Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

Array-Based Memory May Put a Terabyte On a Chip

kdawson posted more than 6 years ago | from the need-ramback-now dept.

Data Storage 93

Lucas123 writes "A new type of flash memory, called array-based memory, could offer a terabyte of data on a single chip within the next decade by bypassing current NAND memory technology, which is limited by the miniaturization capability of lithography. According to the Computerworld story, start-up Nanochip Inc. is being backed by Intel and others, and over 11 years has made research breakthroughs that will enable it to deliver working prototypes to potential manufacturing partners next year. And by 2010, the first chips are expected to reach 100GB capacity."

cancel ×

93 comments

Good News Everybody! (4, Funny)

clonan (64380) | more than 6 years ago | (#22820996)

We on Slashdot just learned how to use a TB of ram only yesterday!

Re:Good News Everybody! (0)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821052)

That was theory, so far this is vapor. I'm still waiting for some face time with products like this.

I sincerely hope that they come up with a couple of really really good high speed data methods for wireless so that in 2012 I'll be able to watch the end of the calendar in HD on my cellular phone... while streaming "2010, the movie to a nearby friend.

Re:Good News Everybody! (1)

Brian Gordon (987471) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821210)

What does this have to do with wireless, and why would you ever watch a movie on your phone? You're right to be concerned about speeds though; as long as 2GB of DDR3 is wellll sufficient, there's no reason at all to use more expensive, slower nanowhastever memory

Re:Good News Everybody! (2, Insightful)

ryszard99 (1193131) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821590)

and why would you ever watch a movie on your phone?
long haul flights

Re:Good News Everybody! (1)

peragrin (659227) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822542)

long haul flgihts? killing your phone battery down to 2-3 hours? either use the airlines built in systems which is getting more and more common, or bring a portable dvd player. it will last three times as long with twice the screen.

Re:Good News Everybody! (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821814)

You would make a good CEO of companies like Prime, or Digital. Where you love of the current technology blinds you in the use of new technologies. Why would you want to watch a movie on your phone? Because if you are taking a long trip, or waiting in a long Queue say to get your car fixed, or any other situation where you will not want to carry around a laptop and you are board out of your skull. It would be nice to have a phone to watch a movie while you wait. For example I use my iPhone a lot even though I have a laptop because the battery life is longer, it gets what I need to be done, It is on my person all the time so I don't need to lug aroung a laptop and an protective case. And it is small enought to hide in my hand so my One Year old won't get imeadeatly fasinated with it.

Re:Good News Everybody! (1)

tabrnaker (741668) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823992)

ah, so basically for those sub-humans who can't stand to be alone with their selves for even two seconds.

Re:Good News Everybody! (1)

repapetilto (1219852) | more than 6 years ago | (#22824330)

I agree, I mean I haven't really come across any evidence that people like that (on the phone or texting all the time, headphones on as they walk down the block, etc) are worse off in any way, but theres just this knee-jerk disgust reaction that I have to it. Maybe its rude, maybe its the sight of someone who is just constantly consuming, or maybe I'm just old-fashioned (I'm 22). I don't know..discuss.

Re:Good News Everybody! (2, Funny)

tabrnaker (741668) | more than 6 years ago | (#22824524)

Even caterpillars have to voraciously consume large quantities of resources. At a certain saturation point, when they have all the necessary resources, they mature into a beauty of nature.

It's just harder to tell where individual humans are on the evolutionary scale.

God(Truth/Beauty) is present at every level, in the most palatable form for that level.

Unfortunately, a lot of humans never distill enough truths from their consumption to evolve to the next level (True happiness :) ).

Re:Good News Everybody! (1)

repapetilto (1219852) | more than 6 years ago | (#22825608)

True happiness is a carrot people dangle in front of themselves, the game doesn't work that way (you're meant to pass on genes, not be happy). If its anything at all it would be a state of mind, probably transitive at that.

Re:Good News Everybody! (1)

tabrnaker (741668) | more than 6 years ago | (#22826136)

You cannot see what you do not understand.

I'm truly happy. :)

Maybe one day, you will get there as well. You see, i speak from experience, you speak with the authority of other peoples thoughts

The false promise of happiness is the carrot that leads you astray. Being happy is the realization that there is nothing to reach for, you already have the carrot.

People seem to think that knowing a word means that they understand the movement that underlies the word. This is the problem with our society. Do you really know what a penguin is if you've never experienced one?

Slashdot is the perfect example of this, people spitting out words and ideas that they've learned 'in theory', but have never understood the connection to reality.

There's a big difference between knowing a label or description and understanding the reality which is described.

Re:Good News Everybody! (1)

Brian Gordon (987471) | more than 6 years ago | (#22824528)

It's one thing if it's someone who's actually doing something, like a businessman tapping on his smart phone making appointments or whatever.. but I completely agree with you, I can't stand teens who never stop texting. At least it's better than talking- talking in theaters and during speeches.. holy crap those people make me so mad, they can't keep quiet for one little hour. So I think it's for the best that all those idiots are venting into their cell phone keypads.

Re:Good News Everybody! (1)

OrangeTide (124937) | more than 6 years ago | (#22835472)

why would you wait in a queue? You'd think in the future standing around waiting doesn't make sense when everyone on the planet has a powerful wireless device in their pocket. Plus movies just aren't all that good and they will only get worse.

Re:Good News Everybody! (2, Funny)

thrillseeker (518224) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823588)

why would you ever watch a movie on your phone

I think there is a world market for maybe five people to watch movies on a phone.

(with apologies to Thomas Watson)

Re:Good News Everybody! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22821396)

woo hoo, porn!!!!!!!

Re:Good News Everybody! (1)

infonography (566403) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821660)

yeah but the Ram you mean was a Dodge Truck. Or do you mean you finally broke down the gates in Minas Tirith??

Re:Good News Everybody! (1)

Korbinus (589005) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821820)

That's what I call a good marketing campaign. And we are the lucky ones that will know everything before everybody.

USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (3, Informative)

Zymergy (803632) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821054)

USB 3.0 or *something faster* will be required for devices this large in portable storage capacity.. USB 2.0 is ~480Mbps (theoretical max) and it would take forever to transfer a terabyte over USB 2.0.
http://www.usb.org/usb30 [usb.org]
http://www.eetimes.com/news/latest/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=201807389 [eetimes.com]

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821116)

well yeah.

OTOH, most people only transfer small amount of data at a time, say a few paltry gigs at most.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (1)

BoogeyOfTheMan (1256002) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821154)

Think of the possibilities for SSD's though

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (4, Insightful)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821174)

I don't think it is a real issue. How often are you going to be moving a completely different 1TB onto the drive? Right now, especially here on Slashdot, handfuls of us already have 1TB NAS enclosures. They run over USB 2.0 just fine, if only because we don't fill the thing up and/or empty it at every usage... it is a gradual add/delete, just like any other general storage device ever used.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (2, Informative)

QuantumRiff (120817) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821350)

Not to be picky, but NAS is "Network Attached Storage" You have an external hard drive.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (2, Informative)

Martin Blank (154261) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821372)

For some, it's both -- a USB enclosure plugged into a router.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (1)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821454)

I didn't think I would have to explain this, here of all places...

http://www.amazon.com/Linksys-Storage-Link-Drives-NSLU2/dp/B0001FSCZO [amazon.com]

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822556)

and you still didn't explain it.
BTW, I checked out the linked, and initially thought it was a TB of storage. I about wet myself. heh

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (1)

dfghjk (711126) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822628)

Thanks for the "explanation".

It's not a NAS (that's Network Attached Storage) if you have to use an external box to attach it to a network. The USB disk only implements the "S" part.

So if your point is that a hard drive can be used over USB2, that's very insightful for you. You're just in the right place.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (2, Informative)

TheRealMindChild (743925) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823228)

I don't know how you can write, but not read. It turns any USB storage device into NAS.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823198)

Have you ever seen an NSLU?

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (1)

Ruprecht the Monkeyb (680597) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821386)

People delete stuff? Not where I work. I think most of the people I support would rather give up their first born than delete some piece of 4 year old spam that they never even opened.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (2, Interesting)

Digi-John (692918) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822728)

My data never goes away... I use Venti [bell-labs.com] at work. Unlike Timemachine, it uses an intelligent backup scheme, coalescing blocks so a block of data will only ever be written once. That means that every time you save more mail, your 2GB mail file doesn't get completely replicated on Venti, just the new data.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823252)

Okay any hope that this will make it out as FOSS? Just wondering it looks great.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (2, Informative)

Digi-John (692918) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823392)

It is already free/open source, under the Lucent Public License (assuming you can bring yourself to run non-GPL code, I know it's hard for some people here). Plan 9 Port [swtch.com] will allow you to run Venti on Linux, but ideally you just download Plan 9 [bell-labs.com] and install it on your file server; you can then use v9fs [swik.net] to access Plan 9's fileservers.
I do my work natively under Plan 9, so I don't have much experience using Venti and Linux.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 6 years ago | (#22824336)

"It is already free/open source, under the Lucent Public License (assuming you can bring yourself to run non-GPL code, I know it's hard for some people here)."
Not really for me. I would prefer that it was GPL because then it might be possible to port it to Linux and create a great home backup system. I am License neutral. I thank any programmer or group that releases code for free so I can learn from and maybe even contribute to. I am grateful for Free as in beer software that makes my life easier or better like the video drivers from nVidia and ATI for Linux. And I don't mind paying for software since I know it is hard work and usually worth the money I pay.
I don't like DRM and or annoying copy protection.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22826660)

I am grateful for Free as in beer software that makes my life easier or better like the video drivers from nVidia and ATI for Linux.

Dude, those drivers were part of the cost of purchasing the card.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 6 years ago | (#22829720)

Dude they are included with the card. It would be pretty easy and frankly cheap for them not to offer Linux drivers like in the bad old days.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (1)

Digi-John (692918) | more than 6 years ago | (#22832630)

Let me clarify something, very slowly and clearly so everyone can understand: You. Can. Port. This. To. Linux. In fact, it has already been ported to Linux. If you would CTFL (Click The Fine Link) about Plan 9 Ports, you'd see that, wonder of wonders, you can run Venti on Linux. It's free software. It's free as in beer. Download it, install it, modify it, whatever you want. The GPL is not the only free license out there.
Honestly, though, if you really want the best experience with Venti I suggest installing Plan 9. And then, like I said, you can access it from Linux and use it as a home backup system.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 6 years ago | (#22840120)

Thanks. I didn't see that. As I said I am not a GPL snob or even really a FOSS zelot. I will have to take a look at it. If Ubuntu could add it to there how server project it might really put the hurt on WHS.
That is if it has the one killer feature that WHS lacks. Data integrity.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22822290)

yeah, USB 2.0 should be fine for now. How frequently do you need to revamp your whole 1.5TB porn collection? I for instance have a nostalgic feeling for my old porn. :D

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (1)

KillerBob (217953) | more than 6 years ago | (#22824020)

Indeed... I've got a 1TB external drive. The initial population was a pain in the butt... took about 6h to copy all my data over through IEEE 1394a. But once the data was on the drive, it's plenty fast enough. I use it for storing MP3s and DivX videos on my HTPC.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (1)

vdgmr1213 (1234018) | more than 6 years ago | (#22828776)

You say this as I am transferring all my data from one PC to back up on my 1TB external HDD. Granted, it isn't full, but full enough that its taking forever. Having the option to move the data faster would be nice. Also, who's to say our files we move in a decade won't commonly reach several GB in size, making simple moves take an extraordinary amount of time to transfer just one or two files.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (1)

adrianmonk (890071) | more than 6 years ago | (#22830336)

How often are you going to be moving a completely different 1TB onto the drive?


Whenever you do a backup. At least, whenever you do a full backup. (You can do incremental backups, but it's best to do a full one every now and then.)

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (1)

billcopc (196330) | more than 6 years ago | (#22865046)

1TB ?

What is this, 2002 ? :P

Everyone with more than 1TB of online storage in their home, raise of hands! /raises, 4.0TB at my desk

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821198)

For a portable device, the real question is how many car batteries it will take to keep it live.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22821200)

That depends how quickly you're loading it up. I have a 1/2 TB drive running on USB 2.0, and I don't have any bandwidth problems. Why? Because I'm only filling it up with data at about 1MB/s tops.

Even a whole HD movie is 30GB, nowhere near 1TB.

It's more of a question of throughput than capacity. I don't plan on mirroring my 1/2 TB drive or doing anything else involving all of its data (in a short period of time) anytime soon, so throughput doesn't really matter.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (2, Informative)

Sylver Dragon (445237) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821302)

I'm thinking eSATA may fill the gap, though it does have the drawback of not powering the device directly. Of course, there is an easy solution to that: have a device which runs on 5VDC at less than 5mw. Connect the data port to eSATA and the power port to the USB port, and you're done.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (2, Informative)

ThisNukes4u (752508) | more than 6 years ago | (#22824504)

I'm thinking eSATA may fill the gap, though it does have the drawback of not powering the device directly. Of course, there is an easy solution to that: have a device which runs on 5VDC at less than 5mw. Connect the data port to eSATA and the power port to the USB port, and you're done.
I think you mean less than 500mw(the limit a single USB port can supply), not 5mw. Most 2.5" laptop harddrives meet this requirement, not sure about other types.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22828946)

I think you need to learn the differnce between a power rating in watts, and current, measured in amps.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (2, Informative)

ThisNukes4u (752508) | more than 6 years ago | (#22829438)

As yes, you got me. USB ports supply up to 500 mA(not mW). The total power a single USB port can supply is 2.5W

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (3, Informative)

merreborn (853723) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821366)

USB 3.0 or *something faster* will be required for devices this large in portable storage capacity
10GigE [wikipedia.org] is faster than USB3, and on the market right now.

Problem solved.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (2)

Zymergy (803632) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821666)

Yes! This is what I am talking about.
It appears that the 10GBASE-CX4 802.3ak would be the best choice of the 10GigE options, but the hardware for either end of the UTP cables is a bit steep for any affordable SOHO device.
I sometimes back up entire PC's using a *nix boot disk to external storage. Anything that transfers all the drive(s) data much faster would reduce the need to open the box to plug in an IDE or SATA cable to my backup drive(s). The fact that inexpensive commodity Gigabit Ethernet devices can outperform USB 2.0 transfer rates really dates the USB 2.0 technology.
sSATA may be the better solution if USB 3.0 is not cheaper to implement. Time will tell.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (1)

Agripa (139780) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822944)

eSATA combined with port multiplication looks promising for external hard drive cabinets but what would preclude using link aggregation to combine multiple gigabit ethernet ports?

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (2, Insightful)

0100010001010011 (652467) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821572)

Or use a real protocol like Firewire. I can't imagine how much CPU USB 3.0 is going to eat up.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (2, Interesting)

TeknoHog (164938) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821766)

USB 3.0 or *something faster* will be required for devices this large in portable storage capacity.. USB 2.0 is ~480Mbps (theoretical max) and it would take forever to transfer a terabyte over USB 2.0.

Firewire 400 is already faster than USB 2.0 in practical use. It was designed for heavy media/disk usage from the beginning, unlike USB that was meant to replace the old serial/parallel ports for slow peripherals. For one thing, USB only has a single-pair data cable that carries either incoming or outgoing data at one time, while FW has dedicated pairs for both directions (like twisted-pair Ethernet). I haven't found USB's CPU usage a problem in practice, but nevertheless it feels much slower. For example, my external drive has both USB and Firewire ports, and with USB it takes much more time for Linux to find the drive and its partitions.

That's just for Firewire 400, and we already have faster versions. I find it really unfortunate that USB is being pushed so much while FW is in decline. The USB 3.0 with its fiberoptic links looks like a particularly desperate move to extend the standard, not the least when you consider the fragility of fiberoptics in the hands of end users.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22822488)

But the opposite is true for SATA and PATA.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (0)

dfghjk (711126) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822750)

Firewire was not "designed for heavy media/disk usage from the beginning", it was not designed for that use at all in the beginning. Disk attachment doesn't need isochronous transfers or peer to peer protocols. It's more accurate to say that firewire outperforms USB2 for disk attachment DESPITE not being designed for that use in the beginning.

Firewire is an abomination. So is USB. They're both advances over what came before them though. The real tragedy is that SSA, a technology vastly superior to either of them, lost out. At least we have SATA now.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (1)

TeknoHog (164938) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823448)

Firewire was not "designed for heavy media/disk usage from the beginning", it was not designed for that use at all in the beginning. Disk attachment doesn't need isochronous transfers or peer to peer protocols. [...] The real tragedy is that SSA, a technology vastly superior to either of them, lost out. At least we have SATA now.

Firewire and USB are designed and used for many applications besides disk drives. Isochronous transfers and p2p networking are needed with DV, for example.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (1)

vuffi_raa (1089583) | more than 6 years ago | (#22827084)

That's just for Firewire 400, and we already have faster versions. I find it really unfortunate that USB is being pushed so much while FW is in decline. The USB 3.0 with its fiberoptic links looks like a particularly desperate move to extend the standard, not the least when you consider the fragility of fiberoptics in the hands of end users.
the problem with firewire can be blamed 100% on apple, when it came out rather than embracing pc firewire, it fought for years to try to keep it out of the hands of pc users- as a result you have the obcurely serial named firewire port on pc's that took years to be added to mainboard support and during those yearss people were already replacing their serial connections with usb, so they were used to just plugging something into a usb port.

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (1)

aminorex (141494) | more than 6 years ago | (#22823858)

> it would take forever

Is that metric forever, or English?

Re:USB 3.0 desperately needed here... (1)

vuffi_raa (1089583) | more than 6 years ago | (#22827056)

USB 3.0 or *something faster* will be required for devices this large in portable storage capacity..
It is not that bad- 500 gigs takes about 8-12 hours (depending on # of files, large files are at full speed based on the single handshake that the data has to do wheras if there are 1000 files taking the same space as that 1 it takes a whole lot longer)- I do this all of the time as I take in terabytes of raw data for cases all of the time and have to copy the data to our local network for us to process in my job for litigation where we are bound not to crack the cases on factory sealed drives- our average drive to intake, files are in the millions and come on 500 gig drives with usually 300-450 gigs of data. you can figure that it takes about twice that, about a day to copy a terabyte over usb (this is done with DOS with verification on, so if it was a straight file copy it would be a lot faster).
don't forget though that there is always esata, if you wanted to copy large volumes you could just directly image the folders over esata and it would be a lot faster.

Vaporware (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22821094)

Whatever Vaporware 2020.

cantilever memory is decades old (3, Informative)

davidwr (791652) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821320)

Memory device with dual cantilever means [freepatentsonline.com] , United States Patent 5036490, IBM, published 07/30/1991. TFA talks about IBM's Millipede project, which looks like something similar.

A better summary would have said "Improvements to cantilever memory hold promise for 1TB chips by 2018" or something similar.

Wikipedia has some information [wikipedia.org] on non-memory uses of micro-cantilevers.

Tiny little rewritable DVD (1)

us7892 (655683) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821142)

So what we have here are tiny little nano-bots writing onto a chalcogenide-based material.

I can't imagine 1 TB (0, Redundant)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821152)

I find it very difficult to imagine how much data is 1 TB. Can some one tell me how many libraries of congresses 1 TB is?

Re:I can't imagine 1 TB (0)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821224)

1 TB = 3 hogsheads per furlong

Re:I can't imagine 1 TB (2, Interesting)

Jason Levine (196982) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821278)

0.1 Library of Congresses according to this website:

http://www.jamesshuggins.com/h/tek1/how_big.htm [jamesshuggins.com]

10 Terabytes: Printed collection of the U. S. Library of Congress

Re:I can't imagine 1 TB (1)

operagost (62405) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821376)

... or one station wagon full of DLTs.

Re:I can't imagine 1 TB (1)

HTH NE1 (675604) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821464)

Someone should get recognition of Library of Congress units into Google Calculator.

Re:I can't imagine 1 TB (2, Interesting)

Sylver Dragon (445237) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821370)

1 TB = a small corner of my SAN.
Personally, I love the idea of small, high capacity, solid state drives. The systems I admin are used for GIS research, and I dread what may happen anytime one of the researches takes a laptop into the field for data collection. So far, the worst which has happened was that one laptop went for a swim, which might have been ok except the salinity of the water was very high.
Ok, so a solid state drive may not have helped too much in that case, but for the occasional drop, bang or 120 degree weather; solid state drives are just gonna survive better.

Still a lot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22821162)

Although by the time the terabyte version comes out we will probably have affordable hard disks that are even bigger, it still means practically unlimited storage for a solid-state laptop. With the exception of high-def video, that is.

Great For Copying (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22821172)


U.S. passport files and revealing them to the public as directed by me.

Actually, it was Cheney's idea but I'm sure you recognize the importance of protocol at The Bunker.

Criminally Yours,
George W. Bush [whitehouse.org]

Interesting move (1)

downix (84795) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821284)

I'd easily imagine this showing up inside CPU's firs tho

50 Gigs (3, Interesting)

zippthorne (748122) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821326)

We only need 50 GB, and in a form factor about a third of a deck of cards, and cheaper than a BRD. And it doesn't even have to be rewritable. Then, the tyranny of spinning disk media will finally be temporarily ameliorated, by USB high definition video players.

Imagine: not having to worry about your media obsoleting because the interface is so cheap and useful that it is guaranteed to be on every computing device long after it has been surpassed by superior buses.

Imagine a robust format that doesn't skip or scratch, even if you keep it in your pocket with your keys.

Imagine a built-in crypto chip ensuring strong DRM by essencially creating an encrypted ssh tunnel straight to your video display device, using a different key every time for the actual data.

(ok, the last one's maybe not so great, but there's no reason why anything with a usb connect can't have the crypto built in, so you'd still have your portability. If there's still a problem, then it's better to enforce the rules as perfectly as possible. People don't usually object to rules that don't affect them, witness the capricious speed laws for your example there)

Re:50 Gigs (3, Interesting)

Original Replica (908688) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821812)

If there's still a problem, then it's better to enforce the rules as perfectly as possible.

According to the series of tubes "The best way to repeal a bad law is to enforce it." was first said by Lincoln, Grant, and several other old dead guys. It might hold true for criminal laws which regulate behaviors, it doesn't work so well for thing that regulate the flow of money. Mostly because the laws which regulate the flow of money, make it flow into the pockets of the powerful. Secondly they people who are in a position to make the needed changes aren't actually effected by something like a $25 CD, because they have two or three orders of magnitude more disposable income than the rest of the society. The richest 10% own 89% of the stock. [marketresearch.com] In a corporate world where everything is beholden to the shareholder, those 10% are the only ones who really count. That same 10% isn't effected by overpriced CDs or overpriced gas or overpriced pharmaceuticals, because they have plenty of cash to cover it without it effecting their quality of life.

Re:50 Gigs (2, Interesting)

Bob-taro (996889) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822892)

In a corporate world where everything is beholden to the shareholder, those 10% are the only ones who really count. That same 10% isn't effected by overpriced CDs or overpriced gas or overpriced pharmaceuticals, because they have plenty of cash to cover it without it effecting their quality of life.

That's an interesting statistic about stock ownership. But I wouldn't be so sure they don't feel the effect of rising prices -- especially gas prices. The top 10% starts at about $100K. I know several people with incomes over 100K and trust me, ANYONE can live at or beyond their means. Plus, wealthier people probably USE more gas in their big cars and trucks. Why, even Rush Limbaugh once complained that he had to ask his pilot to fly his private jet slower because of the rising cost of jet fuel.

Okay, maybe that was a bad example.

Re:50 Gigs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22824824)

Why, even Rush Limbaugh once complained that he had to ask his pilot to fly his private jet slower because of the rising cost of jet fuel.

I'm sure that was a joke. Rush Limbaugh's pilot is.. Rush Limbaugh. If he's flying somewhere with another pilot, chances are it's not his plane, either, so he probably wouldn't have any reason to care how much fuel it's using.

Re:50 Gigs (1)

hughperkins (705005) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822584)

50GB should be more than enough for anyone!

One Terabyte (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22821352)

is a good deal greater than the weight of an unladen sparrow.

month of unrepeating p0rn in an iPod (1)

peter303 (12292) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821400)

Progress.

How fast is it ? (1)

Alain Williams (2972) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821412)

Access times, seeks, etc ?

Longevity and speed (4, Insightful)

hcdejong (561314) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821486)

These chips use moving parts. TFA mentions concerns over the longevity of the read/write element, but I'd expect the rest of the system to be more vulnerable than solid-state memory as well. With thousands of read/write probes working in parallel, there are lots of points of failure. Also, a mechanical system would have to be pretty incredible to beat the access times offered by current memory.

Re:Longevity and speed (5, Interesting)

JustinOpinion (1246824) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821884)

This technology is essentially what is used in atomic force microscopes [wikipedia.org] , and was being investigated by IBM for data storage under the name "Millipede [ibm.com] ". It basically involves a huge array of cantilevers that have very sharp tips on them (typical tip size is 20 nm but smaller is possible). The tips are used to read and write dots on the surface.

So yes, this system has moving parts. The tips have to scan across the surface, and the cantilevers are basically springs that bend up and down as the tips move over the surface. This definitely has some wear issues to consider, but it's nothing like the large-scale and high-speed movements of a hard drive (where a >2" disk is rotating at >7,000 rpm). Instead, the tips are moving laterally by micrometers at most (the huge array is what allows a large surface to be probed), and the cantilevers are springing up-and-down by only nanometers. The movement in an AFM is controlled using piezoelectric [wikipedia.org] deformation of quartz actuators. This small-scale movement is very robust and reproducible. Quartz oscillators can vibrate/move thousands of times a second continuously for years without much problem (think of oscillators used for clocks, etc.). Moreover this technology has been used in commercial AFMs for years, so it's well-understood.

The thousands of tips are probably all actuated together by a single piezo-motor. They move in unison which would actually allow for high-speed reading/writing (since thousands of bits are read/written at once). You're right that each tip is in principle a point of failure. However, with the right error-correction algorithm, the device could be built so that even if a few tips break, no data is lost.

I agree that the access time isn't going to be as fast as modern RAM, but it could very well be faster than modern hard-drives. I think this is intended as permanent storage, not volatile memory.

Re:Longevity and speed (1)

imsabbel (611519) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822896)

You forget the bigger problem convering wear and tear: The substrate those pins write bits onto.
In nanoscale, material fatique and stuff is pretty much nonexistent, but i would be interested in seeing a millipede system that can even reach MLC-Flash levels of write cycles...

Re:Longevity and speed (1)

Pravetz-82 (1259458) | more than 6 years ago | (#22843220)

The tips are used to read and write dots on the surface.

So, basically, it is a punch card !?

Re:Longevity and speed (2, Informative)

dpilot (134227) | more than 6 years ago | (#22822372)

Sounds similar to a DLP TV, to me. On those things, the mirrors are flexing up to 60 times each second, the whole time the TV is on. I remember reading something about the wear issue, and they found that if they constrain the flexing (less than 17 degrees, IIRC) that wear was not an issue. Apparently wear rises rapidly with the degree of the flex.

Actually... (1)

WallaceAndGromit (910755) | more than 6 years ago | (#22825186)

Point well taken. However, DLP mirrors oscillated at frequencies much higher than the frame rate in order to produce gradation in the colors. If they only oscillated at the frame rate, you would only get black or white for each frame. From here [dlp.com] ...

The bit-streamed image code entering the semiconductor directs each mirror to switch on and off up to several thousand times per second. When a mirror is switched on more frequently than off, it reflects a light gray pixel; a mirror that's switched off more frequently reflects a darker gray pixel.

Re:Actually... (1)

dpilot (134227) | more than 6 years ago | (#22825818)

OK, so you've just taken the flexing I've described, and made it much, much worse. Still, my point was that there's a fairly large body of knowledge about flexing small on-chip structures, in DLP TVs.

I read this as... (1)

One Childish N00b (780549) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821620)

I read the title as 'Army-Based Memory May Put a Terabyte on a Chip'.

I guess you need a lot of porn to keep you entertained on a long tour.

lol (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22821902)

lol "array-based memory"

Re:lol (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22822852)

I prefer hashtable-based memory, so I can find any byte I want simply by looking it up with a convenient key.

Who needs that much? (1)

Amazetbm (1087099) | more than 6 years ago | (#22821988)

I thought that Bill said 640 kilobytes should be enough for anybody.

Re:Who needs that much? (1)

gwern (1017754) | more than 6 years ago | (#22862580)

That meme needs to die. Now. We are well past the stage where anyone seriously thought that we could one day have more storage space than we could use up, which was the only justification for citing a spurious quote in the first place.

Re:Who needs that much? (1)

Amazetbm (1087099) | more than 6 years ago | (#22864002)

That meme needs to die. Now. We are well past the stage where anyone seriously thought that we could one day have more storage space than we could use up, which was the only justification for citing a spurious quote in the first place.
Thanks for sharing. Come back when you get a sense of humor.

Magic Material? (1)

vlado4 (819670) | more than 6 years ago | (#22824882)

Ok, so the AFM based probes which write the data are a well researched technology. However, I am quite curious about the material which is used to store the data. So these probes indent a material to write a bit. Then if you want to erase the bit you have to do something magical.... Don't understand how you could do this, although I suppose you could use the shape memory alloys or so. Interesting if this would work on a nanoscale..... Other than this exotic material to store the data, everything else is solid in principle.
Check for New 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>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...