Not as much as one might think. If the goal is data integrity and longevity, you can't print too densely. The usual assumption used in those typical "holds that many typed pages" is on the order of 2 KiB per page. Go much higher than that and running ink or other processes will destroy the data's readability over time just as easily as stray UV light probably did with Jon's EEPROMs
Don't tell me about it. My background is high-energy physics. My former colleagues at CERN basically get to define what "high data rate" means. There's not many other people who will use "Exabyte" in the plural form --- and feel no need to explain that it's not 8mm data tape cassettes they're talking about.
You have this weird compulsive need to be wrong. I mean, you must have a good magnet somewhere, and some US currency, so you could have tried it. But you didn't.
On Sunday, August 28, 2011 11:05:13 AM UTC-7, StickThatInYourPipeAndSmokeIt wrote: [about magnetite as a black pigment]
Nice try, but I have a magnet and a dollar bill. The bill is attracted. I'm unwilling to try the experiment on toner (it's messy).
The classic recipe for black ink, using oak gall, makes a colloidal iron-based black ink. The particle size might not be suitable for ferromagnetism, but the material is black iron oxide (magnetite).
My birds stream OUT (and in too) over 300Gb/s across several tens of miles bigger gaps to tens of thousands more endpoints quite remarkably, in fact.
Your hula hoops gather ten times that amount of data fed from thousands of transducers, and pass it into huge supercomputer data processors over short distances hard wired before feeding that pre-compiled data into still enormous data streams into yet more supercomputers so that you guys can sit at wonderfully crafted graphics processing monster computer 'workstations' allowing huge numbers of scientists to visualize the collisions, and work with the data that created the graphics renderings so we can make a feeble description of the BIG FART that started our little corner of the macroverse.
Good luck getting it right. It has been fun watching it all (from a distance).
That's silly and unnecessary exaggeration, Hans-Bernard. Such taken-to-extremes language only works to undermine one's credibility than to make a non-sequitur, but true point any better. It is better said without being careless.
I have here a Cauzin Reader that was for a short time used to transmit data in magazines to their readers using easily printable marks registered in mass produced publications on cheap paper and lousy ink. 1985, or so And it provided 1k bit per square inch. 160 square inches on both sides of a US letterpaper would be 160k bit or 20k byte using simple optical means. This is an order of magnitude beyond what you are saying and even at that it probably can still improved. Certainly, using reasonable quality paper and modern methods of fused plastic ink even that could be improved along with retaining millennia lifetimes.
formatting link
(My unit still works just fine, by the way.)
Even an ancient papertape achieves 10 bytes per square inch. And this is with huge holes and I can read them, if perhaps slowly. About 1k byte for an 8.5x11 area, punching very huge holes (which could itself be readily and greatly improved upon where there some interest to do so.)
The ViewPlus Tiger embosser combines dot height adjustments (it's like Braille) in 8 heights discernable as distinct by fingers (3 bits per dot.) The dot density is 400 dot/in^2 and so may arguably deliver 1,200 bit/in^2. At that 160 sq inch size, that's 24k byte, and the reader is a human finger! Again, an order of magnitude over you figure and from another existing product already out there in the field.
But besides flogging a dead horse, it's also different horses for courses. So I'm just writing this to be argumentative. It's better not to speak in such extremes, is all. Your non-sequitur point remains.
That is why i recently bought a good scope when the opportunity came up. Now i want another that is portable. I really need to get to work on my "fancy thing" (just a hobby project really, but [to be] implemented with = a PIC). I'll post when i get it running, may be a while though.
Hmm. And yet (perhaps though conversion from energy absorbed at higher wavelengths downward) spreading ashes on snow to lower its albedo makes a huge difference in snowmelt rate (personal observation, repeated over
40-odd years with wood ashes, mostly, and things that are not worth shoveling, but would be nice to get the snow off of a bit ahead of the default rate.)
--
Cats, coffee, chocolate...vices to live by
Please don't feed the trolls. Killfile and ignore them so they will go away.
Snow obviously reflects visible light, which is where most of the sun's energy is, and crud will downconvert that to heat before it get reflected.
The great majority of CO2 alarmists are determined to ignore what is probably an equal or greater contributor to polar ice/glacier melting, which is man-made particulates. But particulates could be controlled without destroying civilization, so the crazies aren't as interested in them.
My wife *enjoys* shoveling snow! Am I lucky or wot?
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.