New Nanofab Tech Developed by UMass 55
Atomasoft Corporation writes: "The article available here point out a new tool in nanotechnology: 'Imagine being able to store 25 full-length, DVD-quality movies on a disc the size of a quarter. That amounts to a data storage density of about 1.2 trillion bits per square inch. A recent development by University of Massachusetts researchers may someday enable consumers to do just that. The research is detailed in the Dec. 15 issue of the journal Science and is funded by a National Science Foundation "Partnership in Nanotechnology" grant, the Materials Research Science and Engineering Center, and the U.S. Department of Energy.'"
Digital Library (Score:1)
Another point worth mentioning: As a result of this increasing quantity of space available to record music digitally, the want and need for radio stations is going down. I sense that in the next twenty years we may be subject to a shift of radio stations broadcasting, instead of through radio waves, online. Or perhaps the radio stations (and record labels too?), being nothing more than a "middle man" of sorts, might be eradicated completely and the artists will be directly responsible for the distribution of their music, online or otherwise.
25 MPAA MOVIES you mean? Bad wording. (Score:3)
Man, why did they have to say Movies, worse yet, DVD-quality Movies. I don't want to see the MPAA trying to stop this technology (or delay it like DVD-R). Why not say, for example, a tillrion uncopyrighted text files instead. Better yet, just the actual storage size would be fine.
MIB Movie (Score:1)
Eerie coincidence, don't you thing?!?!?! SPOOKY!
Like i can't lose things already (Score:1)
What'll happen if we do get these, am I gonna actually get organized for once? Heck no, I'll lose all of them.
I'm all for miniaturization and nanotechnology, but cmon people, let's get serious here. Do we want to promote losing tiny things, or whine about larger, but still easy to lose things?
This is what happens when I get too much sleep.
Big, yes, but what about speed? power? duration? (Score:3)
Just how fast can information be written to or read from this new storage medium? For that matter, for how long can information be retained -- think DRAM. If it needs to be periodically refreshed, then how often? How about power consumption? How reliable is the storage? Would a random gamma ray fry a whole lot of those bits?
The posts I've seen here so far suggest people have been thinking along the lines of CD or DVD kinds of storage with near-permanent storage attributes.
Even using a fast CD drive, that could take quite a while for the data transfer and all the disk shuffling!
Then again, if it proves to have high data transfer rates and low power consumption, sign me up to be the first for data cartridges for a Visor and a digital camera!
Re:Magnetic vs. Optical (Score:1)
Funny you should mention that. There was a story a few months back about an optical data storage technology that used florescent (sp?) methods instead of reflective (like current CD/DVD/etc.) ones. IIRC, they use 2 laser beams that intersect at a certain point within the media and it either floresces or it doesn't. or something like that...
See here [active-hardware.com] for more info.
Averye0
Re:Why isn't there a watchdog? (Score:3)
Look, ignore nanobots for a second. Build me a robot of ANY size that survive and reproduce.
You can't. It will be a very VERY long time before anything like this happens. There's no watchdog because THERE'S NOTHING TO WATCH.
I'm beginning to suspect you're a troll. I've never seen any scientist come close to claiming a tech they've produced will 'cure all our ills'.
Ah well. Guess I'm just used to dealing with ignorance.
Later
ErikZ
Re:Also... (Score:1)
It's the return of Core Memory! (Score:1)
It is rather neat that they can "grow" these things without paying people to thread magnetic donuts with wire under binocular microscopes. Still, I'll be more impressed when they get a matrix hooked up and are using it to store and retrieve data.
If they do it it will be real interesting, because core storage was very robust. The magnetic particles aren't exposed to the outside world as they are on a disc. Even these very small ones would be well protected compared to the recording surface of a disk or CD.
Imagine?? It seems that all we'll ever do (Score:1)
During my weekly stroll at Costco, the only thing I ever see increasing in size are the drives offered by Maxtor. in the span of about 1.5 months, it seems like they went from 30GB, to 40GB to 60GB to 80GB.
--Clay
Re:Digital Library (Score:1)
compression exclusively because there is
no need to conserve space. No more MPEG
compression artifacts, no more decoding
delays and excessive CPU/graphics card
loads - every frame is stored ready to
load to screen, every song is stored with
maximum details in the most sound-preserving
format. This in turn would rapidly force
better monitors and speakers to go
mainstream.
Basic Research, Applied Research, and Engineering (Score:4)
Basic science is the cutting-edge stuff. It's where you do stuff because it's interesting, it's totally new, and it's got maybe a one in 50 chance of leading to a new product. But sometimes, just sometimes, it gets you semiconductors, penicillin, and the theory of relativity. The timeline between such research beginning and products arriving on the shelves is typically a decade, sometimes generations. To use a contemporary computer-related example, research into nanocomputing and quantum computing falls into this category.
Applied research covers the majority of research done by companies (but not all - very large companies do a fair bit of pure research). This is often directed by companies who want to investigate things closely related to their existing products. It typically runs under shorter timelines of maybe 2 - 5 years between research and outcomes. Intel's work on say 0.07-micron processes would probably fall into this category.
Engineering is what happens when companies turn basic and applied research into products.
Now, while these are fairly rough categories (really they represent a continuum rather than strict definitions, and there is feedback in both directions) they are good to keep in mind when examining new developments. Criticising the latest product on the market for really just being a slight refinement on the last one is missing the point. Conversely, criticising this for being "vapourware" is equally silly. It may well take ten years to appear on the market. More likely, you'll never hear of this again. But then again, it might be the foundation of ultra-high-density storage for the computers of 2015.
There will always be luddites (Score:1)
It is attitudes like those you express here that hold the scientific community back from its true potential. The concept you propose, that science should be governed by the whims of the uneducated masses, is preposterous. The establishment of a "watchdog body" to "inform the public properly" would be both ineffective and crippling to the science. Regardless of how the watchdog body acts, the media is going to portray any new scientific developement in the way that will get the best reaction from their audiences, most of whom are uneducated and given to shock journalism and sensationalism. Your hypothetical watchdog body can trumpet the positives of nanotechnology all you want, but the media will still seize upon the minute possibility that something could go wrong, simply because this is the best story. Look at the media play last year, regarding the possible generation of a "strangelet" at the large hadron particle collider. If this event happened, i don't debate that it could end life as we know it. But the probability of a strangelet generation event is so absurdly low it is incalculable. Not only did the media blatantly ignore scientific fact put to it by multitudes of physicists around the world, they pushed the story so hard that the collider is loosing funding. Is this what you want for nanotechnology, one of the most intrigueing and potentially world changing developements ever?
In essence, you blame science for something that is not at all science's fault. If you want to establish a watchdog group, make it watch, not the scientists, but rather the media that distorts and lies about what science is doing. It is not the fault of science that the public is uneducated and the media is adept at exploiting that. It is not the fault of science that the media is willing to conjure facts out of nothing, to accept the ideas of un-accredited "experts" above those of researching scientists. The corruption of media is not the fault of science. Science should not be made to suffer for the stupidity of the masses.
note: yep, that's an elitist opinion. it's also the truth. live with it.
Re:There will always be luddites (Score:2)
BSE IS a problem for the dozen or whatever people that have caught new type CJD in recent years.
Do some reading on BSE and the prions that are thought to cause it. It's pretty scary stuff, worthy of the radical containment measures that are being taken.
Re:Why isn't there a watchdog? (Score:1)
If we had the tech to build such a robot, would we pretty much have the tech to defend against it???
DVD Movies (Score:1)
So what happened to that holographic storage that was supposed to be coming 'any day now'
---
Re:Why isn't there a watchdog? (Score:1)
Science
PO Box 8473
Schenectady, NY 12301
I'm sure that you will be able to convince Science to mend its evil ways. If that doesn't work, though, try:
Capitalism
120B Broadway
NY, NY 10009
Good luck.
*YAWN* (Score:1)
Not bad from the continent that is still using 100MB hacked-up magnetic disks while other countries have been using Magneto Optical disks for years...
Also... (Score:1)
Re:Why isn't there a watchdog? (Score:1)
And you are one of them.
Magnetic vs. Optical (Score:4)
Re:Magnetic vs. Optical (Score:1)
If it can hold that much, think if it were 5.25in (Score:2)
Re:Magnetic vs. Optical (Score:2)
Consider the difficulties of actually seeing through the first layer of the data-storing object. You'd actually have two-dimensional storage that's not efficient since it's folded in three dimensional space. It would be kind of like the "high-tech" alien diagrams from the movie Contact.
You have a point, of course. You could theoretically make all the layers somewhat transparent and each layer would reflect light which had only certain characteristics. (don't ask me how to do that)
Achieving the multi-layer effect with magnetic fields would be much more difficult.
Flavio
Wow (Score:1)
-----
Re:Wow (Score:1)
Forget MP3s, they reduce music quality. You can store audio on that thing that even your dog will know to appreciate ;).
5 on a nickle, 1 on a penny (Score:1)
Tiny disc media (Score:1)
Looks like I'm going to have to buy the white album again soon.
G.
Re:Key words - New technology != vaporware (Score:2)
---
Re:If it can hold that much, think if it were 5.25 (Score:1)
Now imagine.... (Score:1)
Re:Key words (Score:2)
25 Movies?? (Score:1)
Imagine being able to watch ONE movie that wasn't a rehash of Blade Runner or a 60's sitcom.
Please please please don't let them bring this to market.
Not again (Score:1)
Re:25 MPAA MOVIES you mean? Bad wording. (Score:1)
*sigh* (Score:1)
I'm tired of all this god damned vaporware
This has got to be the 100th time I've heard of one of these "store n billion megs on a quarter" devices, and I'm still getting 650 megs a CD. Oh well, one day it'll be true, and all my backup needs will be met..till then.. *sigh*
WooHoo! (Score:1)
See? this proves that poor, drunk, and underrated students/researchers can come up with useful tech.
(HAHA! in your *face* MIT!)
James
KB1FJQ
[Bond] on irc.worldirc.org - #angband
Re:There will always be luddites (Score:2)
It is undeniable that technology can be used harmfully and destructively, and when it is the tool of single-minded companies with bloody track records, there is a cause for unease that has nothing to do with a luddite aversion to technology.
It's how the technology is being used. Even with all the GM hysteria and warnings and cautions, BT corn still made its way into human food supplies. No big deal if, like me, you're not allergic to the stuff and it wasn't your livelyhood that got flushed down the tubes, and you're don't give a rats ass about people who do have extreme allergies but can lead relatively normal lives by avoiding the wrong products by checking the labels.
But at the very least, it indicates that there are "actual problems", and for many, it suggests that the problems are not being taken anywhere near seriously enough - and while you might hate to admit it, GM hysteria has played a huge role in tightening up safety precautions that were previously heading towards profit-motivated levels of an inadequacy that is only now becoming evident.
What is really holding scientific community back from its true potential is a market system where the only research guarenteed to get funding is research that will make $$$ in the forseeable future. When the aim of science is quick bucks, not knowledge, is when science is suffering for the selfishness and stupidity of the elite. And you, sir, although you may deny it most strenuosly, associate yourself with them most strongly in your words
Science should be for the people. If the people, in their supposed "stupidity" don't want something that you believe to be an increase in their standard of living, attempting to impose such change upon them because they are too ignorant or unwashed to know what is best for themselves, is itself an uneducated stance. History repeats.
And if you infer from this that I am anti-GM, then you haven't been listening
Re:Like i can't lose things already (Score:1)
Re:Magnetic vs. Optical (Score:1)
Re:Big, yes, but what about speed? power? duration (Score:1)
Re:There will always be luddites (Score:1)
in that case, i readily admit that BSE is a major problem. as a non-infected prion carrier myself, i'm quite familiar with the ramifications of the disease.
however, that brings up the point that, as far as i've seen, BSE is a naturally occuring disease, a consequence not of unchecked science but rather of evolution and natural selection. admittedly, the practice of using offal in animal feed is repugnant, but it has been in use for centuries. blaming science for BSE is tantamount to blaming meteorologists because people can be struck by lightning. it seems to me that science should be congratulated for their progress, not shamed for the existence of nature. i remember when i was living in europe, in the late 80s and early 90s, they didn't even know what caused BSE. at least now with the discovery of prions, the progress of the disease can be checked to some degree, and a cure can be researched.
metricman's translation (Score:1)
metricman's correction (Score:1)
I can see an accident (Score:4)
*Pepsi drops from machine*
"Whelp, I've got my drink and my movie, what could be better?"
*looks at machine, realizes that wasn't a quater*
Oh good. (Score:1)
Or maybe... "Honey, where's our licensed copy of Gone with the Wind?" "Damned if I know, isn't it on the disc with the Matrix and Dr. Zhivago? Check under the sofa cushions..."
Key words (Score:2)
Can you say "vaporware"?
-antipop
Re:Why isn't there a watchdog? (Score:1)
Inspiration is the Oxygen that surrounds me
Why isn't there a watchdog? (Score:1)
Isn't it about time that science realised what happens with technologies like this in the public eye? First science puffs them up as the cure to all our ills, and then there is a mistake, and then the technology is tarred as the spawn of Satan.
I would like to see science pre-empt these predictable problems by creating a watchdog body that will watch scientists and inform the public properly. The scaremongers are always among us.
Inspiration is the Oxygen that surrounds me
Wow (Score:1)
Re:What do you mean? (Score:1)
What do you mean? (Score:2)
FMD is _much_ closer to being a reality.. (Score:1)
Re:If it can hold that much, think if it were 5.25 (Score:1)
--
More info (Score:1)