Read the article folks, they're proposing two things:
1) The construction of an FBI monitored network behind which nonmilitary government networks would reside.
2) Expanding this monitoring to selectively protect commercial networks.
Comments: #1 is a Good Thing. As a taxpayer, I have no problems about protecting public property with firewalls, etc. This is just an extension of what the Pentagon is already using to protect military networks.
#2 *could* be a Bad Thing, if those sectors of industry are forced to submit to such monitoring. Given the American tendancies not to trust the government, I really doubt banks, etc. will elect to join such systems if they have to capitulate the standards of encryption they already enjoy.
The interesting part, is that the FBI is jockeying to become the knowledge/technology leader amoung conventional law enforcement agencies. The FBI has already started to internationalize, participating in counter-terrorism, investigating war crimes, etc.
But can the Internet be monitored in a fashion that doesn't affront the American values that the FBI are sworn to protect? Maybe. But that doens't mean that the Federal government doesn't have the right to protect their (our) computers the same way as private networks.
Litium Niobate is one cystalline candidate for holographic data storage. However, it is too expensive to compete with more conventional types of data storage.
There's ongoing research ( http://nanonet.rice.edu/research/boy d_res.html) to use photopolymers as a cheaper holographic medium. If such research comes to fruition, you're more likely to see CD like disks coated w/ a holographic layer than the typical science fiction "data crystal."
Other problems w/ holograms: - materials are not totally transparent, so "cubes" might be out of the question
-materials must be chemically resistant to the atmosphere (e.g. oxidation, humidity), which might necessitate that they are coated. Such a coating might have deleterious effects on the substrates optical properties.
- storing a hologram changes the structure of the crystal, which can cause limits of data density and beam penetration.
- multiple holograms can be stored at the same location by rotating the crystal, but each hologram attenuates the possible intensity of subsequent holograms in that location.
- holographic "efficency" is a funciton of the difference between the refractive indices of the substrate components. photopolymers have a very small range of refractive indices as oppossed to inorganic crystals.
Overall the medium might not be rewritable, but a high density, long lasting storage medium would be ideal for back-ups.
Anyway, it's been awhile since I "got out of the business" of chemistry, but this is what I remember.
Slashdot Mirror
Read the article folks, they're proposing two things:
1) The construction of an FBI monitored network behind which nonmilitary government networks would reside.
2) Expanding this monitoring to selectively protect commercial networks.
Comments:
#1 is a Good Thing. As a taxpayer, I have no problems about protecting public property with firewalls, etc. This is just an extension of what the Pentagon is already using to protect military networks.
#2 *could* be a Bad Thing, if those sectors of industry are forced to submit to such monitoring. Given the American tendancies not to trust the government, I really doubt banks, etc. will elect to join such systems if they have to capitulate the standards of encryption they already enjoy.
The interesting part, is that the FBI is jockeying to become the knowledge/technology leader amoung conventional law enforcement agencies. The FBI has already started to internationalize, participating in counter-terrorism, investigating war crimes, etc.
But can the Internet be monitored in a fashion that doesn't affront the American values that the FBI are sworn to protect? Maybe. But that doens't mean that the Federal government doesn't have the right to protect their (our) computers the same way as private networks.
There's ongoing research ( http://nanonet.rice.edu/research/boy d_res.html) to use photopolymers as a cheaper holographic medium. If such research comes to fruition, you're more likely to see CD like disks coated w/ a holographic layer than the typical science fiction "data crystal."
Other problems w/ holograms:
- materials are not totally transparent, so "cubes" might be out of the question
-materials must be chemically resistant to the atmosphere (e.g. oxidation, humidity), which might necessitate that they are coated. Such a coating might have deleterious effects on the substrates optical properties.
- storing a hologram changes the structure of the crystal, which can cause limits of data density and beam penetration.
- multiple holograms can be stored at the same location by rotating the crystal, but each hologram attenuates the possible intensity of subsequent holograms in that location.
- holographic "efficency" is a funciton of the difference between the refractive indices of the substrate components. photopolymers have a very small range of refractive indices as oppossed to inorganic crystals.
Overall the medium might not be rewritable, but a high density, long lasting storage medium would be ideal for back-ups.
Anyway, it's been awhile since I "got out of the business" of chemistry, but this is what I remember.