this post was submitted on 21 Feb 2024
312 points (94.8% liked)

Technology

59575 readers
3418 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Note: Unfortunately the research paper linked in the article is a dead/broken/wrong link. Perhaps the author will update it later.

From the limited coverage, it doesn't sound like there's an actual optical drive that utilizes this yet and that it's just theoretical based on the properties of the material the researchers developed.

I'm not holding my breath, but I would absolutely love to be able to back up my storage system to a single optical disc (even if tens of TBs go unused).

If they could make a R/W version of that, holy crap.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Yawweee877h444@lemmy.world 156 points 9 months ago (33 children)

It's "only" 125 TB. Still a lot, and impressive. But I just hate the stupid click baity 'petabit' term. We use bytes GB and TB as a standard, just use the standard term it's impressive enough.

[–] SinningStromgald@lemmy.world 31 points 9 months ago (1 children)

But then the headline would have to say "Scientists Develop Optical Disc with measly 125TB's of Storage"

[–] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 5 points 9 months ago

Exclamation marks usually help .... and comic sans

[–] BassTurd@lemmy.world 16 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I like to express my storage sizes in nibs. I think that makes this a 250 teranib disk.

[–] cmhe@lemmy.world 16 points 9 months ago (1 children)

IMO the whole byte stuff is pretty confusing, people should have just sticked with bits, because that avoids implementation details.

One bit is the smallest amount of information. Bytes historically had different amounts of bits, depending on the architecture. With ASCII and the success of the 8 bit processor word of the Intel 8080/8085 processor, it is now defacto 8 Bit long.

But personally, byte seems a bit (no pun intended) like the imperial measurement system.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] victorz@lemmy.world 12 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Agreed. Bits are used more commonly when talking about transfer speeds, and bytes regarding storage.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] jenny_ball@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)
[–] buzz86us@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago

I just want this disc in a DVD-RAM format.. It doesn't have to be extremely fast just readable and writable.. I used to love DVD-RAM until 4.25gb became nothing

[–] cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca 4 points 9 months ago (7 children)

8 bits in a byte, networks are measured in bits.

[–] cynar@lemmy.world 12 points 9 months ago

Data is stored in bytes (as the minimum size), it's moved as a bitstream (continuous flow, without regard to individual byte boarders).

Hence storage is measured in bytes, network connections are measured in bits/second.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Are disks though?

I think the last time I saw storage measured in bits was a SNES cartridge.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (27 replies)
[–] prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works 69 points 9 months ago (3 children)

I’m already ready to buy the 32K ultra extended directors cut of the LOTR with this news.

[–] ptz@dubvee.org 34 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Lol, I feel like it'd still be a multi-disc set.

[–] prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works 8 points 9 months ago

It had better be.

[–] GreatAlbatross@feddit.uk 4 points 9 months ago

It's traditional to split Fellowship at Rivendell.

[–] TheDarksteel94@sopuli.xyz 10 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Let me guess, you'll watch it on your 720p TV? /s

[–] femboy_bird@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Give him credit, it's 900p

[–] Deceptichum@kbin.social 12 points 9 months ago

Lets meet halfway and say 900i

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ExLisper@linux.community 43 points 9 months ago

We're almost there...

[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 40 points 9 months ago

The wet dream of all the people who pirate. This and crystal storage.

[–] TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world 25 points 9 months ago (4 children)

I so wish we had some affordable, high-density storage technology that we could record and then forget it in the attic for 20 years.

[–] Silentiea@lemm.ee 8 points 9 months ago (2 children)

I mean there's magnetic tape. It's not, like, usable. But it's also none too volatile if stored properly.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] thehatfox@lemmy.world 19 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Research is one thing, getting from concept to production is another. There was a lot of hype about holographic disc formats years ago that was promising capacities from 100 GB to several TBs but they never actually made it to the market.

With the ongoing "death" of physical media playing out in the consumer space, it will also probably be hard for these esoteric disc formats to attract the investment needed to develop them. There might be some enterprise interest if the tech is stable enough for archival use I suppose.

[–] ptz@dubvee.org 6 points 9 months ago

I could see it easily replacing tape libraries as backup devices in data centers. Without the economies of scale like we saw with DVD-RW, I doubt I'd be able to afford one until they hit the secondhand market. It would also be interesting to see something like that integrated into storage appliances which would let you have something approaching an on-prem version of Amazon's Glacier tier.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Bishma@discuss.tchncs.de 15 points 9 months ago (6 children)

If they could make a R/W version of that, holy crap.

If those turn up at any sort of reasonable cost, it would simplify my home backups so much. I only have about 14TB currently on my NAS (including workstation backups) but even at that size backups are a problem. The irreplaceable stuff (about 3TB worth) is backed up in the cloud. My ripped DVDs/BRDs would all have to be reripped, other stuff I'd just have to find again or live without. I've been looking at the advancements being made in tape drives, but those are all priced for business.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] BrownianMotion@lemmy.world 13 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Tell me you are American, with out telling me you are American....

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago

Whats the read write speed?

[–] hruzgar@feddit.de 7 points 9 months ago (1 children)

They don't want us (consumers) to own anything. The world will turn up and down before this gets released to consumers.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

A big part of the problem is that most consumers don't want to own things either. Subscriptions are exactly what too many people want.

[–] TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

I think even that goes back around to business interests. We can't store that many physical copies in shrinking, expensive housing. Digital purchasable media is somehow just as expensive despite having tiny manufacturing and logistical costs, on top of being unreliable due to DRM.

Subscriptions so far seemed like a better value proposition but between splitting and vanishing libraries, increasing prices and the addition of ads, that's becoming more questionable. Even average people aren't so thrilled of having to subscribe to a dozen different services to watch, listen and play what they want.

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Does it even matter when companies have dumped physical copies for streaming?

[–] ptz@dubvee.org 7 points 9 months ago (2 children)

This is more for bulk data storage than home media.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago

It would make physical sharing of data a lot more efficient instead of the old stack of floppy disks we carried around in the old days.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Flumpkin@slrpnk.net 4 points 9 months ago

That would be amazing! You could store the entire 450TB of ebooks in annas-archive on 4 of those disks!!!

load more comments
view more: next ›