Hitachi working on 5TB hard drive, halfway to human brain capacity

Just when solid-state drives were about to catch up to the spinners, Hitachi has gone and announced that it is working on a 5TB hard drive. It says the drive should be available by 2010 in a 3.5-inch format and will use perpendicular CPP-GMR tech to achieve some serious density. Just to show off, Hitachi's Yoshiro Shiroishi pointed out that the human brain has been estimated at (only?) around 10TB. So there we have it -- we're halfway to intellectual obsolescence. Don't say we didn't warn you!

[Via TechDigest]

[Thi mam(kris120890) @ Jul 3rd 2008 10:24AM]

How do they know a typical brain is 10 terabyte.

[glenn_now @ Apr 29th 2009 8:06AM]

They know that the brain is about 10 tbs by working out roughly how much information a single nerve wait no (arrrrrr forgot it already :)) ahhahahaahah. Anyways they estimated how much information each nerve can store and multiplied it by an estimated number of nerves... (lots of estimation i say)

[Pochi @ Jul 3rd 2008 10:22AM]

What? How could the human brain be estimated at 10TB? I have 10TB worth of Van Damme movie scenes alone in my fucking brain.

I'm thinking that's a bit of a bold (and completely wrong) statement.

[Derbeste @ Jul 3rd 2008 10:29AM]

Maybe you use a REALLY good compression algorithm?

[Pochi @ Jul 3rd 2008 10:34AM]

I do, and I call it "not smoking weed."

[Flashpoint @ Jul 3rd 2008 10:38AM]

a 10 TB minimum is ridiculous.

first of all, you show me how much data it takes to record smell, taste, and touch.

We already know that it takes many GB to record audio and video in HD.


Well how much data does it take to record feelings?

How much data does it take to allow for INTELLIGENCE. I never saw Transformers the Movie 3 - but, I can imagine the whole thing right now in HD.

This is more Japanese "I know it all" bullsh*t.

[Kurian @ Jul 3rd 2008 11:00AM]

@flashpoint

I believe that we don't record anything, except basic " describing information" about things we see, and images in some cases like people's faces.

We "know" how things look and work and we "generate" an image in realtime when we think about something. Few things are actual image/audio recordings.

Like when you imagine a particular person saying something, you haven't recorded his voice saying the exact same thing. You just remeber the characteristics of his voice and generate the audio in your mind.

[Skry @ Jul 3rd 2008 11:07AM]

What the hell are you talking about Flashpoint? Do you seriously remember every second of each movie you watch? Where every little woodchip landed after being blown to smithereens, the exact colour code of the grey walls in RGB? No? That's because the human brain in fact stores very little information, we remember faces, clothes, body shape and major events and a few others, however if you actually took all the information and put it on a computer it would come out at very little.

A HD movie is so large because it remembers every colour, every frame and everything inside that frame, if I asked you to recall a room from yesterday I would place a large bet that you would not be able to remember more then half the stuff in there.

[Johan S @ Jul 3rd 2008 11:20AM]

Do you really think you remember every pixel of the transformers movie?

Probably everything I remember in a day only takes up a 100MB or less.

An that is probably on the high end. I can't recall more than an hour of actual "video" of what I did last Thursday. I may think I can remember the whole day, but can I replay the entire day in your mind .. nope it's all in bits and pices .. if i paste together it's probably only an hour of video? Furthermore it's not in high res images .. I cannot recall details of the images that I wasn't paying attention to. Like, I can't remember what any of my friends (specially the ones I see all the time) were wearing. Can you recall even simple details taht you were not paying attention to (if your memories replays in HD .. you should be able to look at peripheral stuff in the scenes and describe them). Now I believe I recall all the events of the day, which is true .. but actually I'm only recalling facts about the day .. it's not the same as replaying the entire day in HD. Everything I recall about a day that happened within the last month probably can fit (on average) into 5GB. I am going to say .. I remember 1.5 GB (1 GB of highly compressed video and 500 MB of highly compressed audio ) of per day for the last year (total of 500 GB ). But memories fade over time .. so if we average it out I probably don't remember more than 100 MB of most days that happened over a year ago (per day 30 mins of extremely highly compressed video .. a whole novel can fit into 2 MB .. so aside from the 30 minutes of video .. I can also have a couple of thick novel size books summarizing each day .. all fitting in that 100 MB).

Think about it this way .. the entire wikipedia (text only) can fit into 10 GB. Can you write two million articles about everything you know? Well good, let's assume you need 9 TB for all the audio and video u have .. you still have 990 GB worth of factual data etc. you can store.

[Johan S @ Jul 3rd 2008 11:21AM]

Do you really think you remember every pixel of the transformers movie?

Probably everything I remember in a day only takes up a 100MB or less.

An that is probably on the high end. I can't recall more than an hour of actual "video" of what I did last Thursday. I may think I can remember the whole day, but can I replay the entire day in your mind .. nope it's all in bits and pices .. if i paste together it's probably only an hour of video? Furthermore it's not in high res images .. I cannot recall details of the images that I wasn't paying attention to. Like, I can't remember what any of my friends (specially the ones I see all the time) were wearing. Can you recall even simple details taht you were not paying attention to (if your memories replays in HD .. you should be able to look at peripheral stuff in the scenes and describe them). Now I believe I recall all the events of the day, which is true .. but actually I'm only recalling facts about the day .. it's not the same as replaying the entire day in HD. Everything I recall about a day that happened within the last month probably can fit (on average) into 5GB. I am going to say .. I remember 1.5 GB (1 GB of highly compressed video and 500 MB of highly compressed audio ) of per day for the last year (total of 500 GB ). But memories fade over time .. so if we average it out I probably don't remember more than 100 MB of most days that happened over a year ago (per day 30 mins of extremely highly compressed video .. a whole novel can fit into 2 MB .. so aside from the 30 minutes of video .. I can also have a couple of thick novel size books summarizing each day .. all fitting in that 100 MB).

Think about it this way .. the entire wikipedia (text only) can fit into 10 GB. Can you write two million articles about everything you know? Well good, let's assume you need 9 TB for all the audio and video u have .. you still have 990 GB worth of factual data etc. you can store.

[VampireHunter Z @ Jul 3rd 2008 11:56AM]

If you were to write a program that simulates my thoughts it would take a minimum of 10TBs. I'm talking about a program that would "react" the exact same way I do given a scenario. But in terms of "factual" data my brain is holding less than a 1GB.

The subroutines and algorithms in my mind however can generate exponential data. It's just that I can't remember all that data at once but I can regenerate it if necessary. All in all I think he is just about right in that 10TBs is as much as a brain needs.

[CeporSpawn @ Jul 3rd 2008 12:01PM]

@ Skry

Well, but under hypnosis you seem to be able to remember a lot more of small details, so they have to be recorded somewhere, don't they?

[Mike10010100 @ Jul 3rd 2008 12:01PM]

Besides the double post, Johans, you are correct. So is everyone else who says that we humans are very interesting creatures.

We are finally reaching a point in our evolutionary path where we can look at ourselves and see how we are still able to function without infinite processing power and storage space. Humans evolved from creatures who were designed to take in vast amounts of information, summarize it, store it for later recall, and repeat. Predator over there, he attacked in this way, animals are moving in a big herd North, let's hunt again tomorrow.

However, as information has gotten more complicated, we now see how truly small our own storage capacity is. I imagine recalling movies in this way. You know a piece of information. For instance (since everyone seems to love Transformers so much) you know that Optimus, Bumble Bee, Jazz and the other characters are fighting Decepticons. You remember a scene where one is chasing after Optimus on a highway, and you know that he crashes into a bus, which then explodes.

Now, you know that the bus explodes, and that the effects look fantastic in slow motion. My question is, which direction did the bus explode in? Was the character moving right or left? You don't know. That's because you are able to take the most basic information and build up from the bottom.

We humans do something that gives us the illusion of a large memory, we imagine. Machines are not (yet) able to imagine, so they require vast facilities to grasp even the smallest bits of information.

Also, the eventual breaking down of information (as stated in an earlier post) is something that is interestingly significant to humans. We remember significant events in life, while other parts go blank. However, we still have the experience locked away somewhere, otherwise we would be constantly having to re-learn things. The other details of that in-between time aren't important. However, if someone who does remember that point in time that we don't, we can say, "Oh, wait, i think i remember," and imagine it ourselves (aka: false (or planted) memories).

We humans are such that machine quantities might not be applicable.

[tyler @ Jul 3rd 2008 12:28PM]

Shit, I can't remember most of what happened yesterday, or the day before for that matter. So I'd say I'm good with an 8GB thumb drive or something along those lines..

[bohsocks @ Jul 3rd 2008 12:38PM]

So my brain is estimated at about 10TB?

To find out how much RAM I have, just ask the ladies....

(searches for high-fives)

:'(

How do you begin to estimate that? Did they ask a research group to type how much they know and remember and save it as a PDF? Jeez.

lolol, Alzeimher's bad boot sector

[Scott @ Jul 3rd 2008 1:34PM]

It is worth noting that just because most of us aren't able to fully recall images in our head does not mean that we haven't recorded them.

As one person mentioned earlier, there have been some studies that show under hypnosis people are able to better remember specific details that they normally have forgotten about.

Also, in the case of autistic people, it is amazing how much information these people can store and recall without even trying. I recently saw a video of an autistic man who had never been to rome. This crew took him up in a helicopter and traveled around Rome for 45 minutes, then sat the guy down and had him redraw the entire city over the course of three days.

They found he did a remarkable job recreating buildings - angles were near perfect, the amount of windows on each building was correct and they were correctly placed, etc. At the end of three days, this man had fully re-drew Rome in a near perfect representation after only seeing it from the air for 45 minutes.

10TB? Who knows, but it IS possible for people to "record" things in their brain in "HD," even if 99% of us can't recall it.

[Pochi @ Jul 3rd 2008 3:06PM]

@bohsocks

AMAZING.

lol

[Jason @ Jul 3rd 2008 3:34PM]

Hello! 5TB drive! Completely missing the point of this article here!

[E71 @ Jul 3rd 2008 8:40PM]

Can't believe everyone's getting so worked up over his statement.

"Hey! Let's lynch him for his funny marketing speak!"

[John @ Jul 3rd 2008 10:24AM]

I venture to say that our brains don't store data the same way as a computer.

[mayorproof @ Jul 8th 2008 4:03PM]

I'm sure our thoughts don't consist of bloated code

[Ryan Trevisol @ Jul 3rd 2008 10:35AM]

Unless you work for microsoft.

[toxicpiano @ Jul 3rd 2008 10:42AM]

BrainFS?

[Ignatius @ Jul 3rd 2008 10:45AM]

Our brains store information electrochemically, not magnetically. Therefore, I'd assume the capacity is (with our technology) impossible to comprehend.

[Jason @ Jul 3rd 2008 1:44PM]

You don't remember by reading your memory like a computer does.

Your brain hallucinates the experience over again.

[chris @ Jul 3rd 2008 2:55PM]

everyone here should read gödel escher bach: an eternal golden braid by douglas r. hofstadter for more information about the brain, thought storage, and intelligent computer systems. it deals with a bunch of the questions this article and the comments are raising. it has become one of my favorite books.

[oddish2211 @ Jul 3rd 2008 10:25AM]

i think that Yoshiro Shiroishi's brain is only 10TB

[Lotzosushi. @ Jul 3rd 2008 10:25AM]

Sadly unlike hard drives, our brains can't be reformatted.

[York @ Jul 3rd 2008 10:28AM]

Well, they can. You just have to get a running start.

[brownsunz @ Jul 3rd 2008 10:32AM]

Sure they can ... Amnesia

[kal326 @ Jul 3rd 2008 10:36AM]

Not sure about reformatted, but enough drugs and alcohol and your brain bound to get a few bad sectors.

[Echo1 @ Jul 3rd 2008 11:15AM]

what about the the neuralizer in MIB? Its bound to create a new active partition

[IT-Accountant @ Jul 3rd 2008 11:57AM]

Paul McKenna would beg to disagree.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_McKenna

Not that I think he's right, just throwing it out there...

[Itchy Pajamas @ Jul 3rd 2008 12:38PM]

fbrain

[jftjunk @ Jul 3rd 2008 10:33AM]

POCHI is right... MIT Tech Review had an article about how existing theories on brain capacity were underestimated, those theories were under by like a 1,000,000 fold.

[Alex Padilla @ Jul 3rd 2008 10:37AM]

You know, I was wondering about the brain in relation to hardware specifications the other day. How much "storage capacity" does our brain have? How much "processing power" does it have? See, we haven't even tapped into 1/4 of our brain's potential. I've read multiple times that we only use ~1/8 of our brain at maximum (even geniuses and super geniuses and etc). Therefore, how do we truly know the limitations of our brains?

And, on top of that, we fail to take into account the mind, which, philosophically, is quite different from the brain (the mind is our essence, our soul). Do scientists take into account Transcendentism, the belief that humans can overcome (transcend above) our very own physical limitations? Probably not, which makes their calculations incomplete.

[r3loaded @ Jul 3rd 2008 11:00AM]

So what you mean is that if we managed to connect our brain into the PCI Express bus, we could finally play Crysis at very high settings, 2560x1600 resolution and 4x AA on?

/me experiments...

[Nick K. @ Jul 3rd 2008 11:03AM]

Your statement is partially incorrect- a typical "genius" (or anyone of higher than average intelligence) uses less of their brain than an average person. This isn't due to a larger brain, or anything like that- fewer neurons equals a more efficient brain. This isn't true in all cases, as demonstrated by the effects of drugs and alcohol.

[MadMike @ Jul 3rd 2008 11:05AM]

The whole 1/8th bit isn't completely correct. Different parts of the brain do different things. Like emotions, rationalization, vision comprehension, etc. However, we don't use them all at one single instance at a time. If a certain stimulus isn't activated, that part of the brain won't be used at that point in time.

Of course, unless you figured out how to get a blow-job, eat spaghetti, watch Transformers and read Thoreau all at the same time, then you may use 90% of your brain at once.

But I am quite sure we use all of our brains at some point in time.

[lol @ Jul 3rd 2008 4:43PM]

The "we only use x% of our brains" thing is a bit of a myth. I really wonder why people buy it, considering the brain's volume, and how brain activity charts consistently show many parts of the brain being active.

I think that perhaps we only use that much of our brains *at any one given time*, but to say we never use more than that percentage, total...rather silly.

[neurosceptic @ Jul 3rd 2008 12:17PM]

'a typical "genius" (or anyone of higher than average intelligence) uses less of their brain than an average person'

Amazing how people can spout such rubbish. Where is the evidence? We don't even have the technology to make such a claim, let alone the scientific knowledge.

'fewer neurons equals a more efficient brain' umm efficient at what? Flies dont have many neurons and they are very efficient at flying, but not (as far as I know) quantum physics. If I remove half your neurons, let me see you be efficient with them (although perhaps someone has already done that).

If we grossly simplify, the consensus probably says the more neurons the better BUT, it depends how they are connected and what they have to do. You need a lot of well connected neurons to make a dogs nose work properly, but that does not help the dog speak fluent Russian.

[Alex Padilla @ Jul 3rd 2008 10:45PM]

I was speaking primarily about our brain's theoretical potential, rather than actual total neuron usage. When I say that I've read that we only use 1/8 of our brain, I mean that we've only tapped into 1/8 of our brain's full potential, not that we only use 1/8 of our brain's capabilities.

Yes, we have logic, emotions, senses, memory, and etc, but are we using those abilities to their fullest potential? Could it be possible to recall memories from when we were extremely young; is it possible to record everything that happens with great clarity and recall-ability (which would require extremely good sensory recognition, comprehension, and retention, as well as an astounding ability to search and find this "data")? Is it possible for us to be smarter, wiser? Can we be more astute of our surroundings?

That is what I mean when I mention the 1/8 of our brain thing.

[Michael @ Jul 3rd 2008 10:38AM]

The human brain is usually assumed to have 700 MB of memory in the scientific community... not 10 TB.

[neurosceptic @ Jul 3rd 2008 12:08PM]

Where did you find that gem?

[LondonConsultant @ Jul 3rd 2008 3:09PM]

And I thought 640K would be enough...

[Rob Bourne @ Jul 3rd 2008 10:43AM]

I wonder if we see a BSOD when we die...

[Ankan Bhowmick @ Jul 3rd 2008 11:37AM]

Kernel Panic if you are a mac user.

[Harry Wagstaff @ Jul 3rd 2008 1:15PM]

Actually if you're a mac user you just go straight to hell.

[Itsuru @ Jul 3rd 2008 10:45AM]

I can't wait till my brain can support 3G.

That's the hot ticket.

[Conor @ Jul 3rd 2008 10:46AM]

I'd love to store my iTunes in my brain haha