Tech Topic - Data Storage Achievement

IBM achieved a milestone in data storage:

http://news.yahoo.com/ibm-achieves-...rage-technology-creates-worlds-014613071.html

__________________________________________________________

My 2 Cents:

FIRSTLY - Molecular memory is old hat -- a mole of substance has ~600,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 atoms. Even at a data density of 150 atoms per bit, that is 4,000,000,000,000,000,000,000bits of data on a hypothetical piece of silicon weighing 14 grams, which is about 6cm^3, or 0.37in^3. The challenge is to retrieve or write a bit of data in that tight of a space without disturbing the adjacent bits of data. The level of precision necessary is not practically achievable. Bear in mind that this 'block' of silicon weighs about 1/3rd of a CD.

SECONDLY - Data capacity must be coupled with the speed at which data can be accessed. In using the example above of a 6gram data cube, and using a highly optimistic read speed of 1,000 GB/sec (not readily available at this time), it would take 118 years to access all that data.

THIRDLY - The Human Scale. A logical argument from points 1 and 2 is to conclude that 6 grams is too large of a storage device and that this incredible data storage density can be used to miniaturize consumer electronics to ever smaller proportions. How much data storage is enough for practical use? A 2TB hard drive is available in some high-end desktops, but for true performance let's try to match the human brain - which is estimated to hold about 2.5 petabytes. On second thought, since two minds are better than one -- let's make it 5 petabytes (5 times the memory required for the CGI effects in AVATAR, or about 4 times the amount of data stored on all of the World of Warcraft servers.) The mass of this storage device would be 19micrograms. As a comparison, that is 1/3 the weight of a human eyebrow hair, the same weight as a human egg (typically indicated as being "...the size of the period at the end of this sentence."), and the amount of uncertainty in the actual mass of the international prototype kilogram.

 

I'm trying to understand... It sounds very large, and yet very small at the same time...you sound like you know what your talking about. I'm sorry you lost me after "my two cents".

 

I got to FIRSTLY ! But it was interesting.

 

UH , UH , YUP WHAT HE SAID , YUP .

 

Brain cramp.....brain overload! and

 

It helps to follow the link I posted in the original.

 

I agree, IBM has been chasing that same moving target for so long I think they've lost sight of where they were headed. I think "biocryptography" offers more features and functionality. Atomic storage doesn't resolve many of the traditional risks whereas bacterial data storage can offer the potential for infinite amounts of storage and protects against many of the risks associated with current storage media. Only time will tell what new risks it introduces.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/af...ocId=CNG.400a3e587d2193b4c35f133d08db3b96.1e1

 

WOW....I find this amazing! And a little spooky. Think of the possibilities!

 

OK, took op advice and got courage enough to open the link. Interesting that magnetic storage(tape) was first data storage and they're going back to it(magnetic anyway). Modern HD's are optical right? Data storage is one thing, retrieval is another hurdle.

 

Current hard drive tech is still magnetic. CD-R/CD-RW/DVD-R/DVD-RW/Blu-Ray are all optical storage types. So far optical storage still hasn't reached a point where it's cost effective for consumer use in large capacities. Even a Dual-Layer Blu-Ray is still only 50Gb's. A typical 2000Gb magnetic hard drive can be had for less than $100 (retail pricing). Many companies have switched to using magnetic hard drive storage as a backup media due to the costs and speed issues with magnetic tape. Although magnetic tape is still the media of choice for long-term offline storage, I expect that will change as Solid State Disks (think USB keys...no moving parts) become larger and more mainstream.

 

Thanks for edumacation Cyber, I'm a relative dunce when it comes to tech stuff. I did manage to fix the power port in my laptop though and have given this old war horse cpr a couple times when it looked like it was down for the count,lol.

 

Works out well...I'm a relative dunce once I get under the hood of my car.

 

Haha, ok, I know now enough about under hood to be just past the stage where I would be "dangerous." And finally have enough tools accumulated to handle a lot of jobs without having to go out and buy some each time, woo hoo!

 

I'm in the same boat with my tool collection...but I still think of myself as dangerous. Chicks still dig "dangerous" right? I don't encounter many, living in a server room and all.

 

Dangerous, yes. Dangerous to yourself, not so much.