Comment on Cerabyte Ceramic Storage Poised to Usher in 'Yottabyte Era'

• GenderNeutralBro@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Yes, the CeraByte web site is suspiciously devoid of any mention of rewrite-ability (or lack thereof). They just mention reading and writing. www.cerabyte.com/how-it-works/

  More questions than answers, looking through their web site.

  After a few minutes of duckduckgoing it, it looks like they are a new company still in the funding phase. They are due to present at the Storage Developer Conference later this month, but I’m not sure they actually have a product yet. storagedeveloper.org/events/agenda/session/527

  In the abstract they focus on cold storage, but also mention “the ability to fully recycle the media”.

  source

  • SandLight@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    That’s not nothing though. Use cases like YouTube or archival work absolutely had a user case for read only

    source

    • GenderNeutralBro@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      For sure. Also, if the density is sufficiently high compared to alternatives, it could be objectively better anyway. For instance, a typical SSD is rated for less than 1000 full write cycles. So if I have a write-once media with more than 1000 times the space, I’ll be able to write more to it even in the worst-case scenario.

      source

      • SandLight@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Huh, pair that with some quality memory for indexing and it would be a pretty good home backup device

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • LazaroFilm@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      In the film industry, long term storage of digital films is a real issue. Disney still creates a technicolor (3strip) copy of their films as digital data isn’t as reliable as good old silver emulation.

      source
    • BURN@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Depending on necessary speed, Tape Drives fit that use case pretty well. This feels like it could be a slight improvement on that format, but it’ll entirely depend on density

      source
• BURN@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  It makes sense from a layman’s perspective on why it can’t be rewritten, but this is really just a single write storage mechanism. May be really good for archival data, but anything that needs active use is probably far from feasible

  source