Star Trek has superior data storage?

[Sarevok]

A trashcan bot stored detailed plans of a 160km battlestation, to the degree they could plot a vent shaft out to a 2 meter hole. This did not impede it's ability to perform hyperspacial calculations, think and react, or hack into major computer systems. I think the difference is clear.

Not to mention that R2 is an astromech droid used for fixing starfighters. His computer systems would be no where near the capacity of the computer core of a starship.

[Hethrir]

We also have a nice hard evidence for how much a bleeding-edge android can hold and do...

DATA: I have an ultimate storage capacity of eight hundred quadrillion bits. My total linear computational speed has been rated at sixty trillion operations per second.

Measure of a Man.

Or, a good 100,000 TB and a few times the processor power of the room-sized computer that renders Pixar's films.

800,000 Quaddrillion Bits not bytes, for those who dont know

8 bits = 1 Byte

so 8,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000/8 = 100,000,000,000,000,000,000
1 Tera = 1,000,000,000,000,000 so 100,000,000,000,000,000,000/1,000,000,000,000,000 = 100,000 TBytes

largest commercial hardrive I can find right now 1 TByte so this is roughly equal to 100,000 of the largest Hard drive we have currently available. This is quite impresive considering the size of Commander Data!

Not really. Going by Moores law, we should have 100 000 tb HDDs commercially available in 15 years, and at most, the size of current ones.

[Isolder74]

Not really. Going by Moores law, we should have 100 000 tb HDDs commercially available in 15 years, and at most, the size of current ones.

Yes but all this is supposted to be inside Data's Head including the brain power and memory required to operate. This memory cap is above what is needed to act human and walk around ect.

[Hethrir]

Yes but all this is supposted to be inside Data's Head including the brain power and memory required to operate. This memory cap is above what is needed to act human and walk around ect.

I still fail to see what's so amazing about the infallable Data. On top of that, the Feds can't replicate him. I can get a desktop computer not too much bigger than the size of Datas head, and i'm sure i could fit a 1 tb array in it.

[NecronLord]

Moores' law does not refer to HDDs, it is processor power, or more correctly, number of transistors per square millimeter of chip.

[Hethrir]

yes, but it is also remotely applicable to other aspects. It is useless to have a huge processor without the HDD space to give it a workout. I can quite image 100 00 tb hdds being the max in the year 2030.

http://www.pcguide.com/ref/hdd/hist.htm shows a quick guide of HDD history, and extrapolating from that shows it to be quite possible.

[Darth Wong]

Moores' law does not refer to HDDs, it is processor power, or more correctly, number of transistors per square millimeter of chip.

By its nature, however, it also correlates to memory density (RAM or ROM, not HDD, I know, but nevertheless an indicator of storage capacity; if SRAM were to outpace HDDs, then HDDs would no longer be used).

[SirNitram]

Moores' law does not refer to HDDs, it is processor power, or more correctly, number of transistors per square millimeter of chip.

By its nature, however, it also correlates to memory density (RAM or ROM, not HDD, I know, but nevertheless an indicator of storage capacity; if SRAM were to outpace HDDs, then HDDs would no longer be used).

Of course, Moore's Law assumes nothing ever happens to slow down our miniaturization, like, say, the difficulties of manipulating really, really tiny transistors.

[Darth Wong]

Moores' law does not refer to HDDs, it is processor power, or more correctly, number of transistors per square millimeter of chip.

By its nature, however, it also correlates to memory density (RAM or ROM, not HDD, I know, but nevertheless an indicator of storage capacity; if SRAM were to outpace HDDs, then HDDs would no longer be used).

Of course, Moore's Law assumes nothing ever happens to slow down our miniaturization, like, say, the difficulties of manipulating really, really tiny transistors.

Moore's Law would presumably run into a barrier raised by quantum physics. And of course, it's not really a law so much as a correlation. Nevertheless, there's no reason to conclude that Trek has superior data storage based solely on an off-hand comment by Wesley, particularly when Data is the most advanced computer brain they have and his CPU takes up as much space as a human brain while C3PO's brain is a miniscule object inside a mostly hollow head (see TPM, when you could look right through his skull).

[Gil Hamilton]

"It seems reasonable to conclude that the human brain has a raw computational power between 1e13 and 1e16 operations per second."

here

Huh... I was always taught that the bioelectric signals in the human brain cycled 60 times a second.

[Darth Wong]

"It seems reasonable to conclude that the human brain has a raw computational power between 1e13 and 1e16 operations per second."
here

Huh... I was always taught that the bioelectric signals in the human brain cycled 60 times a second.

Those figures are derived from people assuming that each time a neuron fires, you have an "operation". The fact that the human brain doesn't work that way, and that an enormous number of neuron firings are necessary simply to calculate 7+9=16, is a minor inconvenience which they ignore.

[His Divine Shadow]

Assuming R2-D2's hard drive is even only several cubic centimeters, it appears that Trek could get upwards of a billion GB in that space.

Estimates for the DS plans where around 900 million Exabytes.

[Gil Hamilton]

Those figures are derived from people assuming that each time a neuron fires, you have an "operation". The fact that the human brain doesn't work that way, and that an enormous number of neuron firings are necessary simply to calculate 7+9=16, is a minor inconvenience which they ignore.

What I was basing my number on is that when EEGs are attached to a persons head to measure the electric signal, they consistantly recorded that the bioelectric operated at 60Hz. I also seem to recall from a nuerology course I took that when were were shown brain scans of people doing their taxes by hand, the part of the brain that handles mathematics (which was labeled on the display) was significantly large, I seem to recall it being the size of a marble. As something that calculates things, the human brain is ponderously slow and inefficient.

[His Divine Shadow]

A little FYI, using the estimated storage required for the DS and the estimated figure Howedar got, and being nice and assuming they are the same physical size, then SW computer storage is 300,000,000 times more potent.

[Isolder74]

Assuming R2-D2's hard drive is even only several cubic centimeters, it appears that Trek could get upwards of a billion GB in that space.

Estimates for the DS plans where around 900 million Exabytes.

For a refence, The World Trade Center was 110 stories tall. Each floor was roughly one acre in area. Even though most floors were pretty much the same they all had differences that needed their own plans. The World Trade Center Plans take up about 100 GBytes(using Auto-CAD) if every floor is represented. On the Death Star ever floor is different and that does not include the surface structures and the other things beside working areas. The Weapons system have their own plans as well the Death Star's Superlaser plans. The Death Star would require an unbeleivable amount of memory space. It would surprize me if we could even quantify how much memory this takes.

[Isolder74]

Those figures are derived from people assuming that each time a neuron fires, you have an "operation". The fact that the human brain doesn't work that way, and that an enormous number of neuron firings are necessary simply to calculate 7+9=16, is a minor inconvenience which they ignore.

What I was basing my number on is that when EEGs are attached to a persons head to measure the electric signal, they consistantly recorded that the bioelectric operated at 60Hz. I also seem to recall from a nuerology course I took that when were were shown brain scans of people doing their taxes by hand, the part of the brain that handles mathematics (which was labeled on the display) was significantly large, I seem to recall it being the size of a marble. As something that calculates things, the human brain is ponderously slow and inefficient.

Yet a Snail neron that we have attached to computer chip we were able to force it to store 1 MByte into it. The only problem was that the thing would only live for about a week at the most. And this is only simple snail's neuron.

[Howedar]

*snippage*

It should be noted that Autocad is not the most efficient storage medium, by any means.

[Gil Hamilton]

Yet a Snail neron that we have attached to computer chip we were able to force it to store 1 MByte into it. The only problem was that the thing would only live for about a week at the most. And this is only simple snail's neuron.

And what does this have to do with speed and efficency? That's data storage. It coax current through the human brain any faster or make the amount of neurons needed to do even simple tasks for a intergrated circuit any smaller.

[Grand Admiral Thrawn]

In the TNG episode 'Evolution' Wesley was screwing around with some nanites (microscopic robots) and he stated they have 'Gigabytes of memory' or something like that.

For a microscopic thing, this is quite impressive, no?

Thoughts?

Anyone got a quote for this?


And in SW, a floppy carries the entire plans of the Death Star plus a holo-message, and a tiny brain of a droid carries 6 million languages.

[Lord of the Farce]

Anyone got a quote for this?

Doesn't Wong have a copy of the TNG and DS9 scripts somewhere? I know I saved a copy on my computer, but I'm at university right now.

[Isolder74]

Yet a Snail neron that we have attached to computer chip we were able to force it to store 1 MByte into it. The only problem was that the thing would only live for about a week at the most. And this is only simple snail's neuron.

And what does this have to do with speed and efficency? That's data storage. It coax current through the human brain any faster or make the amount of neurons needed to do even simple tasks for a intergrated circuit any smaller.

I thought that's what we were talking about!

[Isolder74]

A trashcan bot stored detailed plans of a 160km battlestation, to the degree they could plot a vent shaft out to a 2 meter hole. This did not impede it's ability to perform hyperspacial calculations, think and react, or hack into major computer systems. I think the difference is clear.

Not to mention that R2 is an astromech droid used for fixing starfighters. His computer systems would be no where near the capacity of the computer core of a starship.

And why not as a Astrogation Droid it has to have the Memory capacity to store a basic map of The Galaxy in order to caclulate a Hyperspace Jump. It is stated that a R2 Unit can store up to 10 Hyperspace Jump Coorinants(pre-calculated hyperspace courses) but how much of that space the Death Star Plan took is uncertian.

[Gil Hamilton]

I thought that's what we were talking about!

I was refering to people talking about the speed and efficency of the human brain, not data storage.

[Isolder74]

I thought that's what we were talking about!

I was refering to people talking about the speed and efficency of the human brain, not data storage.

But thats not what you said and since you were quoting me that means I am entitled to respond. Your post implied that I was not talking on subject when I was. Please be more clear in the future it will save us both alot of headaches

[Gil Hamilton]

But thats not what you said and since you were quoting me that means I am entitled to respond. Your post implied that I was not talking on subject when I was. Please be more clear in the future it will save us both alot of headaches

What do you mean? I was quoting Mike originally about speed and efficency, then you said something about storing memory on nuerons, I said that it had nothing to with what I was talking about, which it wasn't. I didn't quote you until you made the unrelated comment about snail nuerons and then only to tell you that it wasn't related to what I was talking about.