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

Linear, symmetric, self-selecting 14-bit molecular memristors (2023)

researchgate.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–59 of 59 posts

Re: Linear, symmetric, self-selecting 14-bit molecular memristors (2023)

#51

Post by wtallis »

HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #45
mapt wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IIRC, performance was fantastic, but they were never able/willing to match the data density and data cost improvements in stacked-NAND flash, and without forcing themselves into the market at competitive rates, nobody wanted to write applications or design hardware suited to their unique strengths as low-latency caches. There is still, to this day, a numerical niche for these drives, which is being served imperfectly…

But wasn't the potentially transformative market intended to be "persistent DRAM" for instant-on devices removing the distinction between memory and storage, requiring DRAM-like speed rather than NAND-like speed ? I recall their early R/W speed performance projections being far faster than what they ever achieved with Optane drives.

The products that used a PCIe X4 interface with a block storage protocol layered on top were never intended to deliver the best performance the memory was capable of.

Re: Linear, symmetric, self-selecting 14-bit molecular memristors (2023)

#52

Post by HarHarVeryFunny »

wtallis wrote: post #51
HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But wasn't the potentially transformative market intended to be "persistent DRAM" for instant-on devices removing the distinction between memory and storage, requiring DRAM-like speed rather than NAND-like speed ? I recall their early R/W speed performance projections being far faster than what they ever achieved with Optane drives.

The products that used a PCIe X4 interface with a block storage protocol layered on top were never intended to deliver the best performance the memory was capable of.

Sure, but Intel never got to the point of packaging it as memory (DIMMs) since the performance wasn't there.

Re: Linear, symmetric, self-selecting 14-bit molecular memristors (2023)

#53

Post by wtallis »

HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #52
wtallis wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The products that used a PCIe X4 interface with a block storage protocol layered on top were never intended to deliver the best performance the memory was capable of.

Sure, but Intel never got to the point of packaging it as memory (DIMMs) since the performance wasn't there.

Yes, they did ship the DIMMs: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/docs/memory...

Re: Linear, symmetric, self-selecting 14-bit molecular memristors (2023)

#54

Post by HarHarVeryFunny »

wtallis wrote: post #53
HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but Intel never got to the point of packaging it as memory (DIMMs) since the performance wasn't there.

Yes, they did ship the DIMMs: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/docs/memory...

Interesting - I wasn't aware, but even avoiding the PCI bus the performance must have been lacking as that link talks of "memory tiering". I guess this was "mid tier" somewhere between SSD and DRAM, which is a bit of a no-mans land especially in terms of conventional systems architecture ... really just a fast type of storage, or storage cache (a bit like a hybrid SSD-HDD drive).

Re: Linear, symmetric, self-selecting 14-bit molecular memristors (2023)

#56

Post by SideQuark »

p1esk wrote: post #25
SideQuark wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They also provide a central place to search things, with a richer interface than Google scholar, and have centralized a significant amount of good sources. There's a reason millions of researchers have joined. That you don't find value or know what they provide is no reason others should not learn the value they add.

They also show ads: https://www.researchgate.net/marketing-solutions As a researcher I don’t see any value there. I’ll stick with Arxiv, thanks.

That's fine. You also miss all papers not on arxiv. You miss published versions of even the papers on Arxiv (which are often improved versions), and you miss any benefit peer review has on those papers.

I use arxiv nearly every day, and also a few places that get things not on arxiv because the majority of papers are simply not there. Arxiv is paid for by universities paying subscriptions, locked in for five years at a time. It's also funded by Simons Foundation (which may not pay forever) and Cornell and many individual donors. Affiliate groups like professional societies and govts pay huge sums to keep it running. Many companies pay 10's of thousands annually to be members.

Piggybacking on their money while taking affront at a bigger, more comprehensive service, because they dare post an ad, seems somewhat short sighted, but to each his own.

ResearchGate is the largest academic social network, so many use it for that reason. Here's an (2014) Nature article on researcher usage of various sites that may surprise you https://www.nature.com/news/online-collaboration-scientists-...

Since a significant number of job postings for researchers as well and communication and networking opportunities are widely used on Research Gate, none of which is present on Arxiv, you are simply missing likely useful contacts and tools for your career. And I write this as a researcher for several decades, long before any of these were live.

As I said, enough people find value at research gate that millions do pay.

Re: Linear, symmetric, self-selecting 14-bit molecular memristors (2023)

#57

Post by bcrl »

nine_k wrote: post #47
ants_everywhere wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if it turns out that you can not find the necessary improvements in only a single dimension, then the whole thing is kinda doomed and will probably never be competitive I don't know, we've been working on digital computers since at least the late 1800s. Sometimes technology just takes a while. That does make it hard to gamble on it if the time horizon is longer than you need to make a profit. But I don't think we s…

Regarding technology taking time: look at LEDs. - The effect first discovered: 1907. - First prototype device built: 1927. - First commercially viable parts shipping: early 1960s. - Ubiquitous and cheap as an indicator device: 1980s. - Highly efficient, used for lighting: 2010s. The principle never changed along the way. The specific materials changed quite a bit.

And we only have blue LEDs due to the sheer stubbornness of Shuji Nakamura. If you haven't already heard the tale of its development, head over here and enjoy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AF8d72mA41M

Re: Linear, symmetric, self-selecting 14-bit molecular memristors (2023)

#58

Post by cma »

ants_everywhere wrote: post #22
myrmidon wrote: post #2

Takes me back... There was significant hype around those things when they first managed to build them at scale (~15 years ago), because they were promising for low power, high density persistent storage and are also academically interesting: The "concept" of memristors was explored over 50 years ago (they are passive components that couple electrical charge and magnetical flux, just like a resistor does with current/…

> if it turns out that you can not find the necessary improvements in only a single dimension, then the whole thing is kinda doomed and will probably never be competitive I don't know, we've been working on digital computers since at least the late 1800s. Sometimes technology just takes a while. That does make it hard to gamble on it if the time horizon is longer than you need to make a profit. But I don't think we s…

EUV took decades:

> To address the challenge of EUV lithography, researchers at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, and Sandia National Laboratories were funded in the 1990s to perform basic research into the technical obstacles. The results of this successful effort were disseminated via a public/private partnership Cooperative R&D Agreement (CRADA) with the invention and rights wholly owned by the US government, but licensed and distributed under approval by DOE and Congress.[3] The CRADA consisted of a consortium of private companies and the Labs, manifested as an entity called the Extreme Ultraviolet Limited Liability Company (EUV LLC).[4]

> Intel, Canon, and Nikon (leaders in the field at the time), as well as the Dutch company ASML and Silicon Valley Group (SVG) all sought licensing. Congress denied[citation needed] the Japanese companies the necessary permission, as they were perceived[by whom?] as strong technical competitors at the time and should not benefit from taxpayer-funded research at the expense of American companies.[5] In 2001 SVG was acquired by ASML, leaving ASML as the sole benefactor of the critical technology.[6]

>By 2018, ASML succeeded in deploying the intellectual property from the EUV-LLC after several decades of developmental research

Re: Linear, symmetric, self-selecting 14-bit molecular memristors (2023)

#59

Post by bgnn »

hwillis wrote: post #40
Workaccount2 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, our food to energy conversion is so efficient because the foods we eat are already in a very energy ready state. Our bodies don't bother with stuff that is harder to convert.

true, but recycling proteins is also pretty amazing. These are the most complex machines we know of, elegant atomic factories that do the seemingly impossible... and you dip them in acid and then you can pop them apart like a string of beads, to be reassembled into a totally new molecular miracle.

What's also insane is the mitochondria are evolved from proteobacteria.
Post reply on HN