this post was submitted on 28 Feb 2024
329 points (91.9% liked)

Technology

59559 readers
3656 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
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] HeavyDogFeet@lemmy.world 156 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (7 children)

What a useless headline. God forbid they just give the actual capacity rather than some abstract, bullshit, flexible measure that means nothing to anyone.

[–] cali_ash@lemmy.wtf 80 points 8 months ago (5 children)

Asteroid the size of 64 Canada geese to pass Earth Tuesday - NASA

I'm not even making this up ....

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 48 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The US really will do anything to avoid using metric lol

[–] Nurgle@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

Canada geese are metric tho…

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 6 points 8 months ago

That's hilarious.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] BorgDrone@lemmy.one 30 points 8 months ago

I especially like it when they use airplanes to illustrate weight. “… the same as 15 Boeing 747 jumbo jets”. Airplanes are made to be as light as possible, they go to extreme lengths to save as much weight as they can. As such, a 747 is much lighter than most objects of similar size. People have no intuition of the weight of such large objects to begin with, but then they add to it by using something that is much lighter than you’d expect.

[–] PositivePossum@lemmy.world 27 points 8 months ago (2 children)
[–] lambda@programming.dev 8 points 8 months ago

Woah, I can't wait to never afford that!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Teon@kbin.social 25 points 8 months ago

It's larger than 6 olympic swimming pools and fits in my pants.

[–] MasterHound@lemmy.world 12 points 8 months ago (2 children)

They have to make it as accessible a headline as possible, especially when most don't read past the headline anyway these days. The average person probably doesn't have much of an idea as to what 125TB looks like in real world use.

[–] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 12 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

I'd argue that most people would have a better idea of what 125TB looks like than knowing the size of a 4k movie file, let alone 14,000 of them. They can at least compare 125TB to their 500GB/1TB phone/computer storage.

[–] xthexder@l.sw0.com 15 points 8 months ago

Not to mention there's nearly 10x difference in bitrate between 4K streaming video and actual 4K HDR off a bluray. The only people who know how big a 4K video is these days are nerds and pirates, because it's not like Netflix tells you.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mods_are_assholes@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Most people aren't tech savvy, and industry acronyms chase them away.

On the other hand, a movie is something everyone can understand.

[–] Ropianos@feddit.de 10 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

You can understand it but you can't interpret the value. How many movies is a CD? Or a DVD? Or a 1TB SSD? Or even Avatar in 3D (presumably not 1)? How many movies have even been released in total/last year?

The number awes non-tech savvy folk but it doesn't really inform them of anything. You could just as well write "more movies than you will ever need".

And besides that, I personally think that news should try to educate folk. I'm completely fine with a comparison in the article. But why in the headline?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RegalPotoo@lemmy.world 89 points 8 months ago (5 children)

1.4Pb (~175TB), the quoted number of movies is based on a 14GB movie which is very small (most BluRay disks hold somewhere between 25 and 50GB) and no discussion about write speed, so basically this is cool research that someone has done and is no closer to a commercial product that any of the dozens of other articles that have come out on this topic in the last 15 years

[–] MudMan@kbin.social 28 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I rip enough physical media to tell you that post-compression 14GB is not far from average for a 4K movie. I guarantee that Netflix isn't storing those any bigger than that. Hard drives don't grow on trees, you know?

It's still good to know where the top end of optical storage is, even at an academic level, even if these end up not being widely used or being used for specific applications at smaller capacities. We'll see where or if they resurface next, but I'm pretty sure we're not gonna get femtosecond lasers built into our laptops anytime soon.

[–] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Streaming services definitely don't give you full quality files. They're compressed to save bandwidth. Netflix only uses about 7GB per hour in 4k. That's about the exact size of the higher quality 1080p movies I download.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] iAmTheTot@kbin.social 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

These aren't really trying to target a commercial product, at least not anyway. For now these are of interest to enterprises.

[–] c0mbatbag3l@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago

I could see them being archival backups for TV broadcast, quite a few are still using tapes for long term archive.

[–] evilsmurf@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

From the article:

What’s almost more remarkable is that the scientists say a single new blank disc can be manufactured using conventional DVD mass production techniques within six minutes.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Drummyralf@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

And I believe 4k blurays are on average around 100 gb? So that will be about 1800-2000 movies. Still a lot, but not the 14.000 they say.

[–] Psythik@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The rips I pirate aren't re-encoded and are usually in the range of 50-75GB, depending on the length of the film.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] doublejay1999@lemmy.world 61 points 8 months ago (1 children)

That’s nearly 4 Call of Duty games

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ThePowerOfGeek@lemmy.world 26 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I wonder what the longevity of one of these discs is? The article says they can be manufactured in regular DVD production facilities, so it probably depends on the material used (which I think can range).

If they could combine something close to this data capacity level with the M-DISC standard (which supposedly last for about 1,000 years once you take into account the organic ingredients) that would be fantastic.

[–] cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de 14 points 8 months ago (2 children)

There's no point making it last 1000 years since there won't be any working drives by then. You usually need to move data to a newer format every 15-30 years. Look how hard it is to recover data from 8" floppy disks or old tape formats now.

[–] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 30 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Tape storage 100% is still a thing and is valued for a lot of truly critical data.

Also, WAY too much critical infrastructure still depends on floppy drives because... there is not a good reason to upgrade the hardware when they need data on the order of hundreds of kilobytes every couple of months.

Storage with purpose will be preserved. Maybe not in a computer sold in best buy but very much in "computing" as a whole.

I can't think of any situation where THIS disc is useful. But optical drives themselves are 100% going to remain a thing because they provide write once data storage (and OS installation) which is incredibly useful in secure environments.

[–] cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 8 months ago

Tape is still very popular. There has been a new LTO version released every few years. The recent ones are only backwards compatible with the previous version and the older ones supported 2 previous generations. If you need to read 20 year old data from an LTO tape, you will have to find an old drive that's compatible with that version.

There is a surprising amount of equipment still reliant on 3.5" floppy disks. Unfortunately it's getting much harder to find new old stock disks. Many of the older disks are degrading now. I've had some where a lot of the magnetic material gets worn off after a single read. At least there are floppy drive emulators now that can be used to prolong the life of older equipment as long as it doesn't use a weird format or interface.

[–] Norgur@kbin.social 9 points 8 months ago

This 1000 years thing is how (at least on paper) the main components of the medium can chemically stay intact and bonded together. You want this as stable as possible since more stability means more resistance to outside forces like moisture and such. Most discs suffering from disc rot today had a number between 5 years (baaaaad) and 200 years (still not great) and are decaying now.

So don't take things like this too literally.

[–] iturnedintoanewt@lemm.ee 25 points 8 months ago

How much is that in football stadiums?

[–] BananaOnionJuice@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Call me when you can buy a spindle with 100 for $50

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] darkmogool@feddit.de 17 points 8 months ago

I can't comprehend it. Please elaborate it in numbers of an average-sized white truffle.

[–] AceFuzzLord@lemm.ee 14 points 8 months ago (5 children)

New optical-disks able to hold a shit ton more storage sounds cool, until you realize you probably ain't gonna be seeing widespread adoption of it among the general public due to cloud storage and things like that, so if it ever does become publicly available it'll cost way too much.

[–] cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de 25 points 8 months ago

Cloud storage gets very expensive when you need to backup tens or hundreds of terabytes. You need very fast internet and you still need a local backup too. A second NAS and a tape drive will probably be cheaper than this new optical drive though.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] paddirn@lemmy.world 14 points 8 months ago

...That's a lot of porn.

[–] BeatTakeshi@lemmy.world 13 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I hope they come in vacuum cases, or the scratch is gonna hurt

[–] mac@infosec.pub 12 points 8 months ago (1 children)
[–] c0mbatbag3l@lemmy.world 12 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

It finally hit the corner straight on.

[–] cloudless@feddit.uk 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Mildly infuriating photo of the disc being inserted upside down.

[–] Pretzilla@lemmy.world 29 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Double sided disks look like this

[–] GlitchyDigiBun@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 8 months ago

Which this probably is if they want to pack as much data as possible in one unit.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] poopsmith@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago (2 children)

These would be great for backups if they're cheap enough.

[–] veeesix@lemmy.ca 16 points 8 months ago

How great would it be to include a Case Logic binder in a safety deposit box.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] PeterPoopshit@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

I hope they actually end up calling it the Very Big Disc (tm)

[–] ZugZug@sh.itjust.works 5 points 8 months ago

But how many hamster tails is that because I maybe have like 20. With maybe a few more here and there.

load more comments
view more: next ›