Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 24 Jun 2015 12:19:28 -0600
From:      jd1008 <jd1008@gmail.com>
To:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: hard drive problem
Message-ID:  <558AF4B0.6030209@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <34851.128.135.70.2.1435169522.squirrel@cosmo.uchicago.edu>
References:  <5589E2F9.3070604@gmail.com> <861th1tdj3.fsf@WorkBox.Home> <20150624153643.GB43640@neutralgood.org> <46363.128.135.70.2.1435160477.squirrel@cosmo.uchicago.edu> <558AF04A.8090206@gmail.com> <34851.128.135.70.2.1435169522.squirrel@cosmo.uchicago.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help


On 06/24/2015 12:12 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
> On Wed, June 24, 2015 1:00 pm, jd1008 wrote:
>>
>> On 06/24/2015 09:41 AM, Valeri Galtsev wrote:
>>> On Wed, June 24, 2015 10:36 am, kpneal@pobox.com wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 08:57:20AM -0500, Brandon J. Wandersee wrote:
>>>>> jd1008 writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> does anyone have a way to unlock the master pword in
>>>>>> a recent WD 2TB  2.5" drive?
>>>>> "Master pword?" Is this a firmware-level encrypted drive? If so, no. A
>>>>> "reset" feature would defeat the purpose of having encryption in the
>>>>> first place. If the drive is self-encrypting you don't know the
>>>>> password, the drive's a brick.
>>>> My guess is that you can tell the drive to use a new password, but the
>>>> contents of the drive are lost. That's assuming a firmware-level
>>>> encryption.
>>>>
>>>> BTW, are there really 2TB _2.5"_ drives on the market?
>>> It may be an enclosure with two 1TB 2.5" drives either concatenated, or
>>> RAID0 thus presenting itself as 2 TB. Just a wild guess.
>>>
>>> Valeri
>> This one is actually a 4 platter drive, thus rather thick (15mm).
>> Goodby to 7.5mm 2.5" drives. Areal density has not reached the
>> quantum level yet :)
> Cool note! With magnetic domains in will not be quantum level though: it
> will be at least about a hundred of individual atoms involved into each
> individual magnetic domain. Bu I really like your comment!
>
> Oh, boy, I seemed to overestimate macroscopicity of physics here (IBM
> managed it on 12 atoms...):
>
> http://www.ibm.com/smarterplanet/us/en/smarter_computing/article/atomic_scale_memory.html
>
>> But from the technologists I know who are
>> and have worked at HD companies, I hear that mechanical drives
>> are totally on the way out as the the RAM and FLASH electronics
>> get every tinier and faster, and much more reliable and long lasting.
>>
> Holography, one might think, could be most dense way of packing
> information (of what we know today).
>
> Thanks for your brilliant comment! It made my day!
>
> Valeri
>
Back in the 80's, scientists at the Univerwsity of California, Irvine
created a cube made of a polymer that could be encoded 3 dimmentionally
by lasers, with promise of holding tens of exabytes of data.
A japanese company (do not recall the name), bought the rights and
patents for it. I have not heard about that invention again since that time.

Re: speed of electronics:
The absolute speed limit of electronics is the speed at which an electron
will jump from one shell to the next.
We are so so far from that, I do not think that it is achievable. The 
circuits
themselves are not at the level of one atom size, even if you consider the
largest, non-radioactive atom.




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?558AF4B0.6030209>