• Seraph@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Ok sure, but where’s the advanced anti scratch device?

    100 layers just means more data lost to a single scratch.

    • foggy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      9 months ago

      Listen, the idea isn’t that you’ll have a walkman that has every YouTube video you’ll ever watch on it.

      It’s that you’d backup an entire fucking enterprise on one disc. Schedule it daily. Pay the support team to swap the disc out every night. Who needs infrastructure for ransomware, we got DISCS!

    • Donjuanme@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      9 months ago

      I suppose with that much data capacity they could halve the storage and add redundancy. My question is will it only have 1 reading head? That much data is going to take a very long time to read, unless they’re doing multiple layers at a time,

        • Godort@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          9 months ago

          I am unfamiliar with the math used to calculate that value.

          Would it not work like a parity RAID where each sector would have parity bits in a different location on the disc?

          • foggy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            I’m not familiar with it either, but I’d say that using RAID on a single disc is silly… There’s a good reason it’s not a common practice on single HDDs.

            A scratch on the disc usually means many scratches on the disc.

    • Artyom@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Newer discs are way more scratch resistant. I’ve never heard of a Blu Ray or a current gen game getting scratched.