Video of ceramic storage system prototype surfaces online — 10,000TB cartridges bombarded with laser rays could become mainstream by 2030, making slow hard drives and tapes obsolete::Ceramics-based storage medium consumes very little energy and lasts more than 5,000 years, creators say

  • seaQueue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Just wait until one of your techs drops a cassette of these glass and ceramic plates and suddenly your company is out 100,000TB of data.

    The whole “it can last 5000 years” thing is somewhat ridiculous considering the library mechanisms, carriers for the slides and basically everything else not glass and ceramic probably won’t last more than 20 or 30.

    • Brokkr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      46
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It is possible to make glass and ceramics that are resistant to shattering from fair hard impacts. I don’t know if that can be employed here, but there are other ways to deal with the problem.

      Additionally, if 100,000 TB is something that people can carry by hand, then it is also possible to back up those drives relatively easily (relative to that technology).

      Lastly, current silicon fabs have boxes of wafers that at the final stages can exceed $1M in the retail value. They have robots that handle those. If the 100,000 TB is worth something close to that, then a human will not be carrying it.

      • StereoTrespasser@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re not playing Lemmy correctly. The highest rated post must always be a half-hearted pessimistic lazy criticism of whatever new technology is being described.

      • realitista@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Or just put the cartridge in a shockproof box. One that can last as long as the medium. It can’t be that hard to make a really good box.

      • NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        possible to make glass and ceramics that are resistant to shattering from fair hard impacts.

        As far as I know, there is 1 storage technology that has survived wars. Paper.

    • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s… literally always a concern. Name a digital storage medium impervious to impact damage. You can’t.

    • Hawk@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      1 year ago

      Having backups at multiple sites is industry standard. Nobody is keeping 100,000TB of data in a single location.

      As for your second point, I don’t see the relevance. You can store the glass wherever you want, the other mechanisms aren’t relevant for keeping the stored data.

      • aeronmelon@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Just like how if you put a shattered CD in an apparatus, you can still use a laser reader to recover any data on the undamaged sections.

        Though, because data is recorded in a circular pattern at high speeds, you won’t get much. Or what you get will have lots of corruption. I wonder what pattern of storage these plates use? If it’s similar to SSDs, then large files can be nested in a very small area of space - increasing the chances of recovery.

  • MeaanBeaan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    1 year ago

    Something I sometimes think about is how much of humanity’s history is just like, gone. Completely forgotten to time. Great works of art that’ll never be seen. Amazing compositions that’ll never again be heard. An uncalculable number of lifetimes reduced to nothing more than food for the dirt.

    The proposition that we could store vast amounts of our current experience on archival slabs and preserve it all far into our distant future is incredibly exciting to me. It wouldn’t only allow us to indefinitely preserve all of these incredible works of art our modern world has enabled. But would also allow us to more effectively learn from our collective societal mistakes. It would hopefully be more difficult to ignore our past foibles when we keep such detailed receipts… Hopefully.

    If not at least they’ll have SpongeBob in 7023 to distract from the cyber-nazis.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The proposition that we could store vast amounts of our current experience on archival slabs and preserve it all far into our distant future is incredibly exciting to me.

      We’re currently one Carrington Event away from losing a huge amount of the history of the last 20 years. Not to mention all of the things from previous years that were archived from originals that no longer exist.

    • realitista@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah but in about 10 years it will be replaced by something even better and they’ll stop making the readers for it.

  • Matriks404@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    I know it was said before in previous decades as storage evolved, but: How the fuck, do you eve fill these up?

    • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Removal is probably possible by just burning trash over real data. But identifying what needs to be burned. Ouch.

    • antihumanitarian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Normal people don’t, but when you get into absolutely massive enterprise archiving there’s no rival for the density and cost effectiveness. It sucks for general purpose storage, but for write once, hopefully never read use, they’re ideal.

  • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    I can understand needing this tech for court records and similar stuff. Even for libraries which desire to store everything in the world. But that’s about it. I don’t think many people go to old backups and see their old documents or code they wrote. Photos, sure, but even that is not a frequent thing.

    • Bread@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      You clearly have never met a data hoarder before then. Some people just store things for the heck of it and if it happens to be relevant years down the line, they have you covered.