×

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!

Coming Soon, 250 DVDs In a Quarter-Sized Device

kdawson posted more than 5 years ago | from the video-library-in-your-pocket dept.

Data Storage 209

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."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

209 comments

DVDs (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26928695)

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

Re:DVDs (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26928779)

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

Re:DVDs (5, Interesting)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 5 years ago | (#26928941)

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 [amazon.com] 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.

Re:DVDs (5, Funny)

JaredOfEuropa (526365) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929207)

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".

Re:DVDs (1)

saboola (655522) | more than 5 years ago | (#26930787)

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

Re:DVDs (2, Interesting)

Botia (855350) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929377)

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

Re:DVDs (3, Funny)

von_rick (944421) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929809)

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

Re:DVDs (1)

awshidahak (1282256) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929715)

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.

Re:DVDs (1)

theeddie55 (982783) | more than 5 years ago | (#26930011)

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.

Re:DVDs (1)

Lisp Craft (1339611) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929761)

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?

A horse in my wallet. (5, Insightful)

SharpFang (651121) | more than 5 years ago | (#26930473)

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.

Re:DVDs (1, Insightful)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 5 years ago | (#26930523)

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!!

Re:DVDs (3, Informative)

allawalla (1030240) | more than 5 years ago | (#26928973)

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

Re:DVDs (3, Funny)

Albanach (527650) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929379)

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?

Re:DVDs (1)

aliquis (678370) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929351)

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

Just say 1 or 2 TB.

Nice, hopefully coming soon (5, Interesting)

foxalopex (522681) | more than 5 years ago | (#26928747)

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.

Art Immitates Life (4, Informative)

chill (34294) | more than 5 years ago | (#26928749)

"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

Re:Art Immitates Life (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26929155)

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

Re:Art Immitates Life (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26930667)

Thats alot of porn!

Ok. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26928757)

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.

uncompressed (1)

FunkyELF (609131) | more than 5 years ago | (#26928763)

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

Re:uncompressed (1)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 5 years ago | (#26928893)

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).

Re:uncompressed (2, Interesting)

Firethorn (177587) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929511)

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.

Re:uncompressed (1)

FlyingBishop (1293238) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929375)

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

Re:uncompressed (1)

MaxwellEdison (1368785) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929589)

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.

coming soon? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26928767)

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

Re:coming soon? (1)

senatosa (1453155) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929273)

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

When I get... (1)

Thelasko (1196535) | more than 5 years ago | (#26928801)

my Holographic Versatile Disk, [wikipedia.org] 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.

Re:When I get... (3, Interesting)

LUH 3418 (1429407) | more than 5 years ago | (#26930147)

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.

Portable music players with huge capacities? (2, Interesting)

MtViewGuy (197597) | more than 5 years ago | (#26928829)

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.

Re:Portable music players with huge capacities? (2, Funny)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929149)

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.

real vs. vaporware (5, Funny)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 5 years ago | (#26928921)

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

Re:real vs. vaporware (3, Funny)

Roland Piquepaille (780675) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929191)

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

Is that 8-track + parity?

Re:real vs. vaporware (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26929815)

ah, zombie!!!

Re:real vs. vaporware (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26930621)

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

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

Heated for HOW Long?! (5, Insightful)

Logical Zebra (1423045) | more than 5 years ago | (#26928923)

...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.

Re:Heated for HOW Long?! (1)

Guysmiley777 (880063) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929249)

...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?

Re:Heated for HOW Long?! (2, Funny)

lucifig (255388) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929381)

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

Re:Heated for HOW Long?! (1)

Firethorn (177587) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929785)

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...

Re:Heated for HOW Long?! (1)

cduffy (652) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929585)

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.

Re:Heated for HOW Long?! (1)

cduffy (652) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929627)

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

Re:Heated for HOW Long?! (2, Informative)

Firethorn (177587) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929747)

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

Also, Silicon is 1414C [wikia.com], and yes they melt [memc.com] 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.

Re:Heated for HOW Long?! (1)

smoker2 (750216) | more than 5 years ago | (#26930389)

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

Re:Heated for HOW Long?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26930411)

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

Not at all that bad. (1)

SharpFang (651121) | more than 5 years ago | (#26930771)

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.

But.. (0)

Eravnrekaree (467752) | more than 5 years ago | (#26928925)

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.

Re:But.. (3, Informative)

Kamots (321174) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929289)

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.

Poor math (1)

Jason1729 (561790) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929001)

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.

Re:Poor math (1)

MilesAttacca (1016569) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929111)

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.

Re:Poor math (5, Informative)

Albanach (527650) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929507)

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.

Poor math (0, Redundant)

Jason1729 (561790) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929061)

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.

Re:Poor math (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26930259)

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

Large size...portability...hmmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26929065)

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

all your music lost down the back of the sofa (2, Insightful)

petes_PoV (912422) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929223)

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.

Re:all your music lost down the back of the sofa (1)

Exawatt (1463719) | more than 5 years ago | (#26930551)

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

Re:all your music lost down the back of the sofa (1)

zbharucha (1331473) | more than 5 years ago | (#26930675)

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.

Coming soon, huh? (0, Redundant)

Taibhsear (1286214) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929235)

Lemme guess Soon = 5-10 years, right?

Let me explain it in slashdot terms (4, Funny)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929349)

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

== never

Re:Let me explain it in slashdot terms (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26930577)

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

HUGE (1)

dmomo (256005) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929245)

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.

Roland? (1)

68030 (215387) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929261)

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

Never thought I'd miss the guy.

Anonymous Coward (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26929285)

I read this article then I JIZZED IN MY PANTS

we need a new term for press release science (3, Insightful)

cats-paw (34890) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929333)

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.

Wow (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929411)

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

Re:Wow (1)

Farmer Tim (530755) | more than 5 years ago | (#26930139)

I can fit my entire porn collection on just 4 discs

Pfft, amateur.

Re:Wow (2, Funny)

FishAdmin (1288708) | more than 5 years ago | (#26930451)

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.

Where's the rest of the story? (1)

thethibs (882667) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929501)

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

Re:Where's the rest of the story? (1)

Volante3192 (953645) | more than 5 years ago | (#26930067)

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.

Do the calculations :P (1)

kingcobra0128 (1131641) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929561)

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

Re:Do the calculations :P (2, Informative)

Overzeetop (214511) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929843)

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).

Re:Do the calculations :P (1)

kingcobra0128 (1131641) | more than 5 years ago | (#26930493)

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.

Re:Do the calculations :P (1)

kingcobra0128 (1131641) | more than 5 years ago | (#26930559)

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

Re:Do the calculations :P (1)

Brickwall (985910) | more than 5 years ago | (#26930669)

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.

Re:Do the calculations :P (1)

kingcobra0128 (1131641) | more than 5 years ago | (#26930647)

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

Cool research != practical technology (1)

Eukariote (881204) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929599)

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.

Re:Cool research != practical technology (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26929903)

I don't.

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

Re:Cool research != practical technology (1)

Spatial (1235392) | more than 5 years ago | (#26930579)

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

It's like the crystals in Superman, right? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26929633)

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

Coming next (2, Insightful)

halber_mensch (851834) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929773)

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.

Lies! (In the title) (1)

Actually, I do RTFA (1058596) | more than 5 years ago | (#26929837)

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.

Hmm... (2, Interesting)

kabocox (199019) | more than 5 years ago | (#26930143)

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.

Coming soon! (2, Insightful)

Lucas123 (935744) | more than 5 years ago | (#26930311)

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.

Wrong units. (0, Redundant)

lazyforker (957705) | more than 5 years ago | (#26930537)

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?

Twenty-four hours?! (1, Insightful)

macraig (621737) | more than 5 years ago | (#26930691)

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.

"coming soon" vs vaporware (1)

Gorphrim (11654) | more than 5 years ago | (#26930723)

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

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...