IBM Unveils the 'World's Smallest Computer' (mashable.com) 164
On the first day of IBM Think 2018, the company's flagship conference, IBM has unveiled what it claims is the world's smallest computer. It's smaller than a grain of salt and features the computer power of the x86 chip from 1990. Mashable first spotted this gem: The computer will cost less than ten cents to manufacture, and will also pack "several hundred thousand transistors," according to the company. These will allow it to "monitor, analyze, communicate, and even act on data." It works with blockchain. Specifically, this computer will be a data source for blockchain applications. It's intended to help track the shipment of goods and detect theft, fraud, and non-compliance. It can also do basic AI tasks, such as sorting the data it's given. According to IBM, this is only the beginning. "Within the next five years, cryptographic anchors -- such as ink dots or tiny computers smaller than a grain of salt -- will be embedded in everyday objects and devices," says IBM head of research Arvind Krishna. If he's correct, we'll see way more of these tiny systems in objects and devices in the years to come. It's not clear yet when this thing will be released -- IBM researchers are currently testing its first prototype.
Re: (Score:1)
Ultra SoC (Score:2)
So they added some memory to an existing SoC?
It can also do basic AI tasks, such as sorting the data it's given
So it's a bunch of integer calculators. uint8 or uint16. Like the old FPU less machines of yester year.
Re: (Score:3)
Also, blockchain. Still? Seriously?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
As soon as we make a breakthrough in AI
Yeah, as soon as that happens, let us know will you?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Ultra SoC (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Siri isn't AI,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
i was about to say, since when is "sorting" considered AI? if so let me update my resume to add 20+ years experience in "AI" - although give IBM's current approach to workforce........
Re: (Score:2)
Well, you could have AI based sorting. Like sorting first on some heuristic parameter that isn't actually the parameter to be eventually sorted by.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because the AI might be able to sort out certain things faster/to get clusters that may/may not be worth further sorting.
Re: (Score:2)
I can think of one example, block-sorting file compression as used by bzip2. If you are making a tarball of several files, it will presumably help to have files with similar content next to each other in the archive. (The block-sorting process would rearrange them later to some extent, but I believe that compression will be a bit better if they are already close, particularly if the input data is much bigger than the sorting window.)
So you first sort by some measure that only approximates sorting by conte
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We should build a matching MIDI violin for it!
Also, this [greenarraychips.com], if you want something really small and power-efficient.
Re: (Score:2)
So they added some memory to an existing SoC?
"Why, the fax-machine is nothin' but a waffle-iron with a 'phone attached!"
Re: (Score:2)
Well, the 486-DX33 had a power dissipation of 2.5 Watts, which is a lot to radiate off something smaller than a grain of salt.
Not to mention the fact that this sucker probably only has a VGA connector.
Wow (Score:5, Funny)
Blockchain and AI in one press release? I Best Buy some IBM stock.
Re:Wow FTFY (Score:4, Funny)
Blockchain and AI in one press release? I Best Buy some IBM CRYPTOstock.
Re: (Score:2)
They have to find something to prop up the part of the business trying to sell their own SCM. A lot of companies are dumping ClearCase and Jazz SCM and moving to git.
Although it seems like we'll never be free of DOORS.
Breakthrough (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:1)
Said no one ever, except a certain straw stuffed fellow on his way to Oz.
BTW, can you clarify which ones you think are impossible and which ones you think are possible without faster computers?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Right, but dropping your usual comedy A+ "lets go live on mars, just kidding, I fooled you, space nutters suck!" routine, what do you actually believe won't be helped by faster, smaller computers? Do you think true AI isn't possible, or just the time frame is wrong? (Which it always is) Just curious because you always pop up in these types of discussions, so you obviously care enough to post.
Re: (Score:2)
With the same unfortunate lack of accuracy that the dumpy guy on the TV green screen gave us.
Progress of a sort, I suppose.
Re: (Score:2)
Where's my flying car?
Here it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Imagine being able to covertly send a message to someone simply by writing some data into a pile of smart-dust and let it blow around by the global wind currents such as the jet stream. Might take a few days but that's quicker than most international postal services.
Re: (Score:2)
The satellite communication could be intercepted if it were broadcast. Just like those numbers radio stations.
Buzzwords! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
That's because you are classifying everything that has made progress in the last 40 years as not AI.
Re: Buzzwords! (Score:2, Insightful)
Such small ambitions and thought.
Do you realize that even at a 1990s level of computational power and with the diminutive size of the full package that this is within the realm of being powered by your existing metabolism or a micro thermoelectric generator?
Outside of the ultra sci-fi here. Imagine having direct and instant access to that kind of power, an extension of your mind. You'd not even know or feel these in your body.
At some point. A tiny device like this will take over for damaged control systems
This is truly a nightmare. (Score:1)
"Within the next five years, cryptographic anchors -- such as ink dots or tiny computers smaller than a grain of salt -- will be embedded in everyday objects and devices,"
How can anyone read this without getting chills on their backs? The current situation is already a living nightmare of surveillance, but this... makes it impossible to keep existing in this world.
Re: (Score:2)
this... makes it impossible to keep existing in this world.
Okay. Be sure to fill out your organ donor card before you stop existing in this world. That way you can help at least a few other people on your way out.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
He also seems to know absolutely nothing about teeth.
Privacy (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
More like 60 years ago, seems you do not read much Stanislaw Lem.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Unless there are cameras smaller than a grain of salt too, I'm not worried about that yet.
And so we come to - (Score:4, Insightful)
1. Does it run Linux?
2. Imagine a Beowulf cluster [beowulf.org] of these!
Building a Beowulf Cluster in just 13 steps [linux.com]
How many cluster nodes per cm^3?
Beowulf Cluster Recipe (Score:5, Funny)
1/2 tsp processors
Add Linux distro to taste
Re: (Score:2)
Imagine a Beowu... oh, never mind.
Just great. Tiny devices, embedded everywhere. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Your laptop and phone download data from your underwear?
Man I'm out of date, I ain't got any of this good shit.
Re: (Score:2)
Now the TSA will want to download data from my underwear along with my laptop and phone.
Your laptop and phone download data from your underwear?
No, his laptop and phone are in his underwear.
Words fail me... (Score:2)
How do you communicate with it? (Score:2)
If I'm reading it right, it has some kind of LED attached and a micro solar panel. Like it can flash or something and run from power from the sun?
I didn't get the impression you can plug anything in to it like a keyboard or even connect wirelessly, unless the article is missing something?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I don't think it needs a motherboard. Look at the diagram:
* PV power source, right there on the chip. So you don't need to plug into external power.
* Static RAM data storage, right there on the chip. So you don't need a hard drive or anything like that.
* LED communications and photo-detector, so you have input/output there.
* x100,000 transistor processing unit. So there's your CPU.
So you don't need a motherboard. It's entirely self-contained.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:How do you communicate with it? (Score:5, Informative)
The picture of a chip sitting on a finger in the article is 64 motherboards.
Each motherboard is 1x1mm, which includes the CPU, SRAM, a PV cell for power and an LED/photodiode for I/O.
Smaller than a relatively big grain of salt.
I'm a little confused about the power of the thing though. They say it's similar performance to a CPU from 1990, which would be a 486.
Except the 486 had over 1 million transistors, this has 100,000. That's more on par with a 286 from the early 80's
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's still claimed to be an x86 processor though. The 100k transistor 286 had a much smaller instruction set and was only 16 bit
The first proper "x86" was the 386, which came in at 275,000 transistors.
It would have to be a *very* fast, very simple processor emulating x86 to be as fast as a 33MHz 486 and only require 100k transistors.
and still run on half a bee's dick of power from a tiny PV panel.
Re: (Score:2)
It's still claimed to be an x86 processor though. The 100k transistor 286 had a much smaller instruction set and was only 16 bit The first proper "x86" was the 386, which came in at 275,000 transistors.
Hmmm, x86 processors [wikipedia.org] started with the 8086. It refers to a fundamental architecture and instruction set. I think your arbitrary declaration of 386 as the first "proper" x86 is misguided.
Re: (Score:2)
Even so, an x86 from 1990 was a 486 with a million transistors.
An 8086 does about 0.1 mips per mhz, while a 486 does around 0.6. You'd need to run an 8086 at 300MHz is compete with a 50MHz 486. Probably much faster if you're using 32bit math. Even faster again to compete with the memory bandwidth difference.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Except the 486 had over 1 million transistors, this has 100,000. That's more on par with a 286 from the early 80's
Number of transistors is not the only factor determining the performance of a CPU. The switching speed of a transistor is a determining factor as well, and the process size that is fabbed nowadays is in the few tens of nm in size (10-16 nm), while it was about 500 nm in mid 1990s. This implies much lower capacitances and therefore, much higher switching speed.
Re: (Score:2)
It's also a CPU powered by a PV panel that only covers a fraction of a 1x1mm chip, so it's not going to be running that fast.
Re: (Score:2)
You are absolutely right.
Re:How do you communicate with it? (Score:5, Funny)
10Base5 Ethernet.
So I read the article... (Score:4, Informative)
I know, I know, we don't read the article. And this one was crap too. Buzzword noise.
But the block diagram was included, at least, and that's fascinating. Unlike Intel and their little chip, IBM has actually thought about the practicality of using the thing. It comes with an integrated solar cell and an integrated photo-diode communications array for both transmission and receipt of data. It also includes some SRAM. No mention of how many bytes, no mention of data throughput from the array, no mention of actual power consumption (and accompanying heat dissipation).
All coverage appears to be essentially content-free crap designed to pump IBM's stock price.
Maybe somebody can figure out what to do with it. It's going to be difficult since all I/O requires line of sight.
Re: (Score:2)
So what? GPUs. Bored now! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
You forgot to end your comment with "</sarcasm>"
Re: (Score:2)
A modern GPU is the size of a small book and draws some 100W of power.
But.. (Score:2)
Smaller than a gain of salt...yeah...coarse salt (Score:3, Informative)
The headline said "IBM has created a computer smaller than a grain of salt" but they compare it to Kosher Salt (Or another variety with the grain size if bigger).
If you want to use an headline like this at least make sure it's smaller than the most popular type of salt. I mean, I've worked in a salt mine where I could find salt rock bigger than your house.
Re: (Score:2)
A biohacker can't inject a rock bigger than my house into his junk and claim to be 'thinking with the other head' while doing his taxes on his dick-puter. Via the wikfi.
Honestly, I expect facebook to come out with Jewelry that lets you rate the reputation of your meal with this. Then you'll finally be living in one of the Black Mirror episodes. The Nosedive episode, not the San Junipero episode (where the civilization ends by everyone become uploads living life in a retirement village that looks like A
Rock Salt (Score:2)
Ya, exactly what I was thinking, varies with the size of salt...
They specifically say grain, which is obviously untrue, or at least misleading as people think of a grain of table salt. That isn't even course sea salt, or even kosher salt. The picture looks like "Rock Salt" of a particularly lumpy variety. Most of the stuff I use on my driveway is finer than that stuff. I mean "Salt" can come in just about any dimensions you want, but I am not sure I would call it a "grain". We just bout a Salt Lamp for a fr
Re: (Score:2)
This comment, among others, makes me laugh. It's not the most common coarseness of salt? Why is a theme of this comment section that slashdotters, technologists, want to deny the legitimacy of technological advancement?
If you look for this pattern on here, you'll start to see it everywhere.
AC because I don't want a bunch of people telling me how Moore's Law is broken, daggamit.
Let's be clear,
It's an amazing technological advancements, there's no denying it. But I can't stand sensationalism.
They could have said ""IBM has created a computer smaller than a pea" and it would have been equally impressive.
Re:Smaller than a gain of salt...yeah...coarse sal (Score:5, Funny)
I believe you meant Morton's law.
Re: (Score:2)
Five stars, would mod funny
Re: (Score:2)
People here react badly to overhyped stats because we're inundated with them and frankly sick of having to sort out what's real and what was dreamed up by someone in sales.
Re: (Score:2)
It makes people feel superior to crap on the achievements of others.
Useful for nanotech? (Score:3, Interesting)
Great, now can we attach batteries and motors to a small swarm of these and program them to harvest plaque from artery walls?
Please?
Re: (Score:1)
It can also do basic AI tasks ... (Score:2)
It can also do basic AI tasks, such as sorting the data it's given. ...
Ah ha
"The computer power of the x86 chip from 1990" (Score:2)
I'm having trouble understanding this analogy. Can someone explain the equivalent processing power in Librarians of Congress per Svedberg?
Re: (Score:1)
They had machines running in terms of Megahertz instead of Giga hertz like today. I used to sell them. I used to run real Unix, Free BSD Unix on them and they had little memory, usually 4 Megabytes. I used to set up answering services, etc complete with a lan, database and such and it was all reasonable speed. With any luck they're talking about something like a 486-33. I used to sell those boards like hot cakes. Case at a time. Memory used to be a bitch because they were millipede like and I remember my fi
Next in the news: environmental disaster... (Score:2)
I can only imagine what billions of these things will so to the environment. We already have to worry about frigging sparkles killing wildlife and now we’ll have animals dying from investing these things...
Re: Next in the news: environmental disaster... (Score:1)
Better than all the bears investing in the stork market like a bull in a China shop.
Re: (Score:2)
no, these can pass through and be shit out like a small rock. are you going to worry about creatures eating rocks?
Missing feature (Score:1)
No 3.5 mm headphone jack? Then forget it.
Re: (Score:2)