Beta
×

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!

IBM Demos Single-Atom DRAM

timothy posted about 4 years ago | from the is-it-small-enough-yet dept.

Data Storage 150

An anonymous reader writes "A single-atom DRAM was demonstrated by IBM recently with a slow-mo movie of the atomic process of setting and erasing a bit on a single atom. Videos of atomic processes inside chips were not possible until now, leading to IBM's claim that its pulsed-STM (used to make the movie) will lead to a new atomic-scale semiconductor industry, and not just for memory chips, according to this EETimes story: 'The ultimate memory chips of the future will encode bits on individual atoms, a capability recently demonstrated for iron atoms by IBM's Almaden Research Center in San Jose, Calif., which unveiled a new pulsed technique for scanning tunneling microscopes (STMs). Pulsed-STMs yield nanosecond time-resolution, a requirement for designing the atomic-scale memory chips, solar panels and quantum computers of the future, but also for making super efficient organic solar cells by controlling photovoltaic reactions on the atomic level.'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

On speeding up the atoms... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33682748)

Does microwaving it make it go faster?

Re:On speeding up the atoms... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33683136)

Can they make a single-atom nigger?

Re:On speeding up the atoms... (-1, Offtopic)

oliverthered (187439) | about 4 years ago | (#33683296)

not but you can make a gniger counter.

Re:On speeding up the atoms... (-1, Offtopic)

oliverthered (187439) | about 4 years ago | (#33683300)

(dark body radiation!)

Re:On speeding up the atoms... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33683508)

(dark body radiation!)

(darkie nigger radiation!)

Re:On speeding up the atoms... (-1, Offtopic)

oliverthered (187439) | about 4 years ago | (#33683668)

nice flame.

So, they've got those darkies doing Quantum Mechanics now? still a step up from laying rail tracks I suppose.

Re:On speeding up the atoms... (-1, Offtopic)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | about 4 years ago | (#33683712)

still a step up from laying rail tracks I suppose.

It seems they've also been laying your girlfriend and mom with their cut crampon [google.com] railroad spikes.

Re:On speeding up the atoms... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33683790)

I knew they were meant to be big and all, but where did you catch that one?

Fuck (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33683708)

Fuck this whole thread.

Re:On speeding up the atoms... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33683304)

not but you can make a gniger counter.

nigger counter? my nose works well enough

Re:On speeding up the atoms... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33683660)

no a gniger counter, for very small niggers that can escape from atoms.

Re:On speeding up the atoms... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33683900)

no a gniger counter, for very small niggers that can escape from atoms.

if they could do that, counting them would be the least of your problems. the whole idea is horrifyin'.

where on the periodic table? (3, Funny)

Average_Joe_Sixpack (534373) | about 4 years ago | (#33682766)

are we talking H or Uuq sized DRAM? because I don't want to be obsolete within a year.

Re:where on the periodic table? (1)

gman003 (1693318) | about 4 years ago | (#33682872)

Fe, going by the summary.

Where on the DRAM spectrum? (1)

fyngyrz (762201) | about 4 years ago | (#33683942)

Dynamic? The atom needs a refresh cycle?

Random Access? It is addressed by a row/column or similar structure?

Memory... ok, one bit, yes?

Doesn't "DRAM" strike anyone else as almost entirely not applicable?

Re:Where on the DRAM spectrum? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33684232)

Well, random access is because it's not a sequential memory and can be accessed from any position. It stopped to be that way when burst access was introduced.

Re:Where on the DRAM spectrum? (2, Interesting)

zrbyte (1666979) | about 4 years ago | (#33684410)

Yes it does. This is entirely basic research, although a very exciting (especially for me since I work with STMs)! The pulsed STM concept is the interesting part here for a scientist. The application to memory is just a kind of long term prospect they have to write into the paper, to get it published in a high ranking journal. It is not very applicable in practice yet. I guess I need not say that the reading, writing, addressing of more than 1 bit of memory is not possible yet. Furthermore, these STMs operate at liquid helium temperatures (3.2 Kelvin). Who would want to carry around a cryostat with they laptop? :)

Re:where on the periodic table? (1)

Lehk228 (705449) | about 4 years ago | (#33682886)

doesn't matter, H memory will be obsolete within a couple years with -1 e memory

Re:where on the periodic table? (2, Funny)

bersl2 (689221) | about 4 years ago | (#33683328)

What about the e+ memory? I heard that it's completely incompatible with the e-.

Re:where on the periodic table? (2, Funny)

Lehk228 (705449) | about 4 years ago | (#33684018)

both are part of a trinary ECC memory. when an error is detected, it explodes

Re:where on the periodic table? (1)

JDeane (1402533) | about 4 years ago | (#33684172)

So that will be the year of Linux.... hehehehe

Re:where on the periodic table? (3, Funny)

man_of_mr_e (217855) | about 4 years ago | (#33683002)

And we come full circle. IBM started with Iron core memory, and now they're doing it again.

Re:where on the periodic table? (4, Informative)

rubycodez (864176) | about 4 years ago | (#33683522)

funny, but actually IBM started with punched cards for external storage, gears for internal memory, and later patch panels for ROM.

http://www.columbia.edu/acis/history/tabulator.html [columbia.edu]

A video explaining how it works (5, Informative)

rminsk (831757) | about 4 years ago | (#33682786)

Video [youtube.com] explaining the process.

Re:A video explaining how it works (-1, Offtopic)

catmistake (814204) | about 4 years ago | (#33683506)

Old news. Apple has been using atoms in QuickTime [apple.com] movies for some time. I don't really get it, but if the atom is public, the movie won't play.

Re:A video explaining how it works (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33684340)

if i understood correctly, they are assuming the atoms would behave exact same way on each 'hit' with electrons? why would they (considering the outer world has changed and atom cant be 100% isolated)

Just one atom? (5, Funny)

iceaxe (18903) | about 4 years ago | (#33682810)

One atom ought to be enough for anybody.

(Sorry)

Re:Just one atom? (1)

illumastorm (172101) | about 4 years ago | (#33682824)

Make that 640k atoms

Re:Just one atom? (1)

Sulphur (1548251) | about 4 years ago | (#33682876)

Make that 640k atoms

And a cassette.

Re:Just one atom? (1)

oliverthered (187439) | about 4 years ago | (#33683678)

one Atom and one Elise.

one F1 though should be enough on it's own, so long as your a mechanic.

Has not already happend yet... (4, Interesting)

Meshach (578918) | about 4 years ago | (#33682846)

From TFA:

The ultimate memory chips of the future will encode bits on individual atoms, a capability recently demonstrated for iron atoms by IBM's Almaden Research Center in San Jose, Calif., which unveiled a new pulsed technique for scanning tunneling microscopes (STMs).

So this has not already happened (as the article implies) but is an idea for future development.

Re:Has not already happend yet... (1)

the_humeister (922869) | about 4 years ago | (#33682934)

I think the ultimate will be encoding in nucleons or even quarks.

Re:Has not already happend yet... (0, Offtopic)

Barny (103770) | about 4 years ago | (#33683262)

Why not use Ogg?

Re:Has not already happend yet... (1)

oliverthered (187439) | about 4 years ago | (#33683694)

what about using space, you get probability/analogue then.

Re:Has not already happend yet... (1)

CrazyJim1 (809850) | about 4 years ago | (#33683720)

They can brand a top quark with an atom,"Up and atom."

Re:Has not already happend yet... (1)

tobiah (308208) | about 4 years ago | (#33683958)

No, the ultimate will be state-encoding a superstring.
(assuming they exist)
(and have states)

Re:Has not already happend yet... (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | about 4 years ago | (#33683120)

IBM have written their name in atoms with variants on the electron microscope. So in a way they have built single atom RAM. Its just not fast enough yet.

Re:Has not already happend yet... (1)

smallfries (601545) | about 4 years ago | (#33683978)

From TFA: ...snip...

So this has not already happened (as the article implies) but is an idea for future development.

When you quote the article to dispute what the article implied something is seriously wrong. Either the fabric of the universe has become distorted and ... difficult ... or you don't know the difference* between the summary and the article.

*slashdot editors

Moview? (1)

Megahard (1053072) | about 4 years ago | (#33682848)

A movie that you view? A movie that "moves you"?

Re:Moview? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33684054)

A movie that you view? A movie that "moves you"?

Megatron!

Even more vulnerable to radiation? (2, Interesting)

GrumblyStuff (870046) | about 4 years ago | (#33682852)

Don't electronics become more susceptible as they become smaller? How much redundancy would be needed now that you only have a single atom to hold a bit of memory?

Re:Even more vulnerable to radiation? (2, Interesting)

hedwards (940851) | about 4 years ago | (#33683062)

Yes and no, less likely that it will be hit but significantly more damaging if it is hit. What I'm wanting to know is what their plans are for error correction. A single atom is susceptible to all sorts of things that thousands or even hundreds of atoms aren't.

Re:Even more vulnerable to radiation? (2, Insightful)

The13thSin (1092867) | about 4 years ago | (#33683532)

While I share your concern to a certain extent, the great thing here is we can "perfect" data density... at least to the atomic scale. With more research and/or data we'll know/learn the reliability and plan accordingly. Want data that you can trust to be right for 1000 years with 99.999998% certainty? Use solution X! Want data to be right for 1 year with 99.5% certainty? Use solution Y!

Can't wait for a 1 PB "harddrive" which looks like a grain of sand!

Re:Even more vulnerable to radiation? (3, Funny)

hairyfeet (841228) | about 4 years ago | (#33684304)

Oh good Lord why? it is already hard enough to find the dang cell phone or where you laid your flash stick now, can you imagine having to hunt for your portadrive like a fricking contact lens? It'll be "OMG! Nobody move, or sneeze, or fart, or disturb the air! I just dropped my flash and it has a paper due today! ZOMG!"

Big deal... (5, Funny)

skynexus (778600) | about 4 years ago | (#33682884)

the processor on my computer runs on a single Atom already. I'm not impressed.

Re:Big deal... (1)

JorDan Clock (664877) | about 4 years ago | (#33682992)

It's all going backwards already! The single Atom processors are the slow ones; Now it's all about the dual Atoms!

Re:Big deal... (4, Funny)

n1hilist (997601) | about 4 years ago | (#33684416)

I overclocked mine and it split :(

Atoms (2, Funny)

transwarp (900569) | about 4 years ago | (#33682900)

This gives new meaning to atomic writes.

Re:Atoms (1)

nospam007 (722110) | about 4 years ago | (#33683918)

And instead of deleting, you just nuke it.

So.. Much as it seems like it, this does not quash (1)

drfreak (303147) | about 4 years ago | (#33682960)

Moore's Law.

It just means we'll start looking at sub-atomic particles as new storage methods...

Re:So.. Much as it seems like it, this does not qu (3, Informative)

hedwards (940851) | about 4 years ago | (#33683070)

It doesn't apply, Moore's law only applies to transistor count on processors.

Re:So.. Much as it seems like it, this does not qu (3, Informative)

Khyber (864651) | about 4 years ago | (#33684290)

And that single atom in a RAM cell doesn't count as a transistor?

If it performs the same functions, there is no reason to not apply the same law.

Oh, hey, look, we've got Transistors with THREE atoms.

ONE atom shouldn't be a problem. If it acts like a transistor, it's a transistor.

A transistor either acts as an amplifier or an electrical signal switch.

Therefore, a single-atom DRAM cell would be using single-atom transistors.

Want to try making this argument against someone *NOT* deeply involved in this industry?

Re:So.. Much as it seems like it, this does not qu (1)

Surt (22457) | about 4 years ago | (#33683468)

For which we'll need new physics rather than new technology, unfortunately.

Re:So.. Much as it seems like it, this does not qu (1)

smallfries (601545) | about 4 years ago | (#33684014)

...which would quash Moore's Law. Hint: moving from hitting an engineering target of improving a well-understood process to inventing an entirely new one will change the rate of progress.

No-one has invented a buzzword to cover this yet, alongside all of the curve-jumping bullshit. I nominate progress-refraction as a suitable misunderstanding of a physical process for MBAs

Re:So.. Much as it seems like it, this does not qu (1)

91degrees (207121) | about 4 years ago | (#33684168)

It actually might not. The thing about Moore's law is it's something of a self fulfilling prophesy. Semiconductor companies start designing CPUs before the processes that they're going to be using are available, with a reliable expectation that the process will be available by that time. The fabs aren't going to offer a process that nobody yet wants. So both of them assume a doubling in transistor count every 18 months. If this remains possible with some sort of subatomic process it will very likely continue at that rate.

Re:So.. Much as it seems like it, this does not qu (1)

Archangel Michael (180766) | about 4 years ago | (#33684126)

I don't know if I should be up or down, but I definitely feel strange about your ideas.

Atom (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33682980)

Does that mean we're finally entering that 'atomic age' I've been reading so much about?

Not anywhere near ready for prime time (3, Interesting)

Required Snark (1702878) | about 4 years ago | (#33683010)

This is a fantastic technical achievement. However, it has no meaningful direct link to ANY deployable technology. It is a measurement technique, and although the article does not say so, I'm sure it requires a temperature of somewhere below 1K, maybe below .001K. That is the only way they could be getting signals of these phenomena without getting swamped by thermal noise. All the stuff about single atom storage is boilerplate marketing hype. I assumes that they have a hot key to paste in how a new technology can be used for memory storage, or solar cells, or green technology or ...

Re:Not anywhere near ready for prime time (2, Insightful)

gmuslera (3436) | about 4 years ago | (#33683578)

Even if is a solution searching for a problem, still worth. Who knows, maybe could be used in space (satellites, space probes, etc), maybe the next best place for datacenters is in orbit. Or be ready till some other advancements turn them into something practical.

Re:Not anywhere near ready for prime time (1)

foniksonik (573572) | about 4 years ago | (#33683970)

The best place for data centers *IS* in orbit. We just need to perfect the communication between orbit and ground. Solar powered and vacuum cooled. Can't get much cheaper for operational expenses. Maitenance could be a pain though.

Re:Not anywhere near ready for prime time (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33684114)

vacuum cooled

Actually, the vacuum is a problem for cooling. Without a gas or liquid in contact with the heat sinks, conductive (and thus convective) heat transfer is impossible, leaving only radiative cooling.

Then again, a satellite that glows on purpose would be pretty cool.

Re:Not anywhere near ready for prime time (1)

Khyber (864651) | about 4 years ago | (#33684302)

"vacuum cooled"

Umm, no, Vacuums make damned good insulators and space has no place to radiate out heat unless there is another physical object VERY NEAR the heat-emitting equipment.

Re:Not anywhere near ready for prime time (1)

Khyber (864651) | about 4 years ago | (#33684300)

"However, it has no meaningful direct link to ANY deployable technology."

At least, as far as your poorly-educated mind can fathom. I've already got about seven different product ideas that this technology could be applied to, starting with atomic-level light emission.

Maybe if you actually worked in the industry, you could think of uses. It's pretty apparent that you don't work in this field, however, with your statement.

Quantum effects? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33683038)

At that scale, don't you have to start worrying about quantum effects messing with your data?

Re:Quantum effects? (2, Funny)

harley78 (746436) | about 4 years ago | (#33683116)

yes and no, just don't ever try to access the data...

Re:Quantum effects? (3, Informative)

kurokame (1764228) | about 4 years ago | (#33683124)

You have to start worrying at quantum effects WAY before the scale which is currently in most modern computers. Interesting question though.

And while single-atom memory is an interesting feat, memory density isn't everything. It lets you get more capacity into less space, which can be nice. But if size was everything, I'd use my hard drive instead of my system memory and CPU cache. After all, it's easy to get a hard drive on the order of a couple terabytes while system memory is still typically on the order of a few gigabytes, and CPU cache is on the order of a few megabytes.

Re:Quantum effects? (3, Informative)

c0lo (1497653) | about 4 years ago | (#33683420)

And while single-atom memory is an interesting feat, memory density isn't everything. It lets you get more capacity into less space, which can be nice.

yes, indeed, will let you get more capacity only when you fit the probe in the same space. For the time being, an STM is about this big [uta.edu] .
As a research technique, is amazing. As an applicative discovery... a long way yet until the real-life consumer grade direct application will emerge (if ever)

But if size was everything

Hit the nail in the head here: latency and power consumption spring into my mind as well.

Re:Quantum effects? (3, Interesting)

suomynonAyletamitlU (1618513) | about 4 years ago | (#33683548)

yes, indeed, will let you get more capacity only when you fit the probe in the same space. For the time being, an STM is about this big [uta.edu] .

I'd dearly love to know how they plan on locating any particular atom, let alone redirect the read/write head to it and only it.

Even if the atoms are arranged in an array, flat, how does an atom-scale read head know where it is pointing with sufficiently minuscule granularity? Do they intend to put markers on the surface nearby--oh no wait atoms. Well, they can probably have wires leading--oh no wait atoms. Well, maybe if they color--oh.

Well I guess they'll just have to have one atom surrounded by its own read-write logic, flash-style, and completely negate the whole point of having the actual storage on the atomic size. Oh no wait, that's not even what this research is about.

Seriously, I don't think this has much potential for engineering, as much as it may be clever science.

Re:Quantum effects? (3, Interesting)

kurokame (1764228) | about 4 years ago | (#33683774)

You apply a voltage gradient. By some clever field manipulation, sensor placement, and computational wizardry you can address a spot in a three-dimensional lattice. It would probably work something like an MRI, if it had the bastard child of an STM.

Re:Quantum effects? (1)

Khyber (864651) | about 4 years ago | (#33684336)

I would bet more on tunnel-scanning versus anything else for the inner workings. It would be far easier to measure the blank spaces between atoms instead of the atom itself.

Re:Quantum effects? (0, Troll)

Khyber (864651) | about 4 years ago | (#33684320)

"Seriously, I don't think this has much potential for engineering, as much as it may be clever science.'

Too bad your high UID pretty much guarantees your ignorance in this field, I've got several workable applications already in mind for this. Hello, 300+ irradiant lumens per watt output capability, good-bye HID lamps.

I think you need to study more quantum sciences before talking any further.

~Director of Research, EcogroLED USA.

Great. (1)

straponego (521991) | about 4 years ago | (#33683060)

I have enough trouble reading the print on MicroSD cards.

Re:Great. (1)

Barny (103770) | about 4 years ago | (#33683288)

Don't worry, just get one of the "32GB kingston microSD" from ebay, the screen printing is so blocky its great, shame about the failure rate though.

I got chills reading this. I think my only regret (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33683162)

I got chills reading this. I think my only regret in death was that I could not see what was to be.

Long iive... (0)

excelsior_gr (969383) | about 4 years ago | (#33683182)

...the memory of Richard Feynman! I cannot help thinking of him (well, through his books, I am too young to have met him personally) when I hear news like this. I find his teachings and ideas absolutely inspiring.

Nothing to see here (2, Funny)

meteficha (1332195) | about 4 years ago | (#33683220)

We Haskellers already use STM [haskell.org] since a long time.

How many atoms in the sensor? (2, Insightful)

OrangeTide (124937) | about 4 years ago | (#33683272)

Call me when the sense hardware is only an atom per bit.

Re:How many atoms in the sensor? (1)

Khyber (864651) | about 4 years ago | (#33684348)

Considering one uses electrons to sense atoms in this technique because electrons are smaller than protons and neutrons, you could have a fifty atom-wide sensor and still get the required resolution.

Come on, now, you should know better.

Am I the only one... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33683320)

...who misread this as "single-atom DRM?"

What happened to editing? (1)

pz (113803) | about 4 years ago | (#33683360)

"... on the next Science"? Hmm... Maybe that means on the next cover of Science [sciencemag.org] ? Maybe a little editing could fix that? And maybe typographical errors like "moview" could be fixed? Perhaps by actually reading the summary, Timothy?

Re:What happened to editing? (1)

humphrm (18130) | about 4 years ago | (#33683554)

Thank you. I thought that perhaps it was some inside language with quantum scientists that I didn't understand. And I'm an EE.

Just One Bit? (3, Interesting)

Greyfox (87712) | about 4 years ago | (#33683368)

Slackers! Most atoms have way more electrons than that!

Re:Just One Bit? (1)

Khyber (864651) | about 4 years ago | (#33684366)

That is what I was thinking. Why couldn't we encode on the electron levels instead? Granted, we'd need serious computational power to figure out which atom would remain the most stable while we screw with the valence shells, but this shouldn't be TOO much of a problem.

Organic solar cells? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33683370)

but also for making super efficient organic solar cells by controlling photovoltaic reactions on the atomic level

Where did that quote come from? All I saw was a vague mention of measuring the efficiency of solar cells. Not sure why they can't measure the efficiency of the ones they have already.

Re:Organic solar cells? (1)

Khyber (864651) | about 4 years ago | (#33684376)

They're talking about using this technology for plant-based (structure-wise) solar panel designs. Plants have a rather unique solar-powered system with quantum effects through the different types of chlorophyll that we don't fully understand, although we've made some breakthroughs with red and blue wavelengths and chlorophyll a and b (the others are found primarily in marine plant life, or cyanobacteria, and are useless for us to target.)

HOMO (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33683584)

OF AMERICA) Is The

And by Moore's Law... (1)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | about 4 years ago | (#33683656)

And by Moore's Law in 2 years it will be stored in a single proton.

Re:And by Moore's Law... (5, Funny)

jameskojiro (705701) | about 4 years ago | (#33683682)

1 year after that we will be encoding data on quarks themselves.....

6 months later we will make neutrinos our bitches for storing and processing data....

3 months after that we will be creating even smaller particles from cosmic strings to process and store data int he fabric of spacetime.

1 day later we will make God cry.

Re:And by Moore's Law... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33683928)

1 day later we will make God cry.

And store data in his tears. Important data, like this youtube video [youtube.com] .

Re:And by Moore's Law... (1)

Khyber (864651) | about 4 years ago | (#33684384)

Single proton? How about throughout the entire valence shell, on every level, with every electron?

Granted, for more dense stuff with the one-off addition against the electron shells, protons would likely be the better way to go, though we haven't been able to measure the delta spin of protons or neutrons (As far as my weak knowledge can recall,) but we have it for electrons.

Obligatory... (1)

nickdwaters (1452675) | about 4 years ago | (#33683706)

One baby step closer to Skynet. Long live our new immortal overlords.

This MS I Fnd in a Lbry... (1)

SQL Error (16383) | about 4 years ago | (#33683742)

Says we should skip atoms and go directly to cospatial nudged quanta.

Re:This MS I Fnd in a Lbry... (1)

Khyber (864651) | about 4 years ago | (#33684396)

Well, my big theory involves using quantum distances as a quantification of binary/trinary data. I don't think it will work with quaternary but trinary should not be too hard to do and allow enough error-correction space to differentiate between the 'bits.'

I have to say... (0, Redundant)

BlackBloq (702158) | about 4 years ago | (#33683788)

This is fucking awesome!

Atom (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33683848)

I thought the atom was a processor and by intell, i thought ibm onlY supported risk architechture not x87 so I'm kind of cunfuesed?

I'm waiting for notched quarks (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#33683904)

Now where did I leave the interwebs?

Next up (1)

The_mad_linguist (1019680) | about 4 years ago | (#33684016)

Next up on Slashdot, the RIAA is now demoing a single-atom DRM. Will the minuscule security it provides make a difference? Find out three redirects from the blog post we link!

Re:Next up (1)

Pfhreakaz0id (82141) | about 4 years ago | (#33684180)

the RIAA are busy preparing the conditions for a big bang of a new universe with DRM built in at the subatomic level.Unfortunately, I predict that the encryption key will get leaked and they will either be forced to recall the entire universe, or just admit that they can't EVER stop you from doing whatever the heck you want with the content you purchased.

Re:Next up (2, Interesting)

Khyber (864651) | about 4 years ago | (#33684414)

Single-atom DRM?

Guess we'll need nuclear reactors to crack that.

But, then again, I don't think the **AA will exist by the time that comes around. I would really think by then independent artists might actually rule the scene as they show their unique talent versus the cultured BS of the other industries.

IBM's Almaden Research Center now sells lumber (2)

viking80 (697716) | about 4 years ago | (#33684402)

TFA referes to "capability recently demonstrated for iron atoms by IBM's Almaden Research Center in San Jose, Calif"

I remember that place. It used to be one of the biggest research parks in the are. Then an few years ago it became Hitachi, say "Inspire the Next", research after Hitachi bought that division of IBM many years ago. I think they shut it down a few years ago, because it all became tall weeds, and now a brand new Lowe's store emerged in its place.

BTW, someone should collect slogans of Japanese companies: "Inspire the Next", WTF does that mean?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?