>Why? Can't you just tell me what you want to say?
Alright. It's not just ground loops. Everyone who attribute electrical noise only to ground loops doesn't understand noise.

Ground loops matter, but the way the current and signal flow in the wire matters too. Ott's book pages 58 and 59 show 10 configurations, 5 ground loop configurations and five non-ground loop configurations, all with different noise suppression characteristics.

Cutting a ground loop will cut ground loop currents and the associated noise, but there's another 25db of noise suppression between the worst performing and best performing non-ground loop configuration.

The Wiki page is about ground loops, so talks about ground loops. That doesn't mean ground loops are the only consideration or even the most important consideration. If your problem is about noise in wires, then there's more to it than ground loops.

>Is it even worthwhile to use an app like that to save a few cents on gas?

I used it when I had a diesel pickup truck, because it could tell me the nearest petrol station that had diesel.

Consult the relevant pages from the best book on electronic noise and how to get rid of it.
Noise Reduction Techniques in Electronic Systems by Ott.

Because it's massively inefficient. 4 wires to get data through which could each carry 80% of the goodput with 20% error redundancy. So that's 3.2 times better than your 4 wire scheme.

The 1970s called and wants its error correction scheme back.
Try LDPC or turbo codes or or Reed Solomon if you like it old school, but not too old school maybe mixed with soft decision decoding, or fancy DDFSE schemes.
But never meddle in the ways of MIMO, for therein madness lays.

Please put a mechanical keyboard on one half, not a screen.

>But just a few weeks ago I had an empty row in economy plus to myself from Houston to San Francisco.

It's a sign of the end of times!

I flew on Malaysian airlines recently and got two empty seats next to me. That hasn't happened on a US plane in a long time.

For most specific problems thrown at supercomputers, you can go 30 times faster with a custom hardware architecture baked into silicon

To go 30 times fast for general purpose supercomputing, you use the latest silicon (2X) and more chips (15X) and come up with a super new interconnect to make it not suck. This would involve making some chips that support low latency IPC in hardware.

They are free to send me a few billion dollars, I'll get right on it and deliver a 30X faster machine and I'l even use some blue LEDs on the front panel.

My Happy Hacking Professional 2 keyboard has a control key in the place where a caps lock key usually goes.

I haven't touched the iphone stuff. Only Macintosh programming, which I've done on and off since 1984.
I found Swift pretty easy to pick up. Another language amongst many. Each to their own.

I wrote an MVC shim over curses in python for a point of sale application. Now that was a simple API.

I have a degree in computer science. I've been programming since I was 9. I learned Swift. It's quite good as languages go. But no amount of language knowledge or computer science knowledge will make the Apple APIs simple. They're not. They're complicated and hard to use. Swift will not make the APIs simple or logical. Making the APIs simple and logical will make the APIs simple and logical.

Or more SRAM cache local to the CPU with cache lines being merrily lobbed twixt the SRAM and the magic new memory. Maybe. A non volatile PC would be neat.

It's DRAM that's in the crosshairs.