datahoarder

6716 readers

14 users here now

Who are we?

We are digital librarians. Among us are represented the various reasons to keep data -- legal requirements, competitive requirements, uncertainty of permanence of cloud services, distaste for transmitting your data externally (e.g. government or corporate espionage), cultural and familial archivists, internet collapse preppers, and people who do it themselves so they're sure it's done right. Everyone has their reasons for curating the data they have decided to keep (either forever or For A Damn Long Time). Along the way we have sought out like-minded individuals to exchange strategies, war stories, and cautionary tales of failures.

We are one. We are legion. And we're trying really hard not to forget.

-- 5-4-3-2-1-bang from this thread

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

archivist@lemmy.ml

Whatever happened to DNA-based storage research? (lemmy.dbzer0.com)

submitted 10 months ago by BermudaHighball@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/datahoarder@lemmy.ml

7 comments fedilink hide all child comments

It seems like 6 or 7 years ago there was research into new forms of storage, using crystals or DNA that promised ultra high density storage. I know the read/write speed was not very fast, but I thought by now there would be more progress in the area. Apparently in 2021 there was a team that got a 16GB file stored in DNA. In the last month there's some company (Biomemory) that lets you store 1KB of data into DNA for $1,000, but if you want to read it, you have to send it to them. I don't understand why you would use that today.

I wonder if it will ever be viable for us to have DNA readers/writers... but I also wonder if there are other new types of data storage coming up that might be just as good.

If you know anything about the DNA research or other new storage forms, what do you think is the most promising one?

top 7 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] hazeebabee@slrpnk.net 9 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Im most excited about the potential for crystal based storage. Right now there is work being done to etch silica glass internally, allowing for incredibly long term preservation and durability. It can even be rewritten, though the tech is definetly best for achival purposes and is being pursued primarily by movie companies wanting high quality storage.

Heres a video discussing it more in deapth: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6CzHsibqpIs

DNA also sounds interesting, though it doesnt seem like a good way of preserving data long term. DNA is very fragile, and seems like an odd route to take for long term archiving.

[–] TCB13@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

DNA also sounds interesting, though it doesnt seem like a good way of preserving data long term. DNA is very fragile, and seems like an odd route to take for long term archiving.

Yeah the 5D quartz disk is very cool.

Anyways if you think about storage density DNA isn't that "odd". With DNA you can store dozens of copies of the data and parity checks in a very small space so even if some gets corrupted you can still get it. I get that organic stuff has its limits but the density is just mind blowing.

[–] hazeebabee@slrpnk.net 2 points 10 months ago

Density is defintly amazing in DNA, its just so fragile. Even our own bodies have a constant degridation of our DNA... I wonder if they could take that concept and make something sturdier by using slightly different molecules to make up the chains.

Maybe shorter chains with stronger cross bonding & a gentle method of reading the chain could also help?

Its definetly an interesting route & itll be cool to see what happens with it over the next 10-15 years.

[–] litchralee@sh.itjust.works 8 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I recall watching a documentary (on Curiosity Stream maybe? I'm no longer subscribed) on data storage longevity. It covered DNA storage, which I think this PBS video w/ transcript provides more recent coverage of its developments. As well as holographic storage, which I could only find the Wikipedia page for.

As for which one I think might be the future, it's tough to say. Tape is pretty good and cheap but slow for offline storage. Archival media will probably end up all being offline storage, although I could see a case for holographic/optical storage being near line. Future online storage will probably remain a tough pickle: cheap, plentiful, fast; select at most two, maybe.

[–] drdabbles@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago

It wasn't sensible, given the short life of DNA. One of those sci-fi ideas that caught media and technophile attention, but wasn't ever going to go anywhere.

Project Silica appears to be attempting very high density, very long life storage, though.

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 3 points 10 months ago

I remember there being a water based storage solution for music that was under development, though it was said to drain entire ecosystems by doing so. Sad, as it seemed promising.

[–] penguin_knight@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

The truth of academia is that it is extremely slow. there are less than 20 minds total on all of earth working on this idea, separately, in different countries. And these 20 people are in their 20's, severely underpaid, don't necessarily have all the resources they want, and science may not be their #1 life priority.

anyways:

reading and writing DNA is the main driver of evolution, and it does so because it is error prone (causing mutations). You can imagine this is bad if you want to preserve the integrity of the data.

DNA storage would be okay if you were to... say archive the entire internet for future generations, or geneology records, etc. things that do not need to be written and accessed quickly or often.