What is Digg?68 Comments
- geeky, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18I don't get digg... My link
http://digg.com/tech_news/MIT_puts_optics_on_a_chip
to a similar story was submitted hours before this submission. My link even included a white paper on the technology.
I guess I don't have enough digg friends, to game the system. - profOblivion, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17And What Are You Doing?
- Zman0101, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12Ever heard of folding @ home?
http://folding.stanford.edu/
advances in computer processing can only help solve world problems like aids, cancer, etc. - sjmueller, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Oh great, a geneticist. Maybe you could answer a question I have. What is the gene linked to the predisposition to capitalize every damn word in a sentence?
- rune420, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11And Here You Are Bitching About It On The Internet
- Sharshush, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Well maybe they will be able to implement the chips into various systems within 5 years but that doesn't mean they will be commercially available by then.
- Rikkochet, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8With faster computers, we can make bigger wars and nastier diseases than AIDS!
Oh wait, that's not what you meant, is it? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9buried for being stupid
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9I never understood why getting the the front page mattered. Is there free ***** involved? Cash and prizes?
- Bahimiron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5That would be a super pinky that DOESN'T know when to hit shift. Here's a fun fact, capitalizing every word is bad and wrong, not good and right.
Also, your spelling could use some work.
(And your logic.) - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Buried For Typing In The Second Most Annoying Way...
ps,
for the record, tHIS iS tHE mOST aNNOYING wAY - quine, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5^^^ Ladies and gentlemen, I bring you the next Ted Kaczynski.
- arbulus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Research isn't a one-or-the-other business. People are studying genetics at the same time people are studying new ways to make cars more fuel efficient, or pioneering alternative energy sources. At the same time, people are developing technology that makes our lives easier and more connected to foster better communication and relations across the world. Just because a 5 petabyte hard drive is a toy to a teenager and a place to store all his porn doesn't mean that others don't use it for business and information and communication.
The point is research isn't a mutually exclusive field. You can study genetics while others develop optical chips. One doesn't diminish the importance of the other. And just because you're not working on a AIDS cure doesn't mean your a bad person. - SLYK, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9I doubt it. It's taken longer to get the big companies to begin using MRAM, and they still don't. Also, optics are a tricky thing...look at Lawrence Livermore National Lab's attempt at NIF. That's been going on for what, almost a decade? I couldn't see Optical Chips in 5 years. There's too much in R&D, selling the things, and then integration. Maybe ten. Maybe more.
- cmiller1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5photonics is in fact what they call it
- quine, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4They're also playing with computers and DNA. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_computing Though personally -- I'm holding out for quantum-state computing. Qubits FTW!
- profOblivion, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Tell you what. You go ahead and sequence the human genome on your abacus, while the rest of the world forges ahead.
- Afrotronics, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3If there was a microprocessor that used light, let's say for the main timer, the maximum frequency of the processor if it used violet light would be 749.481145 Petahertz. That's just enough to run Unreal Tournament at 1600x1200 with 8xFAA and HDR with 32x multisampling...j/k But seriously it would be about 749.481145 Petahertz.
PS- I so came up with this idea in 8th grade. - profOblivion, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@MotionAesthetic
Disregarding the overcapitalization, it's still plain that nobody is ever going to take him seriously (based on this page, anyway). - B3bomber, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2FTA: "Depending on the growth of the telecom industry, such devices could be in demand within five years,". Don't need the rest, it failed right there. The USA coversion to fiber optics just isn't happening within 5 years. What's sad is we paid them 10 years ago to do it...now we're paying for it again only this time it's not replacing those copper phone lines (Verizon FIOS, AT&T Lightspeed...worthless proprietary crippled networks. Don't believe me? Japans fiber gets you 100 mbit up/down for $40, Verizon offers 1/3 of that down and 1/10th of that up then charges you $100).
- jake13jake, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4I already told everyone ten years, but I'll take five. I just see a very very large impact for this.
Will we start calling what we typically refer to as "electronics" as "photonics"? - taylorhayward, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7Go. Away.
- MotionAesthetic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2For your own good, I'd try and break your habit. It's genuinely difficult to read - I sound things out in my mind, and this gets sounded out like a robot. Nobody is ever going to take you seriously if you type like that.
- tHePeOPle, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Congratulations KingVegas! You've won the douchebag of the day award, with complimentary douchebag tshirt and handbag.
- ronin2040, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2b3bomber--
Where the HELL do you see verizon selling 33mbit down, 10mbit up for $100? Sign me up o.0
and youre telling me you can get a residential 100mbit line in Japan for $40 USD? Link or it didnt happen, smells of *****. 30mbit, i can accept, 100mbit is really pushing it. - daedalus1982, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I agree with you on one point, that big corporations are timid as far as sinking money into unproven tech to be the forerunners of some great disaster or loss of revenue. likewise MRAM may never pick up for power and scalability reasons. What your typical company wants is something that is 2-3rd gen. Something that has already been tried out by another company and been proved profitable.
optical chips though. if they can do what they say. smaller, cheaper, better. We may have it in 5 years - jasnmb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Sorry geeky, I didn't see your story in my initial dupe search. I used to feel the same way as you when I first started submitting stories. You just have to keep submitting and digging.
- OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2They said the same thing five years ago.
- ronin2040, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1and the circuitry could handle pulsing that fast? Amping up the hz--getting a higher frequency isnt the issue. I believe modern wireless house phones use 5.4ghz radio waves. We are capable of generating that wave, its just that the circuitry would fry.
I think the deal with optical computing is that light travels quite a bit faster (10x?) than electricity, and that light wouldnt stress optical traces with heat the way electricity does, and switching could possibly be done much faster...Im not an expert in the field, but thats my understanding--everything will move faster simply based on the properties of light, rather than its frequency. - Jeeum, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"...a discovery that could soon add the power and speed of light waves to traditional electronics."
The power of light waves? What is the power of light waves? It reminds me of that cellphone ad where they say "No one has a more powerful network".
And doesn't electricity travel at the speed of light anyway? Maybe speed of light means something different here...
"...could even pave the way for integrated devices to be mass-manufactured for the first time."
Now I can digg that! - wware, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The advance cited in the article doesn't look like anything really important. It looks like the MIT folks are trying to generate near-term excitement about a research agenda that won't produce useful results for years. This might have more to do with a funding cycle than the importance of the recent advance.
- ronin2040, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1feeding trolls=fail
try using the block button on him and otherwise pretending he doesnt exist - sonofagunn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Prototypes of this (integrated optical interconnects in silicon) have already been done by http://www.luxtera.com
- hackwrench, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Links please. At least you're the first optimistic post in the bunch.
- geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"I think the deal with optical computing is that light travels quite a bit faster (10x?) than electricity",
Electrons travel at just below the speed of light. It's wire delay we're trying to beat here with photonics, as electrons take time to travel around bends and through squeezes in aluminum and copper, while light travels at the same speed through the chip's medium, regardless. Electrons also cause the copper to warm up, the laser shouldn't put off as much excess heat.
"and that light wouldnt stress optical traces with heat the way electricity does, and switching could possibly be done much faster"
There's no such thing as an "optical trace", there's just be a valley lithographed into the chip where the laser bus needs to go. The biggest problem with lasers this size is focusing them (which is why it's almost certainly going to start out as a serial laser bus on chip), followed by power generation (which we've got a good handle on now). It also poses all kinds of new layout issues, which will probably make 10+ layer interconnects commonplace. - rlg420, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I know when this chip we be available. Sony will put it in the PS4 along with a blu-holographic disc drive. The system will sell for $15000 and have an hdmi output.
- starfighter01, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2They've been doing this at Cornell for about 10 years now, and it's real. It's just a matter of time before it hits the markets.
- senixon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1... Yep, I'm holding off to buy a new computer until then :-)
- DigitalDud, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Didn't Intel mention they have prototype optical chips now?
- simpleid, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It sounds like your brain has an itch which you couldn't lose focus of, resulting in this schism from reality.
Get with it, move on. - Ramtech, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2looks like i'll wait 8 years to get another computer...
i'll save my money till then ..
everythings gonna be 80 times faster than today's electronics...
imagine the cell phones??? ! - arbulus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1So apparently our method of capitalization, or lack of doing on every word, is the cause of global warming?
Damn, if only Al Gore had read digg more, he could have made a 15-second commercial spot instead of a whole feature film devoted to global warming. Who knew it was so simple? - LilBoyLuver, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Your logic is terrible. Wait there are dying people in the world so none of us can enjoy life or pursue any other type of science until these diseases are cured. I like to think that I am blessed to have everything that I have in my life and yes I do donate money but there is nothing wrong with this type of research and you are the one who is ignorant.
- MilesLombardi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"The power and speed of light".
A common misconception apparently. I've been doing a physics project on silicon and it can be used for optics and optical processing because of raman scattering, and raman lasers. So now we have laser powered computers? COOL. I'm sure Alex would buy one ;), but unfortunately it wouldn't speed up the transmission, as the electrons propogate as electromagnetic waves anyway. What's more making the light creates more heat than the current method of processors anyway, there are some benefits, but the speed of light isn't one of them.
Admittedly my only source is Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_computing
But trust the wiki kids :). - GenericName, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3Dude, you're just TRYIN' to get dugg down.
- Bahimiron, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2I was kidding.
You are not.
Do not agree with me.
I do not want to catch Crazy *****-itis. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0IBM already has this technology. In fact, it was posted on Digg a very long time ago.
- dgendreau, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Can I be an Adrian Barbeau-bot?
- ronin2040, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1and another troll gets fed.
- GenericName, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Scientific American has a good overview of this in its November 2004 issue: "Computing at the Speed of Light". I just used it to write a paper I turned in this morning for electromagnetics class. Didn't catch this article in time to add it in.
-
Show 51 - 68 of 68 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is