Infinite Memory?

with the new command computers, we can now set blocks, as you know, imagine a system of 0's(stone) and 1's(redstone block) where you could store info!

another way is to use the command blocks as a notepad. you create a command block with a bunch of text in it, maybe a program, image, ect. and you could do this infinite times until u run out of chunks. maybe ill make a computer…based on a command computer…that can manipulate blocks…and can store info based on command blocks…

Why not just change the configuration to increase the computer storage size limit? These methods sound like very awkward ways to store data.

While this might be possible it would be incredibly inefficent in terms of writing and reading. It would take (id immagine) hundreds of commands to write or read a simple sentence.

mmmmm well im still gonna do it just for giggles. and it shouldn't take that much per sentence/function…a cmd block can hold alot

slow-coder, on 27 February 2015 - 02:32 AM said:

mmmmm well im still gonna do it just for giggles. and it shouldn't take that much per sentence/function…a cmd block can hold alot

The ammount the computer itself can hold means nothing… You are talking about using physical blocks to store data, and in order to read / write that data you would have to call a huge number of commands.

1 command = change 1 block

I suggest you look at this page http://searchstorage...-many-bytes-for

according to that the average word is around 10 bytes, which is 80 bits. 80 bits = 80 blocks = 80 commands to change the block. I would say the average sentence is around 10 words so that is 800 commands per sentence. As I said it is inefficent. Given the number of blocks in a chunk it might be able to store a few functions, but it would take a crazy amount of time to read it.

Your one advantage is the fact chunks have 65280 blocks in them, making it to where you can store a decent amount of data.

Assuming there are at least 256 different blocks available to vanilla MineCraft (certainly the case once you start taking metadata-based variations into account), storing one or even multiple bytes per block should be quite possible.

It's still a highly inefficient way to store data, but ComputerCraft computers in general are inefficient. The idea has an air of novelty to it.

Really though I think we need some giant QR codes.

valithor, on 27 February 2015 - 03:31 AM said:

slow-coder, on 27 February 2015 - 02:32 AM said:

mmmmm well im still gonna do it just for giggles. and it shouldn't take that much per sentence/function…a cmd block can hold alot

The ammount the computer itself can hold means nothing… You are talking about using physical blocks to store data, and in order to read / write that data you would have to call a huge number of commands.

1 command = change 1 block

I suggest you look at this page http://searchstorage...-many-bytes-for

according to that the average word is around 10 bytes, which is 80 bits. 80 bits = 80 blocks = 80 commands to change the block. I would say the average sentence is around 10 words so that is 800 commands per sentence. As I said it is inefficent. Given the number of blocks in a chunk it might be able to store a few functions, but it would take a crazy amount of time to read it.

Your one advantage is the fact chunks have 65280 blocks in them, making it to where you can store a decent amount of data.

i was talking about storing a whole sentence in one command block :}

This actually crossed my mind the other day. It allows for, albeit slow and inefficient, infinite range data transfer.

Bomb Bloke, on 27 February 2015 - 06:15 AM said:

Assuming there are at least 256 different blocks available to vanilla MineCraft (certainly the case once you start taking metadata-based variations into account), storing one or even multiple bytes per block should be quite possible.

It's still a highly inefficient way to store data, but ComputerCraft computers in general are inefficient. The idea has an air of novelty to it.

Really though I think we need some giant QR codes.

Maybe this can be a way to transfer code

What about using many blocks for one bit?
Maybe redstone for 0, stone for 1, dirt for 2, cobblestone for 3, etc

This would make it faster.

This is all good until a creeper visits your databank… fsssss…. booom

Lupus590, on 01 March 2015 - 03:22 PM said:

This is all good until a creeper visits your databank… fsssss…. booom

Create a recovery record.