Slashdot Mirror


Coming Soon, 250 DVDs In a Quarter-Sized Device

Several readers have remarked on a new technique developed by scientists at UC Berkeley and University of Massachusetts Amherst that has the promise of achieving storage densities of 10 terabits per square inch. "The method lets microscopic nanoscale elements precisely assemble themselves over large surfaces. ... Xu explained that the molecules in the thin film of block copolymers — two or more chemically dissimilar polymer chains linked together — self-assemble into an extremely precise, equidistant pattern when spread out on a surface... Russell and Xu conceived of the elegantly simple solution of layering the film of block copolymers onto the surface of a commercially available sapphire crystal. When the crystal is cut at an angle... and heated to 1,300 to 1,500 degrees Centigrade... for 24 hours, its surface reorganizes into a highly ordered pattern of sawtooth ridges that can then be used to guide the self-assembly of the block polymers."

209 comments

  1. DVDs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Who cares how many DVDs? How many Libraries of Congress is it, that's what I want to know.

    1. Re:DVDs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Doesn't google provide a conversion between DVDs and Libraries of Congress?

    2. Re:DVDs by CRCulver · · Score: 5, Interesting

      We're living in the future. The thought of a library fit onto a quarter-sized device makes me think of that scene from Gene Wolfe's science fiction masterwork The Book of the New Sun where the curator of the Earth's largest and most ancient library says:

      There is a cube of crystal here --- though I can no longer tell you where --- no larger than the ball of your thumb that contains more books than the library itself does. Though a harlot might dangle it from one ear for an ornament, there are not volumes enough in the world to counterweight the other.

      The development of such small memory is a significant step forward. Just think about how the writings of the human race can be better preserved if it all fits on a small, lightweight and easily duplicated device. It could be spread all over the solar system as protection against all manner of cataclysms. I wonder how long it stays readable though, before it succumbs to some kind of rot.

    3. Re:DVDs by allawalla · · Score: 3, Informative

      Seems like 500 TB in the library of congress, At 10Tb an inch -- About 400 square inches for the library of congress.

    4. Re:DVDs by jetsci · · Score: 0, Redundant

      But can it play beta-max?

      --
      Bored at work? Play Game!
    5. Re:DVDs by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 5, Funny

      I wonder how long it stays readable though, before it succumbs to some kind of rot.

      I imagine the future after mankind has passed away, where some alien race stumbles upon one of these libraries with the collective wisdom of humanity preserved on it, and upon trying to make sense of the contents, instead see a message: "We cannot verify you rights to access this material; the DRM server that can validate your license appears to be down. Please try again later".

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    6. Re:DVDs by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Yeah, useless info, who cares if it's 250 compressed DVDs when you can't play them?

      Just say 1 or 2 TB.

    7. Re:DVDs by Botia · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes, we are living in the future. I am reminded of that every time I have to reboot my toaster.

    8. Re:DVDs by Albanach · · Score: 3, Funny

      Seems like 500 TB in the library of congress

      What size is that in a useful unit, like Olympic swimming pools or double-decker buses?

    9. Re:DVDs by Zashi · · Score: 1

      Should've used linux or BSD instead of windows.

      --
      Skiffy is Spiffy, but Ort is tort.
    10. Re:DVDs by awshidahak · · Score: 1

      We're living in the future.

      No, we're not. We're living in the present and everything we do is part of the past. I hate it when people say we're living in the future. It sounds ridiculous.

    11. Re:DVDs by Lisp+Craft · · Score: 1

      Also, it will be much easier to collect the information on entire earth population, thereabouts of everyone, habits, interests. Policing the world becomes much easier.

      Is there a luddite party BTW?

    12. Re:DVDs by von_rick · · Score: 3, Funny

      Your toasting partitions must be terribly fragmented, and you must have tons of redundant and archaic bits of crumb affecting your performance.

      --

      Face your daemons!

    13. Re:DVDs by CecilPL · · Score: 2, Funny

      What they really mean is, "We're living in the past's future."

    14. Re:DVDs by theeddie55 · · Score: 1

      true, I prefer the more correct term: "we will be living in the future", true until the point of death when the opposite becomes true.

    15. Re:DVDs by Wildflowers · · Score: 1

      You're just not prepared for everything the future has to offer you? Why are you so afraid of the future?

    16. Re:DVDs by Hognoxious · · Score: 1, Insightful

      There is a cube of crystal here --- though I can no longer tell you where

      In other words, he lost it. And that's the problem with all these high density storage devices.

      Micro SD are smaller than a fingernail - what next, dustMoteDisk, the storage device you can fit under a fingernail? OMG, I just scrubbed my hands and lost all my holiday photos!eleventyone!!

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    17. Re:DVDs by mooingyak · · Score: 1

      Perhaps the poster has access to a time machine that could transport the entire Earth.

      --
      William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
    18. Re:DVDs by creepynut · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Funny? Maybe. Unfortunately, I think it's more accurate (and sad) than funny.

    19. Re:DVDs by saboola · · Score: 1

      I still say we just print everything ever written and start firing reams into orbit. Efficient? No. Fun? Hell yeah.

    20. Re:DVDs by SharpFang · · Score: 3, Funny

      Seems like its data density is 200 miliOlympicPools per kiloLibraryOfCongress.

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    21. Re:DVDs by cloakable · · Score: 1

      Yes, but you have to register on the website.

      --
      No tyrant thrives when every subject says no.
    22. Re:DVDs by llZENll · · Score: 4, Insightful

      More than likely no one will ever know of anything we did if humans are extinct. If you read up on time capsules, data retention, and info on what would happen to the earth if mankind disappeared it is an sobering realization that after only 50,000 years most traces of humanity will be gone. And after only a few million years, which is minuscule on a galactic time frame, every trace will have vanished, even our weapons grade plutonium will have decayed to its normal state, and all of this long before the sun will obliterate our solar system.

      http://images.thetimes.co.uk/TGD/picture/0,,351113,00.jpg
      http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/channel/videos/player.html?channel=1797&category=5487&title=05068_00

    23. Re:DVDs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Several years ago holographic storage seemed about to make its entry into the marketplace. They stated that it would be able to hold the entire contents of the Library of Congress in a 1 inch cube.

    24. Re:DVDs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just think about how the writings of the human race can be better preserved if it all fits on a small, lightweight and easily duplicated device. It could be spread all over the solar system as protection against all manner of cataclysms.

      Or it'll be that much easier to loose in your couch cushions.

    25. Re:DVDs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      That's because you aren't realistic. You are too busy raging against the machine for no particular reason to realize that things aren't nearly as bad as you seem to want to believe they are. It's a common issue amongst zealots.

    26. Re:DVDs by stei7766 · · Score: 1

      The year of linux on the countertop?

    27. Re:DVDs by cparker15 · · Score: 1

      For the rest of us, that would be 0.0891067053 square smoots. That puts things into perspective for me. Thanks, Google!

      --
      Have you driven a fnord... lately?

      You must wait a little bit before using this resource; please try again later.

    28. Re:DVDs by Snarfangel · · Score: 1

      Imagine what humans would do when confronted by such an obstacle. Now multiply that by the power of a space-faring race.

      --
      This tagline is copyrighted material. Please send $10 for an affordable replacement.
    29. Re:DVDs by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      You just don't have any imagination.

      It's like your mind is trapped in an old Perry Mason episode.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    30. Re:DVDs by eleuthero · · Score: 1

      It seems to me the opposite of "funny" should be "depressing" and maybe we should be able to multi-mod. "Insightful" here is very apt but the parent is also fairly depressing.

    31. Re:DVDs by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      "normal" people have no understanding of what a terabyte is.

      "The Bible" or "Lord of War" is something they can get their head around.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    32. Re:DVDs by davester666 · · Score: 4, Funny

      The size of the LOC is constantly changing. You need to specify the date/time to be used to determine the size of the LOC before you can do the conversion.

      Sure, you can use the default of 'right now', but if everybody does this, it makes comparisons useless, as everybodies 'LOC' constant is different.

      We must push for an international standard for the amount of data in a single 'Library of Congress'.

      Once this is done, we can discuss whether we should enforce this value on the real Library of Congress, so it's contents match the size of the international standard.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    33. Re:DVDs by eleuthero · · Score: 1

      but are we talking old London double-decker, more modern, Victoria, BC or... ?

    34. Re:DVDs by iiiears · · Score: 1

      First you mix it up then you pour it onto a lattice. a bit like making waffles. - Don't miss the overlook red indicator light turning green or the wafer will be too crispy.

      --
      15TW = 15,000 Nuclear Reactors. (Approx. one accident a month.)
    35. Re:DVDs by triffid_98 · · Score: 1
      The question is this: given that God is infinite and that the universe is also infinite, would you like a toasted tea-cake?

      Yes, we are living in the future. I am reminded of that every time I have to reboot my toaster.

    36. Re:DVDs by aliquis · · Score: 1

      I would like to see the percentage of bought DVDs which are single layer.

    37. Re:DVDs by tsjaikdus · · Score: 1

      Who cares how many DVDs? How many Libraries of Congress is it, that's what I want to know.

      And can it be used to make calls from a public telephone?

    38. Re:DVDs by tsjaikdus · · Score: 1

      http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/channel/videos/player.html?channel=1797&category=5487&title=05068_00

      Funny that the camera, the flag and the car on the moon are the last human traces to disappear.

    39. Re:DVDs by AlamedaStone · · Score: 1

      No, we're not. We're living in the present and everything we do is part of the past. I hate it when people say we're living in the future. It sounds ridiculous.

      Maybe it sounds ridiculous to you, but most of us are living in the future. ... See? We're still alive! Well anyway, I am.

      --
      "All these years believing you're the signified monkey, only to find out you're just a big hunk of nobody cares."
  2. Nice, hopefully coming soon by foxalopex · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This seems like it has some potential. Hopefully it will make it out of the lab considering how many times I've seen the promise of amazing technology only to find that eventually it isn't practical or has some sort of manufacturing limitation. Oh, and while you're at it, when you do create this "new technology" don't riddle it with DRM issues.

    1. Re:Nice, hopefully coming soon by reashlin · · Score: 4, Funny

      > This seems like it has some potential. Yup, it'll be good for storing your router logs http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/09/02/20/131224.shtml?from=rss [slashdot.org]

    2. Re:Nice, hopefully coming soon by knarfling · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Sorry, probably not any time soon.

      Not because of the tech or DRM or anything, but because this is not a new storage medium as most of the comments below seem to indicate, but because it is a new METHOD of creating storage.

      From TA (Yes, I actually RTFA [sometimes, but I don't make it a habit]), it appears to be a new way to create semiconductors. This process would be used to create RAM, microprocessors, or other semiconductor manufacturing. Think of it as being able to create a 10 TerraByte RAM stick the same size as a 8 GigaByte ram stick now.

      Furthermore, the heating process is not used for each set of RAM chips created. I heat up one huge crystal and then use it as a bed to create a large plate of semiconductor material which I can cut multiple RAM chips. I no longer have to use the expensive nano lithography to create chips. I only need one bed to make many, many plates. By changing the heating process, I can create one bed for RAM chips, another for microprocessors and another for a custom chip.

      Why won't we see it soon, then? Because chip manufacturers already have tons of money invested in nano lithography and won't be willing to just drop it. The author seems to think that since it only replaces the nano lithography and harsh chemical processes that everyone will jump at it in order to make cheaper chips. I am not so optimistic, but would love to see it.

      --
      Great civilizations have lived and died on false theories. Don't mess up mine with a few facts.
    3. Re:Nice, hopefully coming soon by troll8901 · · Score: 1

      Why won't we see it soon, then? Because chip manufacturers already have tons of money invested in nano lithography and won't be willing to just drop it.

      There's also the manufacturing reliability issue. When I buy Kingston or Corsair RAM, for example, I don't have to run 6 hours of MemTest on it, at various temperature levels. I'll just test for 0.5 hours, then start using it.

      New different manufacturing techniques take time to refine and improve. Jumping ahead may lead to manufacturing defects.

      Packard Bell PC, anyone?
      IBM Deskstar 75GXP hard disks?
      Seagate 1.5TB hard disks?
      XBox 360?

  3. Art Immitates Life by chill · · Score: 4, Informative

    "This fascinating little gadget is supposed to replace the CD; guess I'll have to buy the White Album again." - Agent K, Men In Black

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    1. Re:Art Immitates Life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If p2p lasts long enough for this to come out, you'll never have to buy any album again. Just don't drop it!

    2. Re:Art Immitates Life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats alot of porn!

    3. Re:Art Immitates Life by xOneca · · Score: 1

      It has reminded me this TiraEcol comic strip.

  4. Ok. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ts surface reorganizes into a highly ordered pattern of sawtooth ridges that can then be used to guide the self-assembly of the block polymers."

    To find out the exciting conclusion to this gripping story, please read the article.

  5. uncompressed by FunkyELF · · Score: 1

    Good, lets keep the size of the discs the same, use the same 1080P resolution and use losslessly compressed audio and video. Oh, and let the big movie studios use their expensive equipment and processing power to make it 60fps rather than letting everybody's bluray player magically turn 24fps into 60

    1. Re:uncompressed by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 1

      Oh, and let the big movie studios use their expensive equipment and processing power to make it 60fps rather than letting everybody's bluray player magically turn 24fps into 60

      So you want them to create frames that previously didn't exist? I'd rather stick with the current methods of either repeating a frame for X interval or, better yet, using a display that operates in multiples of 24 (72Hz and 120Hz work quite well).

      --
      This guy's the limit!
    2. Re:uncompressed by FlyingBishop · · Score: 1

      And we will be getting enough sapphire for more than a few hundred of your uber-discs from... ?

    3. Re:uncompressed by Firethorn · · Score: 2, Interesting

      better yet, using a display that operates in multiples of 24 (72Hz and 120Hz work quite well)

      It's an LCD monitor. There's no particular reason it needs to refresh at 60htz or faster.

      My LCD TV is perfectly happy operating at 24hz when that's the media it's presented. I imagine that, given the right hardware and programming, the thing would be perfectly happy refreshing at any given interval between 1 and 60hz, only limited by whatever scheme is telling it the resolution and refresh rates it's supposed to be displaying.

      Still - I think it'd be best for movie makers to switch from filming in 24fps to 60 or even 72fps. There's not many movie theaters left with actual film projectors; even if you have to run off some reels of film, it's easy enough to downsample 60/72 fps to 24.

      Hmmm... One thing I'm thinking of is quality - while I am very annoyed by 'mere' 60hz on a crt, I've never really had a problem with televisions, and have to really concentrate to see any jumping with film. Remember, each cell in 24fps film is displayed *twice*, so you get 48 flashes a second, 24 cells. Increasing the number of frames by a factor of 3, while with any decent compression alogorithm it wouldn't increase the size of the video by a factor of 3, is still increasing the quality of video by an almost imperceptible amount, for a very real increase in size. How much, I don't really know. There's a LOT of variables.

      Now I almost want to conduct some tests... Find some 'true' 120fps video, reencode at 24fps and 60fps, see how much the file size ends up. You'd want Low motion and High motion test sections as well.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    4. Re:uncompressed by MaxwellEdison · · Score: 1

      They're not making sapphires, they're growing self-assembling polymers with sapphires. The breakthrough is the process, not so much the product. It looks like a useful alternative to optical lithography.

      --
      -=Bang Bang=-
    5. Re:uncompressed by Firethorn · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sapphire can be created artificially

      Compared to the cost of silicon wafers of sufficient quality the price isn't even that bad.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    6. Re:uncompressed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who the hell modded this insightful? This person clearly doesn't understand how pulldown works. And if he thinks his set is really refreshing at 24 cycles a second, hes completely mistaken. That would give anyone and everyone a headache trying to watch that set. Accepting a 24Hz signal and displaying it at 24Hz are two completely different things. Someone mod this nitwit down!

    7. Re:uncompressed by neomunk · · Score: 1

      The same place we get it to make all those bright LEDs with the sapphire substrate?

    8. Re:uncompressed by gregben · · Score: 1

      You are incorrect. Each frame of a 24fps film is displayed ("flashed") onto the screen three (3) times. This yields a pulsation rate of 24*3=72Hz. If 24*2=48Hz. were being used
      you'd very quickly get a headache.

    9. Re:uncompressed by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      Looks like we're both right.

      Modern shutters are designed with a flicker-rate of two times (48 Hz) or even sometimes three times (72 Hz) the frame rate of the film, so as to reduce the perception of screen flickering.

      Given the 'sometimes', the two flickers per cell is more or less the standard, with some doing 3.

      Remember, film projection results in different light qualities than a CRT monitor, and LCD/Plasma screens don't truly 'flicker' at all as they're constant light projectors. With a projector effectively the whole screen is either lit or not.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    10. Re:uncompressed by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Look in the yellow pages. Under "S".

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  6. coming soon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    f- coming soon
    coming soon should be only be able to be used if it in on shelves in 90 days or less.

    1. Re:coming soon? by senatosa · · Score: 1

      Is it just me, or does any story that claims a revolutionary device is "coming soon", doesn't come soon. [here's the setup...]

    2. Re:coming soon? by 9Nails · · Score: 1

      "Charles Carmichael always comes quickly." or something like that.. :)

      ("Chuck" TV Show reference to a recent episode.)

      I'm not a fan of teaser announcements either. When ever big university is behind the news, I always have to wait 3+ years before the tech comes out. But by then it's under a new name and I've found something similar and just as good. The time to market is sometimes just too slow for these wondrous breakthroughs.

  7. When I get... by Thelasko · · Score: 1

    my Holographic Versatile Disk, we'll talk about this. At the moment, it's all vaporware.

    Let's face it, no major manufacturer is going to decide what technology to use based on storage capacity, it will be based on how restrictive it will be to the end user.

    --
    One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
    1. Re:When I get... by LUH+3418 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      But of course... This is why we now have 32GB+ USB keys... Because the RIAA/MPAA would never allow devices with this kind of capacity and read/write access to fall into our hands! Seriously... Why don't you take off that tinfoil hat?

      The reason we're not seeing any of those insanely dense holographic storage technologies and other forms of vaporware is because right now, it doesn't work. The huge claims in this article are either the result of journalists not understanding what's going on, or researchers trying to get funding.

    2. Re:When I get... by HiThere · · Score: 1

      I may be cynical, but I think it more likely journalists writing what they think will sell. There is probably some kernel of truth under there somewhere... but finding it would require digging.

      And the journalists don't get paid for digging anymore than I do. They get paid for writing interesting articles. Preferably with some actual basis somewhere, if only in misunderstanding. Better interesting misunderstanding than boring actuality.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    3. Re:When I get... by DaVince21 · · Score: 1

      You mean like SD cards and USB keys?

      --
      I am not devoid of humor.
  8. Portable music players with huge capacities? by MtViewGuy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If they can make this technology work with solid-state re-writable memory, I can see huge leaps forward in storage for portable music player solid state memory. The possibility of storing 250 to 500 GB of media files on a portable music player the size of the current 4G iPod nano is very enticing, to say the least.

    And it may finally spell the end of the hard drive, replaced by a solid-state "drive" in the 750 GB to 1.5 TB range.

    1. Re:Portable music players with huge capacities? by zappepcs · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yes, and a mirrored RAID-5 stack would fit inside a pack of cigarettes. A 3.5 inch bay with a little drawer that pulls out with 16 slots in it for these devices.

      I wish we'd just get on with using crystals so when the aliens come we'll be able to use their technology. Of course, the down side to using the new alien technology would be all the ads for 250 DVD sized ZIP drives, and cheap home video recording equipment from X10.

    2. Re:Portable music players with huge capacities? by kurzweilfreak · · Score: 1

      Don't forget the other downside about how insecure and easy to hack they'll have to be to interface with that alien technology.

      --

      kurzweil_freak

      5th Kyu Genbukan Ninpo/KJJR student

      Be the darkness that allows the light to shine.

  9. real vs. vaporware by rubycodez · · Score: 5, Funny

    my mini-van full of 9-track can hold 3 TB, and is real. don't bother me with this vaporware speculation!

    1. Re:real vs. vaporware by Roland+Piquepaille · · Score: 3, Funny

      my mini-van full of 9-track can hold 3 TB

      Is that 8-track + parity?

    2. Re:real vs. vaporware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ah, zombie!!!

    3. Re:real vs. vaporware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your geek card, sir. I must insist you surrender it immediately.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9_track_tape

    4. Re:real vs. vaporware by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      My SATA RAID rack can (and does) already hold ~7.5TB
      and doesn't need to be the size of a van.

      Of course one important question (one not asked) is how
      much will this spiffy new tech cost and how long will
      it be before I can get away with buying it?

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    5. Re:real vs. vaporware by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      doesn't look as impressive as a tape reel doing random seeks with reversals, though.

  10. Heated for HOW Long?! by Logical+Zebra · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...and heated to 1,300 to 1,500 degrees Centigrade... for 24 hours...

    I certainly hope they can improve those figures. From a manufacturing standpoint, that sounds very expensive.

    --
    I have a bad feeling about this...
    1. Re:Heated for HOW Long?! by Guysmiley777 · · Score: 1

      ...and heated to 1,300 to 1,500 degrees Centigrade... for 24 hours...

      Sooooo, probably not going to have a writable drive for PCs for awhile huh?

      --
      Coding with assembly is like playing with Legos. Coding an application in assembly is like building a car with Legos.
    2. Re:Heated for HOW Long?! by lucifig · · Score: 2, Funny

      I don't know, my MacBook certainly gets close. At least it feels like it on my lap.

    3. Re:Heated for HOW Long?! by cduffy · · Score: 1

      Maybe -- but if we're doing a large enough batch size, the cost for an individual unit may not be so awful.

      Then again, not my field, so I wouldn't really know. My next-door neighbor used to be an engineer for 3M who specialized in coming up with scalable manufacturing processes for products coming out of R he'd be the person to ask how this compares.

    4. Re:Heated for HOW Long?! by cduffy · · Score: 1

      Btw, that R should have been R&D -- I forgot the need to quote it into valid HTML ("R&D")

    5. Re:Heated for HOW Long?! by Firethorn · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, consider that Steel, which is used in construction left and right, is made from Iron with a melting point of 1538C

      Also, Silicon is 1414C, and yes they melt the silicon to make the wafers. Don't forget that we also melt a lot of silicon for windows.

      As for keeping the temperature up for 24 hours, well, the vast amount of the cost is getting the temperature that hot, after that it just depends on how well insulated your oven is.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    6. Re:Heated for HOW Long?! by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      Well, by my reading of the article this would be used as the substrate for manufacturing the storage system, not as storage.

      IE they'd use a sapphire base instead of a silicon one, using the auto-ordering substrate to arrange things beyond the density that photolithography can do.

      So you'd just have really, really, dense flash memory. Well, that and your CPU, RAM, etc...

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    7. Re:Heated for HOW Long?! by smoker2 · · Score: 1

      No worse really than tantalum caps, which go into sinters for roughly 12 hours.

    8. Re:Heated for HOW Long?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, like the way ceramics are expensive. I mean look at the price of bricks, they must be £0.30 each by now!

    9. Re:Heated for HOW Long?! by Mozk · · Score: 1

      What is this unit called degree Centigrade? I believe degree Celsius was adopted way back in 1948.

      --
      No existe.
    10. Re:Heated for HOW Long?! by BoothbyTCD · · Score: 1

      Logical Zebra, meet steel mill...

      --
      snig
  11. But.. by Eravnrekaree · · Score: 0

    Sounds good, except crystals seem to be rather expensive and not a renewable resource. Or maybe they can be synthesised, is that possible? Can artificial crystals me made that would suffice in this case. It would be nice if the technology did become widely avialable, it would be great to carry around a library of congress in my pocket.

    1. Re:But.. by Kamots · · Score: 3, Informative

      Considering that we've been able to artificially make sapphires for over 100 years now... and that things like the glass on your grocery-store's barcode scanner is probably made from sapphire glass (a thin wafer of cut sapphire)...

      Well, I'm thinking that it's not that large of a problem.

    2. Re:But.. by Net_fiend · · Score: 1

      Hopefully its not a problem. This was one of the first things I wondered about after reading the article. I then found: this link which explains the process much better.

      "With this technique, the researchers were able to achieve defect-free arrays of nanoscopic elements with feature sizes as small as 3 nanometers, translating into densities of 10 terabits per square inch. One terabit is equal to 1 trillion bits, or 125 gigabytes." (from the site) - so about 125 gigabytes per square inch. That is quiet a bit of space, however I still think its a far cry from what they make it out to seem like.

      I mean 125 gigabytes per square inch? How many of those would fit on something the size of your pocket..that is maybe, say 5 square inches? It would only fit maybe 1.2 terabytes... (please by all means create a grid using square inches to see how many would fit on an object roughly the size of a "normal" pocket..don't forget to round it as it'll be a platter not a complete rectangle) At this point its not worth the press release they put out unless they can get disk compression or shrink the amount they can fit per square inch even more. Otherwise the normal disk platters we have at >1 terabytes are going to trounce this and are already probably cheaper. Don't get me wrong I could see this as another step to downsize platter size, but unless they're putting multiple platters of these things in a disk then the idea of fitting the library of congress is still a far reach. And even if they do it won't fit in your pocket well...

      Yes I do realize that the library of congress thing was a stretch and concocted here, but that should be their endeavor imo. Not only would it make a good marketing move, but imagine what else you could fit besides the library of congress on a single disk...although it does bring up a relative question of how reliable over time the drive would be.

      --
      "When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. When the government fears the people, there is liberty."
  12. Poor math by Jason1729 · · Score: 1

    Not only is it just stupid to use DVD equivalents to give an idea of the size (how many elephants equals a libraries of congress anyway?), but they're off by an order of magnitude.

    8.4GB * 250 = 2.1TB, not 10TB.

    1. Re:Poor math by Kokuyo · · Score: 1

      Didn't they say teraBIT?

    2. Re:Poor math by Kokuyo · · Score: 1

      Oh and who said anything about double layer DVDs, eh? :)

    3. Re:Poor math by MilesAttacca · · Score: 1

      They're not off by a full order of magnitude; they're talking in terabits. There is some loss of accuracy, though, since people like nice roundish numbers.

      --
      98% of America's teens drink alcohol, smoke, and have sex. Put this in your sig if you like bagels.
    4. Re:Poor math by Albanach · · Score: 5, Informative

      but they're off by an order of magnitude.

      8.4GB * 250 = 2.1TB, not 10TB.

      Perhaps they were looking at single layer DVD

      4.7GB * 250 = 1.175TB

      1.175 * 8 = 9.400 Terabits

      Since, the summary points out it's 10 terabits per square inch, not terabytes as you seem to be using.

    5. Re:Poor math by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I find it humorous you managed to fail not once, but twice.
      And within 3 minutes...

    6. Re:Poor math by DaVince21 · · Score: 1

      You mean 4.7 GB, and multply that by eight. Sigh...

      --
      I am not devoid of humor.
  13. Poor math by Jason1729 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Besides the fact that it's stupid to equate to DVD equivalents (and how many elephents worth of volkswagons fill a football field of libraries of congress anyway?), they couldn't even to the math right for it.

    8.4GB on each DVD time 250 DVDs, = 2.1TB. They're off by a factor of 5.

  14. Large size...portability...hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Finally a thumbnail sized device that can hold my collection of porn movies!

  15. This sounds cool! by Cormacus · · Score: 1

    I'm sure it will be available commercially in 5-10 years!

    --
    Mon chien, il n'a pas du nez. Comment scent-il? TrÃs mauvais!
  16. all your music lost down the back of the sofa by petes_PoV · · Score: 2, Insightful
    If the device is really as small as they say, it will be extremely easy to lose every digital thing you value in one careless moment.

    This technology should kick-start the backup market as people will have to continually restore all their photos, music and movies every time they leave the last chip somewhere they forget about.

    Hopefully the backup/restore device will be bigger (and static) so that it, too, doesn't get easily lost.

    --
    politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
    1. Re:all your music lost down the back of the sofa by Exawatt · · Score: 1

      There's also the privacy concerns. I lose things often, and have another person looking through my life in pictures somewhat disturbs me.

    2. Re:all your music lost down the back of the sofa by zbharucha · · Score: 1

      The article seems to suggest that this device is capable of being manufactured (reasonably) cheaply. I don't see the problem in having several backups of your backup. That way, no matter how small this thing is, making redundancies should not cost an arm and a leg.

    3. Re:all your music lost down the back of the sofa by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      backup market?

      Once you've got excess storage in place, "backup" is no more than a desktop drag and drop away.

      Do "cp -r /home/media/DVD /media/saphiredrive" if you want to feel special about it in the process.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    4. Re:all your music lost down the back of the sofa by vertinox · · Score: 1

      If the device is really as small as they say, it will be extremely easy to lose every digital thing you value in one careless moment.

      This technology should kick-start the backup market as people will have to continually restore all their photos, music and movies every time they leave the last chip somewhere they forget about.

      If they get it small enough, you could just implant it in your skin like they do with RDIF chips for pets and other animals.

      That way, you can never misplace your data and it can't be stolen.

      Of course if you lost your arm, you might loose your data, but I think you would have other issues to worry about at that point.

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    5. Re:all your music lost down the back of the sofa by chgros · · Score: 1

      Have you ever seen a microSD card?

  17. Coming soon, huh? by Taibhsear · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Lemme guess Soon = 5-10 years, right?

  18. HUGE by dmomo · · Score: 1

    That's like... more bits than all the atoms in the UNIVERSE! Logically, we should be able to back up precisely on Universe on each device.

    1. Re:HUGE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      <Buzz Killington>Not quite. The current estimate of atoms in the universe is 10^80, or just under 2^266. A terabit is only 2^40 bits. If these drives were only a millimeter thick, it would take a sphere of them with a radius of about 11,843 light years to store one bit for every atom in the universe. </Buzz Killington>

    2. Re:HUGE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well we'll just have to settle for the Milky Way then.

  19. Roland? by 68030 · · Score: 1

    I saw the headline and my first instinct was to look for the 'ohnoitsroland' tag...

    Never thought I'd miss the guy.

  20. Anonymous Coward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I read this article then I JIZZED IN MY PANTS

  21. we need a new term for press release science by cats-paw · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This growing trend of announcing lab discoveries which _might_ hold commercial promise _sometime_ in the future, _maybe_, are really kind of annoying.

    What do these accomplish ? Do they show the people supplying the research $ that something is being accomplished and that the researches aren't just sitting around the lab smoking fatties ?

    Vaporware just doesn't do these "discovery" press releases enough justice.

    Could some clever person out there think of a nice derogatory term for them ?

    Something to do with flying cars, maybe.

    --
    Absolute statements are never true
    1. Re:we need a new term for press release science by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Vacuumware? Vacuousware?

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    2. Re:we need a new term for press release science by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      Suckware!

  22. Let me explain it in slashdot terms by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 4, Funny

    They mean "soon" as in the sentence "you will be having sex soon".

    == never

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:Let me explain it in slashdot terms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It wouldn't be the first time kdawson's gotten our hopes up for nothing.

    2. Re:Let me explain it in slashdot terms by Jason+Levine · · Score: 2, Funny

      You know, not all of us Slashdotters are virgins living in mom and dad's basement. Some of us are married with a few kids. Of course, then we're back to your original definition of "soon." Carry on.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    3. Re:Let me explain it in slashdot terms by PalmHair · · Score: 1

      True, some of us are married with kids, some of us are elf wizards or airline pilots. It doesn't matter whether you play The Sims, World of Warcraft or MS Flight Simulator - you can't change what you are - a slashdotter. I'm already past the denial phase and it really set me free, though I do still cry occasionally when I think nobody is looking. Who said becomming a Jedi Knight would be easy?

  23. Wow by elrous0 · · Score: 1

    I can fit my entire porn collection on just 4 discs, each the size of quarters? That's amazing!

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:Wow by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 1

      I can fit my entire porn collection on just 4 discs

      Pfft, amateur.

      --
      Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
    2. Re:Wow by Tyrannicsupremacy · · Score: 1

      So YOU stole Leeuwarden's municipal porn collection.

      --
      http://i.cubeupload.com/T6cyLu.png
    3. Re:Wow by FishAdmin · · Score: 2, Funny

      I can fit my entire porn collection on just 4 discs

      Pfft, amateur.

      No, no; I think he meant the professional videos, too, not just the amateur stuff.

      --
      Last night I played a blank tape at full volume. The mime next door went nuts.
    4. Re:Wow by mc1138 · · Score: 1

      Is that just the human to human stuff?

    5. Re:Wow by maxume · · Score: 1

      I wonder if anyone in the porn industry anticipated the collection fetish.

      And yes, I am pretty sure that having several months worth of video that you never watch qualifies as a collection fetish.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  24. Where's the rest of the story? by thethibs · · Score: 1

    TFA is unfortunately incomplete. So far what they seem to have is ten terabits per square inch, but the bits are all zeros.

    --
    I'm a Programmer. That's one level above Software Engineer and one level below Engineer.
    1. Re:Where's the rest of the story? by Volante3192 · · Score: 1

      Just make a second one, with all the bits '1.'

      Then it's just a matter of reading from the right quarter at the right time.

    2. Re:Where's the rest of the story? by thethibs · · Score: 1

      I knew there was something I was missing!

      --
      I'm a Programmer. That's one level above Software Engineer and one level below Engineer.
  25. Do the calculations :P by kingcobra0128 · · Score: 0

    10 terabits per square inch Thats the actually quote which actually works out to a whopping 4375 GB on one side of a quarter (quarter being a totally of 35 square inches) 10 Tbs being 125 GB so 4.375 TB on a quarter size disk :D imagine the HDs :D

    1. Re:Do the calculations :P by Overzeetop · · Score: 2, Informative

      Man, I'd hate to see your change purse. The quarters in my pocket are just under an inch in diameter, or about 0.7in^2 per side. Allowing for a hub and spindle opening, maybe 1/3 to 1/2 of that is available for data, which would be closer to 2.3-3.5Tb. Surprisingly close to the article claims (others above have posted 2.1Tb values; I didn't do the math).

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    2. Re:Do the calculations :P by kingcobra0128 · · Score: 0

      and the surface area is equal to 4*pi*r squared (4 * 3.14 * 0.955/2) squared which actually equals 36.005 square inches then take 36.005 and multiple that by your 125 GB and its actually higher then 4375 not smaller. But maybe my Canadian quarter is a bit bigger then yours lol.

    3. Re:Do the calculations :P by kingcobra0128 · · Score: 0

      But also I was taking the account for the whole size of the quarter which doesn't actually happen with CDs or DVDs because the outside edge having data there would be a bad idea I actually didn't consider the spindle and who says the will be a spindle and what would you lose in surface area on a quarter would have to be small maybe and one inch of surface area I am not sure though

    4. Re:Do the calculations :P by kingcobra0128 · · Score: 0

      Think before you write since they said "square inch" which is the surface area lol I actually went and got the formula for the surface area of a circle -- (4*pi*r^2) and the diameter for a quarter is .955 inch so half that or instead use 2 * pi * d ^ 2

    5. Re:Do the calculations :P by Brickwall · · Score: 1
      Well, in my universe, the area of circle is pi*r squared. So you would multiply by two if you could use both sides of the quarter. 3.1415 * 2 * .995/2 ^2 works out to about 1.5 square inches. I mean, come on man - a 3.5" by 5" piece of paper has a total surface area of 35 square inches. You seriously think that a quarter has the same area as the piece of paper?

      Please hook me up with whatever you're smoking; it seems pretty powerful.

      --
      What was once true, is no longer so
    6. Re:Do the calculations :P by kingcobra0128 · · Score: 0

      ooops I am wrong I was looking at the surface area of a sphere but we are still of as it is 10 times 125 GB as in 1250 GB per square inch it still being more then the 2 TB that you suggest more along the lines of 5.890 TB

    7. Re:Do the calculations :P by Brickwall · · Score: 1

      Go read your math book again. 4 pi r squared is the formula for the surface area of a sphere. You might know those as "balls", though I do wonder if you have any.

      --
      What was once true, is no longer so
    8. Re:Do the calculations :P by burning-toast · · Score: 1

      Considering if you made a square 1" by 1" in dimensions you would have a square large enough for a quarter to fit inside of (being 1 square inch) since the quarter's diameter is 0.955 inches. I fail to see how you get 36 square inches out of that.

      - Toast

    9. Re:Do the calculations :P by kingcobra0128 · · Score: 0

      wow my math is not failing I am just failing too early in the morning for me to be awake :( Forget to half the diameter still equals a lot of space for a quarter :)

    10. Re:Do the calculations :P by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      the surface area is equal to 4*pi*r squared (4 * 3.14 * 0.955/2) squared

      There's something wrong there. Perhaps you don't know how to use brackets, or perhaps you really did square right at the end as your use of brackets implies? In either case, your figure is laughably wrong.

      Put the maths aside and try applying some common sense. Single sided, 36 square inches is, not surprisingly, equivalent to a 6 by 6 square. That's like a bathroom tile. Even if you count both sides, it's like a square with sides over 4 inches. I for one don't have any beermat sized coins.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    11. Re:Do the calculations :P by Hognoxious · · Score: 1
      When you've finally woken up you can go and learn the Order of Operations. It might stop you embarrassing yourself like this:

      and the surface area is equal to 4*pi*r squared (4 * 3.14 * 0.955/2) squared which actually equals 36.005 square inches then take 36.005 and multiple that by your 125 GB and its actually higher then 4375 not smaller.

      If you've got the energy later in the day you could maybe do something about the run-on sentences?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    12. Re:Do the calculations :P by kingcobra0128 · · Score: 0

      I guess I should of read the website instead of using there picture of a sphere which is a circle. but my math wasn't failing by the way if you take the original value I gave 4. TB that would be the right amount for both sides :D

    13. Re:Do the calculations :P by kingcobra0128 · · Score: 0

      I did read a math book as in the web just read the picture not the actually sphere word. that would be a better type of media anyways DVD balls :P use a metal core with the crystal over the top of it :P then they could use magnets to hold it in place for reading and writing :D

    14. Re:Do the calculations :P by WalksOnDirt · · Score: 1

      and the surface area is equal to 4*pi*r squared...

      Spherical quarters? Neat, but how many can you fit in your pocket?

      --
      a,e,i,o,u and sometimes w and y (at be if of up cwm by)
    15. Re:Do the calculations :P by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      and the surface area is equal to 4*pi*r squared (4 * 3.14 * 0.955/2) squared which actually equals 36.005 square inches then take 36.005 and multiple that by your 125 GB and its actually higher then 4375 not smaller. But maybe my Canadian quarter is a bit bigger then yours lol.

      4*pi*r squared is the surface of a sphere not a circle.

      And even if it were the surface of a circle, the formula would properly be written 4*pi*(r squared), which is NOT the same as (4*pi*r) squared.

      In other words, your Canadian quarter may be a bit bigger than my American quarter, but your brain seems to be a bit smaller than your Canadian quarter.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  26. Cool research != practical technology by Eukariote · · Score: 1

    I so resent research scientists selling some cute tinkering on a nano-scale as having imminent potential for practical high-density memory or some other technology. Almost none of these stories have any chance of ever resulting in something that works and is economically competitive. The scientists in question know that very well, they're just putting a practical applications spin on it because popular-science writers/press/websites go for that. Pimps.

    1. Re:Cool research != practical technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't.

      Blue laser research for the blu-ray players now in mass production was about 99-00...

    2. Re:Cool research != practical technology by Spatial · · Score: 1

      That's what I was thinking when I read the summary. "I'll see you in ten years."

  27. It's like the crystals in Superman, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Soon they can build whole new landscapes with their petabytes of data, and we can form the earth as we see fit, until...

  28. Microscopic nanoscale by MadKeithV · · Score: 1

    It's a good thing that it's microscopic nano-scale, as opposed to macroscopic nanoscale!

    1. Re:Microscopic nanoscale by Brickwall · · Score: 1

      Hey, this is Slashdot. No economic jokes allowed!

      --
      What was once true, is no longer so
    2. Re:Microscopic nanoscale by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      It could have been nanoscopic microscale.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  29. Coming next by halber_mensch · · Score: 2, Insightful

    MPAA/RIAA lawsuits against anyone who buys these devices, because obviously you can't afford to fill that device with legitimately purchased content or you'd be as bankrupt as they're going to make you with the lawsuit.

    --
    perl -e "eval pack(q{H*},join q{},qw{70 72696e74207061636b28717b482a7d2c717b343 637323635363534323533343430617d293b})"
    1. Re:Coming next by bestalexguy · · Score: 1

      Oh, with an HD video camera and a pretty girlfriend you definitely can. No need for purchased content.

  30. Lies! (In the title) by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

    I was astounded. Somehow, the structure of DVDs can be changed, and they can be shrunk to such a degree to allow 250 of them to be stacked in one quarter ( presumably US) sized container.

    Turns out, they just were talking about the data on the DVD, not the physical object. There goes my "shipping company based on carrier pidgens" concept.

    --
    Your ad here. Ask me how!
  31. Hmm... by kabocox · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I wonder how long it'll take us to invent genetic memory. Let's think of what it'd really require. It requires encoding memory into your reproductive packages. How many generations back would you include? Most likely as many as possible.

    Thinking about it, we've got 9 months to grow and develop inside another human. I wonder how much/little engineering that it would take to have neural downloads straight into the kid's memory right up until birth. Of course you could always run into the Dune problem where past personalities want to take control of the new generation. That's one of the reasons that the memories might be useful, but entire personalities would be dangerous.

    Who needs history education if you could remember it happening through your relative's view point?

    Of course some things folks might want to forget or try to force future generations not to remember.

    1. Re:Hmm... by downhole · · Score: 1

      Do we really want to change how memory works in this kind of way, though? Take a long-standing conflict like, say, Israel and Palestine. Do we really want it to be possible to pre-program the next generation with vivid memories of all of the perceived injustices and wrongs committed over the last 50/100/1000 years? Pretty much every nation and culture has some sort of old feud against someone or other that has long since been forgotten about. I think that part of what makes peace possible is that the next generation will always feel somewhat detached from the problems of the past. How can there ever be even a chance at peace anywhere if the next generation feels every problem that happened to the last as if it happened to them?

      --
      I don't reply to ACs
    2. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, that would be interesting and we'd of course need some way to search through all those memories. Maybe Google could help out and embed a little search engine in our heads. We could label everything and put little stars next to the important stuff.

    3. Re:Hmm... by linzeal · · Score: 1

      So we will have people who are 99% South Park and Family Guy DNA. Maybe when they dream they will be playing some MMORPG or something.

      We live at the advent of the era that will see space colonization, the grand unified theory and nanobots and some people who have access to millions of volumes of books, textbooks and research papers choose instead to download porn, cartoons and video games. It is pathetic the amount of space utilized to host all the crap people use to entertain themselves. Are people addicted to entertainment nowadays? Isn't it more satisfying to go to sleep knowing that you enriched yourself and humanity through your work?

    4. Re:Hmm... by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Take a long-standing conflict like, say, Israel and Palestine. Do we really want it to be possible to pre-program the next generation with vivid memories of all of the perceived injustices and wrongs committed over the last 50/100/1000 years?

      Once again, Dune dealt with this problem. The idea is that you leave the genetic memories latent within the person until they reach adulthood, have a well-formed psyche, and are prepared for it, then let them remember their ancestors' lives. This prevents memories of events that happened 1000 years ago from traumatizing a person or becoming to integrated into their identity.

      Of course, in the Israel-Palestine case you still run into the problem that the settlers and the Arabs already define themselves by supposed atrocities perpetrated against them anywhere from 50 to 2000 years ago without any genetic memories at all. Letting them remember that the XYZ Massacre was actually faked (yeah, some have been in that area) or that the ABC Conquest wasn't as violent as the stories and histories say might actually be beneficial, now that I think of it.

    5. Re:Hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As much as we like to believe we only use "10%" (or whatever) of our brain, brain storage is not unlimited. I seriously doubt most people could even handle that much information. I know I often have to shift memories in and out depending on what I'm doing. I usually tend to hold a lot of programming information and such which limits my capacity for other things. If I need to do something else then I have to let go of some of the programming stuff.

      I keep a baseline level of information/skill but there is a lot of crap that I can't keep stuffed in there all the time.

    6. Re:Hmm... by canonymous · · Score: 1

      I wonder how long it'll take us to invent genetic memory. Let's think of what it'd really require.

      You seem to have skipped this step. There is no indication right now that there is any way of encoding memories into genes. We don't even know how memory works, or how to manipulate memories in already existing humans, let alone unborn ones.

  32. Coming soon! by Lucas123 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I hate it when someone uses "coming soon" in the title of a story when production of the technology is at least 10 years off and industry adoption isn't even in sight. Oh, and don't forget there are a half dozen other nanotechnologies promising the same thing as this one, such carbon nanotubes and scanning tunneling microscopy, atomic force microscopy, holographic storage, heat-assisted magnetic recording, and quantum dot technology.

  33. A horse in my wallet. by SharpFang · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, say what you want, right here with me, in my wallet, I have a horse. Smaller than a quarter.
    Precisely, the complete genome sequenced and sorted. On a 2GB MicroSD card.

    "A lot of books" is an odd abstract that doesn't really impress me. But the idea of a full, unabridged, complete set of information which describes a real lifeform in full, contains the program of all the life functions, all the complexity of neural system, all the mysteries of instincts and social behaviors, the complexity of senses, the strength, immunity, lifeforce of a powerful creature - all this potential, described as a bunch of files consisting of rows upon rows of letters AGCT (gzipped).

    Sure we have no technology to reproduce a living creature from this data alone. But that looks like a really small problem compared to all the incredible knowledge achieved through billions of years of evolution, to solve all these problems of creating a standalone, self-repairing, self-replicating, self-defending, and quite pretty to that, piece of "biotechnology" - actually, the solution to re-creating it from that data (only on different media) is right in that data. We just can't really use it.

    250 high quality movies, in some future? blah.
    A horse in my wallet, now and today, that is what impresses me, really.

    --
    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    1. Re:A horse in my wallet. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > A horse in my wallet, now and today, that is what impresses me, really.

      That's what SHE said!

    2. Re:A horse in my wallet. by Your+Pal+Dave · · Score: 4, Funny

      A horse in my wallet, now and today, that is what impresses me, really.

      I dunno, any horse manages to keep a copy in the nucleus of each of its cells.

    3. Re:A horse in my wallet. by HiThere · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That's probably about 1/2 of the information required to reproduce a horse. The genome isn't everything, even if it were complete (which I doubt, because repetitive segment of codons are beyond what I believe is our current ability to sequence).

      But *if* you had the complete genome, including the mitochondiral sequences, etc. it still wouldn't be enough. You also need the environment to raise the genome, which includes not only mechanisms for feeding it, but an unknown but large number of prions which are required for proteins to fold correctly. Not all proteins require such assistance, but many do, and without them you can't create a live horse...or any other mammal, probably any other chordate.

      I'm guessing that the genome is half the information needed. It could be considerably less than half. (Or, of course, more. I can't even tell if I'm being conservative.)

      Note that the genome carries practically all the information for the variation between horses...or between horses and zebras. But this isn't at all the same as half the information.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    4. Re:A horse in my wallet. by smallfries · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's a nice idea, but not actually true.

      There is enough information on that card to create a horse within the environment of a horse. There is nowhere near enough information to create a horse from scratch.

      Look at the new cloning projects trying to bring back extinct animals from the dead. The first step is to find a living species that is genetically close enough to act as a surrogate host.

      --
      Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
    5. Re:A horse in my wallet. by pzs · · Score: 1

      But the idea of a full, unabridged, complete set of information which describes a real lifeform in full, contains the program of all the life functions, all the complexity of neural system, all the mysteries of instincts and social behaviors, the complexity of senses, the strength, immunity, lifeforce of a powerful creature - all this potential, described as a bunch of files consisting of rows upon rows of letters AGCT (gzipped).

      What about epigenetics? The sequence is not everything.

    6. Re:A horse in my wallet. by MobyDisk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually, that 2GB MicroSD card is very inefficient as far as nature is concerned. That same amount of DNA exists in genetic material a million times smaller. We have a long way to go.

    7. Re:A horse in my wallet. by Yetihehe · · Score: 3, Funny

      But the idea of a full, unabridged, complete set of information which describes a real lifeform in full, contains the program of all the life functions, all the complexity of neural system, all the mysteries of instincts and social behaviors, the complexity of senses, the strength, immunity, lifeforce of a powerful creature - all this potential, described as a bunch of files consisting of rows upon rows of letters AGCT (gzipped).

      Yeah, but it takes YEARS to compile! Also if you don't compile it in a networked environment with some of the same nodes, --social-behaviors option is often ignored.

      --
      Extreme Programming - Redundant Array of Inexpensive Developers
    8. Re:A horse in my wallet. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You could in theory achieve the same effect with a single horse hair instead of a bulky SD card.

    9. Re:A horse in my wallet. by jtgd · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but the human technology that let's him keep it on an SD card in his wallet is more impressive than keeping a single horse cell in his wallet.

      --
      J
    10. Re:A horse in my wallet. by mad.frog · · Score: 1

      Precisely, the complete genome sequenced and sorted. On a 2GB MicroSD card.

      Dude: the menu is not the meal.

      And that is NOT a horse. Horses eat. And poop. A lot.

    11. Re:A horse in my wallet. by jedidiah · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > 250 high quality movies, in some future? blah.

      Those movies can be anything. They don't necessarily have to be formula Action movies.

      They could be the history of the world from the Learning Company.

      They could be any other set of subjects from the Learning Company.

      They could be that same content in audio form (times 10) rather than video form.

      They could be the entire Project Gutenberg collection.

      They could be history recorded as it was happening.

      The genome of a horse is a little less useful. Hell, we don't even have a "decoder" for it yet.

      Keep your horse. I would rather have Plato.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    12. Re:A horse in my wallet. by NeoSkandranon · · Score: 1

      I don't get it.

      You could gzip a stream of binary that represents code to do something amazing or revolutionary, yet in that form and sans proper environment, it's useless and nigh unreadable, much like your horse genome.

      --
      If you can't see the value in jet powered ants you should turn in your nerd card. - Dunbal (464142)
    13. Re:A horse in my wallet. by master_p · · Score: 1

      in my wallet, I have a horse

      Oh really? I have a horse near where I have my wallet!!! :-)

    14. Re:A horse in my wallet. by SharpFang · · Score: 1

      mitochondrial RNA file is included in the set :)

      As for prions, [citation needed] please?

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    15. Re:A horse in my wallet. by SharpFang · · Score: 1

      You could argue a game on a CD is not a game, until you install and run it.

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    16. Re:A horse in my wallet. by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Yeah, a citation *is* needed. Unfortunately, I can't supply it. I still believe it's true, but the only reference I HAD was an thing on yeast reproduction. And I don't have that now.

      But what background did you THINK there was which allowed prion diseases to exist? It's one of the standard mechanisms used during cell metabolism gone astray. And prions are carried by the cytoplasm. Which means that they are inherited with the egg, but not carried by the sperm.

      Again, sorry, no references. It's often mentioned within articles about something else. But I'm guessing as to the amount of information carried in this manner.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    17. Re:A horse in my wallet. by glittalogik · · Score: 1

      You could, but that analogy is only apt if running the CD makes the entire cast of Final Fantasy or F.E.A.R. or Barbie Horse Adventures appear in your living room.

  34. Wrong units. by lazyforker · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Could someone please convert "250 DVDs" into a useful unit - such as Libraries of Congress? How big would this thing have to be to hold a LoC?

  35. Twenty-four hours?! by macraig · · Score: 1, Insightful

    You have to keep the substrate heated to 1500 degrees Centigrade for twenty-four freaking hours? That's a LOT of expended energy to create the doggone thing, isn't it? Something tells me it takes less energy to make those 250 DVDs.

    I don't think this process is going to be qualifying for an Energy Star rating any time soon. Here we go again... using MORE energy like there will never be a Peak Oil event tomorrow.

    1. Re:Twenty-four hours?! by dfdashh · · Score: 1

      Yeah, true, but you also have to consider what kind of batch the manufacturer can concurrently process. These are also supposedly small objects, so perhaps many of them could fit into one batch and spread the cost out until they are feasible from an energy-expenditure/cost perspective. Who knows...I'm not holding my breath.

      --
      df -h /my/head
    2. Re:Twenty-four hours?! by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      Google "insulation".

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    3. Re:Twenty-four hours?! by HiThere · · Score: 1

      *Keeping* something at a particular temperature doesn't require much energy if you've got good insulation. It's true that higher temperatures require better insulation, and that 1500 C is pretty high. That just means that you need several layers of vacuum insulation. Make building the oven expensive, and getting it up to heat in the first place expensive, but not holding it at the right temperature.

      At that temperature you need to worry about radiative losses as well as conductive losses, so vacuum alone isn't sufficient. You've got to polish the surfaces well, and carefully select the materials. But it should still be quite manageable. Just expensive to set up.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    4. Re:Twenty-four hours?! by Chih · · Score: 1

      "You have to keep the substrate heated to 1500 degrees Centigrade for twenty-four freaking hours?" No, the sapphire "die" that is used for the manufacturing process is heated that long.

      --
      For best results, avoid doing stupid things.
  36. "coming soon" vs vaporware by Gorphrim · · Score: 1

    Don't like the "coming soon" headline for this product? Too bad. What do you expect? The editor is kdawson.

    --

    Queens of the Stone Age - they rule
  37. Not at all that bad. by SharpFang · · Score: 1

    Also, sapphire is quite expensive, even artificial one.

    But from the description it looks like it's only needed as a tool to mass-produce these, reusable. Meaning you make such one sapphire matrix and then use it to produce bulk amounts of media which may be a simple plastic coated with these polymers.

    --
    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
  38. A post-turntable future? by RevWaldo · · Score: 1

    How long will it be until storage technologies that reply on motors and spinning disks and some form of stylus (magnetic heads, lasers, etc.) are a thing of the past? Or are there fundamental reasons why motor-driven media will always have an edge over their solid-state brethren for the foreseeable future?

  39. Standard measurement units by szquirrel · · Score: 1

    10 terabits per square inch

    None of your tech mumbo-jumbo, please. Just tell me how many Libraries of Congress per width of a human hair.

    --
    Never approach a vast undertaking with a half-vast plan.
    1. Re:Standard measurement units by HiThere · · Score: 1

      How long is the hair?

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  40. what about the reader? by White+Yeti · · Score: 1
    Buyer: Cool! Now where can I play my shiny new cube of movies?

    Salesman: I can sell you a ticket to Berkeley, or Amhurst.

    Later, what happens if your home reader springs a leak and loses (looses ;) all its helium? As the tags suggest, this won't be leaving the lab soon.

  41. Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A storage media capable of archiving my entire porn collection!

  42. How many Humans? by WED+Fan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    LOC is a nice measurement, I want the technology to progress to the point we can digitize an entire colonization team, load them onto a ship with equipment necessary to reconstruct them and then send that ship to the farthest reaches. It's all about saving the evils of man so we can propagate.

    --
    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.
    1. Re:How many Humans? by PalmHair · · Score: 4, Funny

      Does 1 KLOC = 1024 or 1000 LOCs? Also, how does that translate to metric units - GBs. (GB - Gutenberg Library)

    2. Re:How many Humans? by jshackney · · Score: 3, Funny

      1 KLOC = 1024
      1 KLoC = 1000

  43. Celsius, not centigrade by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it hasn't been centigrade since 1948...

  44. torkstone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if you think "soon" means "soon" in the Tech world, then you must be a "buffoon"

  45. The Pigeons are winning... by craenor · · Score: 1
  46. Yeah but... by Dallas+Caley · · Score: 1

    this is really cool, don't get me wrong, but is size the most important thing now? so what if we can get 250 DVD's into a square inch, what if there are only 10 DVD's worth watching in the first place?

    All kidding aside though, i wonder more about how fast i can get my data than about how small it is physically. Think about it, do you really want to carry around your entire cd/movie collection everywhere you go? what if you loose it or it gets stolen? I'd rather have a gigantic drive attached to my server at home where i can have it backed up consistently and have it secured, then just access the info via the net. what i need is bandwidth, thats the problem.

  47. How does I/O work? by nerph · · Score: 1

    Is this similar to CD/DVD with bumps and grooves and read/written by a laser? Or is it more like solid state drives/memory where the assembled block copolymers provide a foundation for the formation of transistors? More generally, is it random access or is there a seek time involved?

  48. SDxC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    didnt sandisk announce at CES the SD XC. with soon (sooner than this vapor crystal) to be 1TB storage on a SD card?

  49. Re:You can't beat the consumer's law. by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1

    Recordable memory technology available to the public will only ever be allowed increase at a set rate over time.

    We hear whispers of astonishing technologies over the years. Sci-fi words like, 'Holographic' and 'Crystal' float like mist, but then nothing. And amazingly storage technology seems to grow only at a steady, reliable pace using the most mundane, already-tooled up factory standards. Heck, the holographic disk thing was released last year after the steady commercial creep of the 'cutting edge' had passed it by. Probably allowed to exist because it was considered a small-fry potato by the military.

    I find it frustrating that the public is treated like a retarded child. Everybody knows that the real state of the art is well-funded and kept secret. And yet we all still cheer like fools when some 'new' advancement is made, as though our lives in the public sector are anything but fastidiously planned. There isn't any chance or invention for us. Who the heck knows what the state of real cutting edge technology is today? I have some educated guesses, some verifications, and the kinds of things we were capable of doing ten years ago would make certain aspects of Star Trek look like the "Toys R Us" version. But the people who could tell us, and some of you spineless cogs visit here, are under writs of secrecy.

    The public is stuck in a neurotic state of cognitive dissonance. We know there's a real score, but we act like the one we're given is the whole deal, even to the point where we forget that it's not even close.

    Oh my!

    Touched a nerve there, didn't I? --Was it the phrase, "Spineless cogs" or simply pointing out an obvious truth that nobody likes to think about? --The reaction against which (moderation into negative troll dust) is indeed the purest expression of, "A neurotic state of cognitive dissonance" as you're likely to get. Other than shooting a person dead for talking about the elephant in the living room, that is.

    The most disturbing part is this. . .

    The more I learn about human nature, about auto-reactions, about willingly self-imposed slavery and above all, about how virtually everything people say to themselves and to others is a lie either conscious or unconscious, the more I understand how those driving the machine can do so with such callous disregard for humanity. --I don't agree with it, but I certainly find I understand its origin.

    -FL

  50. Researcher in related field by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This isn't nearly practical yet because of problems of pattern transfer, plus this method only allows the creation of straight lines and there is non-uniformity in periodicity due to entropic effects of annealing. It will be a long time for this to be useful, read/write head domain size isn't even close.

    cheers

  51. I do this now by wirefarm · · Score: 1

    I have all of Wikipedia, all of Google, all of YouTube, in fact all of the data available on the Internet here in my pocket on a device about the size and shape of about 30 playing cards.
    It's constantly updated and refreshed in almost real time.

    It's my iPod. I get all of this as long as I have an Internet connection somewhere nearby.

    In practice, that's really good enough for me. Why would I want to carry around terabytes of data that I couldn't trust to have not gone stale since it was committed to memory, 99.99% of which I have no need for?

    --
    -- My Weblog.
  52. Height of stacked paper! by reidconti · · Score: 1

    I really want to know how far a stack of paper with this much data would stretch.

    1. Re:Height of stacked paper! by tsjaikdus · · Score: 1

      I really want to know how far a stack of paper with this much data would stretch.

      Paper or DVD leaflets?

  53. Re:You can't beat the consumer's law. by nido · · Score: 1

    Oh my!

    Touched a nerve there, didn't I? --Was it the phrase, "Spineless cogs" or simply pointing out an obvious truth that nobody likes to think about?

    It seems that you've committed both faux pas mentioned by Mr. Swann in the opening to one of his books:

    ITEMS TO CONSIDER

    It's unkind to point out
    the Obvious
    To those that don't want to see it.

    But it's worse to point out
    the Invisible
    To those convinced it doesn't exist.

    I found an excerpt on a web forum a few months back. I wanted to send it to someone, and in the process of searching I found that someone had scanned their copy to a 41mb PDF. The PDF of Penetration floating around the torrent sites looks like it's been OCR'd, as there are typos that are not in my photocopied version...

    --
    Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
    www.teslabox.com