Not so. We have moved on from such large time uncertainties in networking in the last 10 years, at least for specialized applications.

Also do not confuse the reference clock being slow, and the time propagation across the global network (ie Internet) being slow.

It is fine for the NIST clock to be inaccessible to the wider network for small periods of time, which would inevitably introduce drift on the downstream systems. Once those systems reconnect to NIST, they could correct themselves.

What is not fine is for the NIST reference clock to itself fail to stay synchronized with the atomic clocks which create the standard. That's what I'm finding shocking (although I suspect that old school NIST engineers are embarrassed and already on the case).

Small correction. C++ with template metaprograms can be more performant than C code, due to the ability to better map code against the system architecture. The C design is beautiful, but the use of general purpose library functions can hold it back in some applications.

lol. I like how you claim OO inheritance is an anti-pattern. Do you know what an anti-pattern is? It's a recommendation by some self appointed experts for others to not do certain things because it might be too difficult for new students to learn how to do such things correctly. Race to the lowest common denominator.

This is how we ended up with languages like Java who separated interface and object definitions, C# then copied Java. Why would anyone even do that? Because they wanted to fix perceived flaws in C++ that they didn't think students would be able to grasp, and Sun wanted to corner the next generation of programmers. Other examples include removing pointers from the language, and (originally) peppering the libraries with hidden mutexes because concurrency is hard.

Fast forward to today, and ask yourself why Windows 11's file manager is so dog slow? It's not a new technology concept. It's actually slower than the file manager in MSDOS 4, which ran on a PC that was easily a million times slower than yours is today. What gives, Microsoft?

You're a member of a cult of safety zealots without merit. You think that safety is the most important feature a language can have, and you're willing to sacrifice expressivity for it. Then you attack other languages that make different choices, and you want everybody to play by your rules, by requesting that they henceforth contort their logic until it fits your safety first nonsense. Good luck with that. I'll take performance, performance, performance, any day of the week.

I am actually shocked. As claimed by the article, it's not the clocks themselves that were compromised, it's actually the network outage that caused the problem.

That makes sense, because the time protocol requires estimating routing delays, so when the outage happened there may have been a change to the estimated delays in the network. And that seems frankly ridiculous, if true, since there's no reason that the network relaying the atomic clock readings should be tampered with on an ordinary operating day.

So the fact that the reference clock is off by this much either suggests a flaw in the protocol (trying to do something that doesn't make sense, like re-estimating the delays continuously through another route) or a flaw in the system design (does the computer which averages the 16 atomic clock ticks actually have an atomic clock itself? It would be stupid to use a cheap commercial time crystal as a fallback in case of a complete outage).

4 microseconds is an eternity in some applications. The idea that it is so easy to tamper with the reference time by messing with the network is unacceptable. NIST has some work to do here.

You might like mathsgear as a source of delightful trinkets, if you've not seen it before.

Vendor swag (and especially company swag) can be great, but has a shelf life due to the branding. It's pretty embarrassing to sport a T-shirt from a former employer at your new employer (duh!)

What would be cool is a site with tips and tricks for removing branding of different kinds, so you can keep the swag without the stigma shelf life hit.

Eg how to remove logos from fabric without damage? Easy enough when it's just sewn on, but for some kinds of swag the logo printing methods are more stubborn than others and probably require chemicals.

And if it sucks.... that's just Megamaid!

I'm estimating 2 years + 2 years. The reckoning can be dragged out either through war, or through government bailout guarantees. Second half of next year will be interesting.

Psst! I am Neo, I'll save you!

Why? Is the printer on fire?

2026 may be a bit too soon. First the circular AI economy bubble needs to burst, and that will cause a lot of demand contraction and businesses shutting down. I'd estimate about 4 years, let's say 2030?

We've been burned by Java.

This is nothing particularly new. Mircosoft tried this already in the 2000s with Managed C++. It didn't turn out well. People didn't care for safety features and memory management then either.

The Rust people are learning this lesson too. You don't break code that works. You don't rewrite adequate code just for the new shiny. If you want to stay in business, that is.

That's so Greedo!

Why do you care? It's just one AI industry company complaining about another AI industry company scraping their content and repackaging it in a different way. They'll figure things out amongst themselves, and if not, it won't make a difference. It's not like Copyright is consistently enforced these days.