Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

447 TB/cm² at zero retention energy – atomic-scale memory on fluorographane

zenodo.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 169 posts

Re: 447 TB/cm² at zero retention energy – atomic-scale memory on fluorographane

#101

Post by rogerrogerr »

topspin wrote: post #100
rogerrogerr wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dude, you _have_ to write things in your own words if you want to be taken seriously. "The is not — it's " will cause a bunch of people to disengage, and those people have high overlap with the people who may fund you.

"Dude, you _have_ to write things in your own words if you want to be taken seriously." How is this lost on people? Everything that contains the slightest hint of "AI slop" is instantly panned anywhere it appears, and yet people such as Ilia Toli appear to be entirely oblivious to this. It's tragic. There is at least a non-zero chance that this work is a world changing breakthrough. It's clear, based on his engagemen…

Yeah, I get that it can be amazing and be of superhuman intelligence and all that, but also it reads exactly like the slop article I saw yesterday that was giving baking instructions for “wood biscuits” (which are a method of joining in cabinetry and are not tasty at all): https://thehoneypotbakery.com/wood-biscuit-size-chart/

Do not match your communication style to nonsense articles.

Re: 447 TB/cm² at zero retention energy – atomic-scale memory on fluorographane

#102

Post by TOMDM »

nurettin wrote: post #90
nine_k wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It took 15 if not 20 years to commercialize even such obvious, low-tech thing as radio telegraph, which can literally be built form common house supplies. It happened about 60 years after Maxwell predicted the electromagnetic waves theoretically. Red LEDs were invented / discovered in 1920s, became commercially successful as indicators in 1960s. Optical fibers were invented in 1920s or so, became a commercial success…

It doesn't take long to commercialize feasible new tech in this day and age. If someone invented an electromagnetic hovercar tomorrow, it will be available for sale next week and regulations will follow after.

Waymo has cars that drive themselves and are dramatically safer than people in most conditions and yet they're only in select cities.

Do you just think Google hates money, or does this only work for hover cars

Re: 447 TB/cm² at zero retention energy – atomic-scale memory on fluorographane

#103

Post by iliatoli »

topspin wrote: post #100
rogerrogerr wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dude, you _have_ to write things in your own words if you want to be taken seriously. "The is not — it's " will cause a bunch of people to disengage, and those people have high overlap with the people who may fund you.

"Dude, you _have_ to write things in your own words if you want to be taken seriously." How is this lost on people? Everything that contains the slightest hint of "AI slop" is instantly panned anywhere it appears, and yet people such as Ilia Toli appear to be entirely oblivious to this. It's tragic. There is at least a non-zero chance that this work is a world changing breakthrough. It's clear, based on his engagemen…

[dead]

Re: 447 TB/cm² at zero retention energy – atomic-scale memory on fluorographane

#104

Post by moconnor »

bastawhiz wrote: post #60

Every year or so there's a new article about some new spectacular storage medium. Crystals, graphene, lasers, quartz, holograms, whatever. It never materializes. Demonstrating this stuff is possible isn't the hard part, it seems. Productionizing it is. You have to have exceedingly fast read and write speeds: who cares if it can store an exabyte if it takes all month to read it, or if you produce data faster than you…

Very large, fast, read-only memory now has an incredible use-case: NN weights.

Re: 447 TB/cm² at zero retention energy – atomic-scale memory on fluorographane

#105

Post by londons_explore »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #94
bastawhiz wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if you need 1eb, waiting a whole month for it isn't great. You'd be better off with 720 1pb devices taking an hour in parallel.

Yes it causes problems in this increasingly narrow situation. Massive storage that takes a month to fully read is acceptable in a wide variety of use cases. If it's cheaper than hard drives it'll get a huge amount of users.

It's notable that 'time to read/write entire device' has been creeping up for any storage device you can buy off the shelf for the past ~40 years.

Reading a floppy disk took around 30 secs for example. A whole CD took 5 mins. My whole 1TB SSD takes 10 mins.

Re: 447 TB/cm² at zero retention energy – atomic-scale memory on fluorographane

#106

Post by topspin »

topspin wrote: post #100
rogerrogerr wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dude, you _have_ to write things in your own words if you want to be taken seriously. "The is not — it's " will cause a bunch of people to disengage, and those people have high overlap with the people who may fund you.

"Dude, you _have_ to write things in your own words if you want to be taken seriously." How is this lost on people? Everything that contains the slightest hint of "AI slop" is instantly panned anywhere it appears, and yet people such as Ilia Toli appear to be entirely oblivious to this. It's tragic. There is at least a non-zero chance that this work is a world changing breakthrough. It's clear, based on his engagemen…

Replying to myself, because iliatoli's reply to me was [dead] so fast I couldn't reply to it directly...

"The physics is mine — thirteen years of it, starting from the 2013 paper. I use AI for editing, as I use a calculator for arithmetic. The transition state, the barrier, the molecular model, the fluorine uniqueness argument — all computed on my workstation. The tone criticism is heard and will be addressed in revision. The calculations don't change with the prose."

This is NOT about "prose." You're missing the point. Badly. And damn that's frustrating.

Read carefully and inculcate: Do not use LLM to write anything you expect to be taken seriously. This is not negotiable. It doesn't matter if all your peers and colleagues are doing exactly that. It doesn't matter that this is your first experience with such a reaction: it's not a fluke. DO. NOT. DO. IT.

Am I getting through?

Re: 447 TB/cm² at zero retention energy – atomic-scale memory on fluorographane

#107

Post by JimDabell »

topspin wrote: post #100
rogerrogerr wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dude, you _have_ to write things in your own words if you want to be taken seriously. "The is not — it's " will cause a bunch of people to disengage, and those people have high overlap with the people who may fund you.

"Dude, you _have_ to write things in your own words if you want to be taken seriously." How is this lost on people? Everything that contains the slightest hint of "AI slop" is instantly panned anywhere it appears, and yet people such as Ilia Toli appear to be entirely oblivious to this. It's tragic. There is at least a non-zero chance that this work is a world changing breakthrough. It's clear, based on his engagemen…

> You have to be deeply ensconced inside an impenetrable bubble to do that to yourself.

I largely agree with your point, but I’m afraid you are the one in the bubble. Detecting AI writing is a rare skill, not the norm. It’s glaringly obvious to those of us who use AI a lot, but it’s not that obvious to the average person.

To the point of absurdity in cases – I’ve seen loads of people who hate AI complain about AI online, not realising that the account they are talking to is nothing but a simple spam bot.

Re: 447 TB/cm² at zero retention energy – atomic-scale memory on fluorographane

#109

Post by nurettin »

TOMDM wrote: post #102
nurettin wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't take long to commercialize feasible new tech in this day and age. If someone invented an electromagnetic hovercar tomorrow, it will be available for sale next week and regulations will follow after.

Waymo has cars that drive themselves and are dramatically safer than people in most conditions and yet they're only in select cities. Do you just think Google hates money, or does this only work for hover cars

I don't know the costs and logistics of such an operation. Maybe you do?
Post reply on HN