← Back to context Comment by HumanOstrich 11 hours ago That's already pretty common, but the goal isn't storing less data for its own sake. 2 comments HumanOstrich Reply nextaccountic 6 hours ago > the goal isn't storing less data for its own sake.Isn't it? I was under impression that the problem is the cost storing all this stuff HumanOstrich 2 hours ago Nope, you can't just look at cost of storage and try to minimize it. There are a lot of other things that matter.
nextaccountic 6 hours ago > the goal isn't storing less data for its own sake.Isn't it? I was under impression that the problem is the cost storing all this stuff HumanOstrich 2 hours ago Nope, you can't just look at cost of storage and try to minimize it. There are a lot of other things that matter.
HumanOstrich 2 hours ago Nope, you can't just look at cost of storage and try to minimize it. There are a lot of other things that matter.
> the goal isn't storing less data for its own sake.
Isn't it? I was under impression that the problem is the cost storing all this stuff
Nope, you can't just look at cost of storage and try to minimize it. There are a lot of other things that matter.