News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on IBM has found a way to store data on a single atom. Parent comment

Re:IBM has found a way to store data on a single atom by Retr0spectrum on Wednesday March 08, 2017 @11:59PM (#13827106)
Raw studio-quality audio and highly compressed mp3s are multiple orders of magnitude apart.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:IBM has found a way to store data on a single atom by fritzw on Thursday March 09, 2017 @09:16AM (#13829361)
To insinuate that the average user is using uncompressed audio is being obtuse. The social context for the measurement by song came from iPod like devices based on the average 1MB per minute of audio MP3/MP4.

Raw is 10MB Loseless compressed is 5

Everyone using "songs" as a metric is talking about 1MB per minute MP3.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:IBM has found a way to store data on a single atom by KeytarHero on Thursday March 09, 2017 @12:00AM (#13827110)
And punk rock songs and prog songs can be an order of magnitude apart in length.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:IBM has found a way to store data on a single atom by danso on Thursday March 09, 2017 @12:11AM (#13827149)
When the average reader has to store/port songs in bulk, which of those formats are they using?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:IBM has found a way to store data on a single atom by Retr0spectrum on Thursday March 09, 2017 @12:13AM (#13827157)
An unknown quantity somewhere in the middle.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:IBM has found a way to store data on a single atom by function_seven on Thursday March 09, 2017 @12:30AM (#13827219)
A “song” is about 4-10MB. Good enough for a colloquial point of reference.
[ Parent | on HN ]