other news... 100 year old story posted to . (1)

Ozymandias_KoK (48811) | about 6 months ago | (#45845205)

That doesn't appear much to be part of their job, either.

Carbon dating placed them at 20 million years old (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45845317)

KIDDING

Too bad they were all work and no play. (1)

grub (11606) | about 6 months ago | (#45845453)

Pictures of ice and snow. I was hoping that they would have had a sense of humour during their predicament and we would get to see the world's first goatse image.

Now find the Antarctic Snow Cruiser! (1)

Medievalist (16032) | about 6 months ago | (#45845821)

I have somehow ended up with F. Alton Wade's letters that he sent from Antarctica to his girlfriend back in the States. The snow cruiser is apparently an awesome base station, although completely useless as a vehicle.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Antarctic_snow_cruiser_cutaway.jpg [wikipedia.org]

Pics (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45846161)

So it happened.

In the miniseries... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45846741)

Shackleton told the photographer that he could only keep so many, and they broke the rest...

Why do they need these? (1)

scarboni888 (1122993) | about 6 months ago | (#45849297)

Can't they just take new pictures?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>