The people pulling the strings in the US pull the strings in most other countries as well. If you can't see their connections you are really not looking. The NSA leaks that started these recent discussions make that fact abundantly clear.
It is not too complex, however translations without the originals would not be evidence. Of course today having evidence in a government prosecution is optional at best. Easy to bluff to a plea with the translation.
Whether it is microwave or fiber would make no difference to my point. No matter what the hardware is, you can never get the theoretical maximum speed.
That said, I agree it's designed to be quick, don't agree that it's all microwave. Some equipment? Yes, but not all due to security and potential tampering/interference and not the equipment in question in the article. You may be referring to traders -> Exchange, but the Exchanges are on buried lines to each other.
First your "no gear" is the input to the lines, not the lines themselves. You are trying to assert that every trade communication is a dedicated dark fiber run from point to point. Sorry, it's not working that way and is cost prohibitive. Great lines? Sure. Better than I have in my fiber closets? Absolutely. Direct point to point lines in the shortest possible run length? Nope.
Second, you are only looking at half of the problem. It's not just the speed at which they could send the trade, it's the speed at which they would receive data to make the trade with.
No, what I'm claiming is that the 3.2ms measurement is absolutely wrong. That would be the measurement for light traveling in a direct line with no branching, forking, splitting, and absolutely perfect conditions. The 7ms number is based on the real physical route and considers abnormalities that we see in Fiber connections all the time. To expect theoretical maximum speeds _and_ the shortest distance possible between the two points is idiocy.
I'll grant even that we get near perfect connections on these lines, I'm sure they are tested and maintained better than most fiber networks. But you can't have the shortest possible distance to boot.
You are obviously not an engineer either. Numerous tests have been run to show the packet speed on these networks. The 7ms number is the real number. Your theoretical maximum for the speed of light does not take switching into consideration. You are trying to imply that there is a single cable that connects the two, and there is not!
gah "bit" charitable. Reason is that they test the connection speeds. Those tests are under conditions that would yield the best results. I have no idea the frequency of those tests, but know that they happen.
I'll try to find that one, but it's impossible in network gear on fiber. Light by itself could. Light moving from hop to hop, I believe the 7ms measurement given is a big charitable.
At home, I run an AMD. Much cheaper than Intel and I can honestly state that I have never had problems with AMD chips. Memory, depends on the manufacturer but that's not a CPU or motherboard issue. My motherboard at home cost 90 bucks, the CPU 150. Similar Intel gear would be double that (roughly).
At home, since most parts of the computer work whether AMD or Intel, it would not be "that" expensive to benchmark Intel vs. AMD unless you planned on the AMD first. The additional 200 bucks for a motherboard and CPU is not "that" much, but more than most want to pay.
When I look at CPU performance, why would I not test for work over home? A game may stress the CPU and GPU, but it's not what I consider important.
Most businesses will allow a budget for testing. You think I purchase systems at home to run enterprise analysis applications? I would have to pay for the applications as well, which are between 20K and 200K depending on options.
It honestly depends on the application using the CPU, see my initial post. Math intensive applications tend to perform much better on AMD chips. This is everything from Analysis and Simulation to some types of compression and encryption.
If speed was all that mattered in a chip you would have a point. Speed is not all that matters, it never has been and never will be. The memory buss is much better on an AMD chip. FP instruction is faster and better in AMD chips. If it takes.01ns to get an instruction to memory due to buss length and.001ns on an AMD because of shorter buss length, who's chip is better?
Speed is a misnomer, and go back 10 years and AMD was telling you that the only rating on a chip should not be speed. You probably forgot to read it, or forgot that you did read it.
It's like having a city with a highway around it, think Houston or DC. You can drive 65mph around the city on the freeway. To you, I'm going slow on a 35mph road. Who makes it from the South side of town to North first? Not you, assuming I know a better route. That analogy is why chip speed arguments are a measure of ignorance.
Instead of relying on a web site which does testing based on their funding, perform actual bench marks yourself. I do, and see mixed results today. 5 years ago for math intensive apps, AMD was a hands down winner. Apps like Muses, Nastran, Abaqus, Dyna, etc...
Opera, NoScript, Ad-block, etc.. Many of ways of blocking them from attempting to do so. I'm a bit paranoid as well, and in addition to those steps I would only open FB in a clean run of Opera to make sure there is no cache/history for them to try and access.
The first I have to ask "Why would anyone buy something from a free site?". That is the part I really don't get. I get finding a time waster game like Angry Birds, but that money goes to Zynga and Facebook should get their cut from a Zynga rep based on someone purchasing a game designed for Facebook. It's working backwards.
Next, why would anyone purchase anything from a company with so many security problems? Facebook as been full of them since release, and not rocket science hacking problems but simple "we fucked up" problems.
Keep your "free" account, just don't use it. Don't "pay" for garbage.
AMD still makes a better chip for many FP intensive applications, and the price is still superior to Intel to boot. Intel always made a big deal about clock speed, while AMD worked on actual performance. It is really a shame that people pay more attention to marketing than real performance.
Responding to an OT thread I realized, but... As a parent I always tried to regulate and monitor what my kid watched when he was younger. Interesting fact follows.
There was a Comedy Central kid show called "Power Puff Girls". While watching an episode of that show, they zoom on on the secretaries drive way.. kind of like a camera walking up the road, into the driveway, then into the house. I noticed that address of Ms. Sara Bellum was 69 Yodelinda Valley Lane."
In this case, I was not very offended. It was an obscure reference that a kid would not get. As is some of the other humor from the show you can find here. IMHO, there are some things done to make shows amusing for adults and kids. This differs from the penises and word sex in many Disney shows, at least to me.
Slashdot Mirror
VT-220and lynx you insensitive clod!!
The people pulling the strings in the US pull the strings in most other countries as well. If you can't see their connections you are really not looking. The NSA leaks that started these recent discussions make that fact abundantly clear.
It is not too complex, however translations without the originals would not be evidence. Of course today having evidence in a government prosecution is optional at best. Easy to bluff to a plea with the translation.
Unfortunately morons get mod points too. I'd correct if I had some.
That was funneh! :D
Whether it is microwave or fiber would make no difference to my point. No matter what the hardware is, you can never get the theoretical maximum speed.
That said, I agree it's designed to be quick, don't agree that it's all microwave. Some equipment? Yes, but not all due to security and potential tampering/interference and not the equipment in question in the article. You may be referring to traders -> Exchange, but the Exchanges are on buried lines to each other.
Two problems with your statement.
First your "no gear" is the input to the lines, not the lines themselves. You are trying to assert that every trade communication is a dedicated dark fiber run from point to point. Sorry, it's not working that way and is cost prohibitive. Great lines? Sure. Better than I have in my fiber closets? Absolutely. Direct point to point lines in the shortest possible run length? Nope.
Second, you are only looking at half of the problem. It's not just the speed at which they could send the trade, it's the speed at which they would receive data to make the trade with.
No, what I'm claiming is that the 3.2ms measurement is absolutely wrong. That would be the measurement for light traveling in a direct line with no branching, forking, splitting, and absolutely perfect conditions. The 7ms number is based on the real physical route and considers abnormalities that we see in Fiber connections all the time. To expect theoretical maximum speeds _and_ the shortest distance possible between the two points is idiocy.
I'll grant even that we get near perfect connections on these lines, I'm sure they are tested and maintained better than most fiber networks. But you can't have the shortest possible distance to boot.
You are obviously not an engineer either. Numerous tests have been run to show the packet speed on these networks. The 7ms number is the real number. Your theoretical maximum for the speed of light does not take switching into consideration. You are trying to imply that there is a single cable that connects the two, and there is not!
gah "bit" charitable. Reason is that they test the connection speeds. Those tests are under conditions that would yield the best results. I have no idea the frequency of those tests, but know that they happen.
I'll try to find that one, but it's impossible in network gear on fiber. Light by itself could. Light moving from hop to hop, I believe the 7ms measurement given is a big charitable.
Except if they did it on the mark it would be obvious. Crooks are not always idiots, in fact many of them are extremely intelligent.
Which of you stole 7ms to post at exactly the same time as the other?
Sorry, couldn't resist... :)
At home, I run an AMD. Much cheaper than Intel and I can honestly state that I have never had problems with AMD chips. Memory, depends on the manufacturer but that's not a CPU or motherboard issue. My motherboard at home cost 90 bucks, the CPU 150. Similar Intel gear would be double that (roughly).
At home, since most parts of the computer work whether AMD or Intel, it would not be "that" expensive to benchmark Intel vs. AMD unless you planned on the AMD first. The additional 200 bucks for a motherboard and CPU is not "that" much, but more than most want to pay.
When I look at CPU performance, why would I not test for work over home? A game may stress the CPU and GPU, but it's not what I consider important.
Most businesses will allow a budget for testing. You think I purchase systems at home to run enterprise analysis applications? I would have to pay for the applications as well, which are between 20K and 200K depending on options.
I trust Toms Hardware as far as I can spit. Once a cheat always a cheat.
It honestly depends on the application using the CPU, see my initial post. Math intensive applications tend to perform much better on AMD chips. This is everything from Analysis and Simulation to some types of compression and encryption.
Ahh, my bad.
If speed was all that mattered in a chip you would have a point. Speed is not all that matters, it never has been and never will be. The memory buss is much better on an AMD chip. FP instruction is faster and better in AMD chips. If it takes .01ns to get an instruction to memory due to buss length and .001ns on an AMD because of shorter buss length, who's chip is better?
Speed is a misnomer, and go back 10 years and AMD was telling you that the only rating on a chip should not be speed. You probably forgot to read it, or forgot that you did read it.
It's like having a city with a highway around it, think Houston or DC. You can drive 65mph around the city on the freeway. To you, I'm going slow on a 35mph road. Who makes it from the South side of town to North first? Not you, assuming I know a better route. That analogy is why chip speed arguments are a measure of ignorance.
Instead of relying on a web site which does testing based on their funding, perform actual bench marks yourself. I do, and see mixed results today. 5 years ago for math intensive apps, AMD was a hands down winner. Apps like Muses, Nastran, Abaqus, Dyna, etc...
Opera, NoScript, Ad-block, etc.. Many of ways of blocking them from attempting to do so. I'm a bit paranoid as well, and in addition to those steps I would only open FB in a clean run of Opera to make sure there is no cache/history for them to try and access.
The first I have to ask "Why would anyone buy something from a free site?". That is the part I really don't get. I get finding a time waster game like Angry Birds, but that money goes to Zynga and Facebook should get their cut from a Zynga rep based on someone purchasing a game designed for Facebook. It's working backwards.
Next, why would anyone purchase anything from a company with so many security problems? Facebook as been full of them since release, and not rocket science hacking problems but simple "we fucked up" problems.
Keep your "free" account, just don't use it. Don't "pay" for garbage.
AMD still makes a better chip for many FP intensive applications, and the price is still superior to Intel to boot. Intel always made a big deal about clock speed, while AMD worked on actual performance. It is really a shame that people pay more attention to marketing than real performance.
We agree. :)
Responding to an OT thread I realized, but... As a parent I always tried to regulate and monitor what my kid watched when he was younger. Interesting fact follows.
There was a Comedy Central kid show called "Power Puff Girls". While watching an episode of that show, they zoom on on the secretaries drive way.. kind of like a camera walking up the road, into the driveway, then into the house. I noticed that address of Ms. Sara Bellum was 69 Yodelinda Valley Lane."
In this case, I was not very offended. It was an obscure reference that a kid would not get. As is some of the other humor from the show you can find here. IMHO, there are some things done to make shows amusing for adults and kids. This differs from the penises and word sex in many Disney shows, at least to me.