Reading/watching too much sci-fi?

[Backseat Driver]

Apparently, another type of over-population is on its way...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-8615541/Number-digital-bits-overtake-number-atoms-Earth-2170.html

The number of digital bits will overtake the number of atoms on Earth within 150 years, according to a new study that warns of an impending 'information catastrophe'.

By 2170, the world will be 'mostly computer simulated and dominated by digital bits and computer code', the study claims.

There will be 133 quindecillion (133 followed by 48 zeroes) bits in existence – the same as the estimated number of atoms on the planet.

However, the power needed to support information transfer will equal all the power currently produced on Earth, leading to ethical and environmental concerns.
snip
=================================================================================

Do we need to make plans NOW for a literally "out-of-this-world" expandable/retrievable library/achive/depository?

[LunaSea]

1. Add "The Nine Billion Names of God" to your reading list.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nine_Billion_Names_of_God

[Dial H For Hero]

2. While I know what the words "too much sci-fi" mean, in that order they make no sense.

[Dr. Strange]

4. See also "too much chocolate"...

or "too much education".

[DavidDvorkin]

3. There is no such thing as reading too much sci fi.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

6. Right.

No such thing as reading too much sci fi.

[muriel_volestrangler]

5. Reminds me of the Elvis impersonator extrapolation

Here's something to ponder over your hot cross bun. In 1977, the year the King died, there were 185 Elvis impersonators in the world. In 2005 there were 186,000. At this rate, by the year 2060 one in four people on the planet will be sporting a quiff, a curled lip and an indecently tight white jumpsuit.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2007/apr/07/featuresreviews.guardianreview28