225 terabytes in 1 second of fiber. 225TB of DRAM doesn't actually cost all that much, O(million), or maybe O(10 million) if you're also talking the servers req

225 terabytes in 1 second of fiber. 225TB of DRAM doesn't actually cost all that much, O(million), or maybe O(10 million) if you're also talking the servers required to drive that much. Ping between USA and EU might be what, 100ms round trip? So how much would you think 20x spools of transatlantic fiber plus all the repeaters and power to run it will cost you? And for that you get a memory with O(1s) latency as opposed to DRAM which is 10 million times better latency. Or you could go with NAND for about twenty thousand dollars for that much storage with only 1 million times better latency. Or HDD at a few thousand and still get 100x better latency. Maybe my math is wrong, but I'm not quite seeing the niche for this new form of slow billion dollar cache.