What year was this filmed in?
1993 it would appear: https://youtu.be/Sn0f0vpn8jE?t=7m50s
She died in 1992, so I highly doubt it was recorded in '93.
Admiral Grace Hopper Explains the Nanosecond (1983) [video]
11–16 of 16 posts
Re: Admiral Grace Hopper Explains the Nanosecond (1983) [video]
#12Re: Admiral Grace Hopper Explains the Nanosecond (1983) [video]
#13It is funny (to me anyway) that the nanosecond wires she used to give out take rather more than a nanosecond to traverse.
The speed of signal propagation is largely determined by the density of the wire's insulation, because the signal is an electromagnetic wave carried at the skin of the conductor, with its electric field oscillating in the insulation, so propagation is limited by properties of that. The distance covered in a nanosecond is typically between seven and eight inches. In wires with foam insulation (typically co-ax) signals go a little faster. In optical fiber, a nanosecond is under seven inches, because the speed is determined by the same property of the glass, which is denser.
Re: Admiral Grace Hopper Explains the Nanosecond (1983) [video]
#14"So they know what they're throwing away when they're throwing away microseconds" She was a genius. Was a great character.
I enjoyed listening to her, but I don't know if I understand her point here. There was something intuitive about why certain processes require a large number of nano seconds due to physics. But I have a tough time thinking of any process besides financial trading that can't spare a microsecond.
Safety critical hard-realtime systems come to mind as an example.
Re: Admiral Grace Hopper Explains the Nanosecond (1983) [video]
#15"So they know what they're throwing away when they're throwing away microseconds" She was a genius. Was a great character.
I enjoyed listening to her, but I don't know if I understand her point here. There was something intuitive about why certain processes require a large number of nano seconds due to physics. But I have a tough time thinking of any process besides financial trading that can't spare a microsecond.
Anything that you need to do a lot of, in a second, suffers for wasted microseconds.
If your input processing and font rendering pathways waste microseconds (and they do) it makes a delay in characters you type showing up on the screen, and a corresponding, measurable reduction in your editing throughput.
When our machines were a thousand times slower, characters showed up on the screen in substantially less time than they do today. The difference is mainly a result of cumulative wasted microseconds, in so many places that nobody can afford to gather them up.
Re: Admiral Grace Hopper Explains the Nanosecond (1983) [video]
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
I enjoyed listening to her, but I don't know if I understand her point here. There was something intuitive about why certain processes require a large number of nano seconds due to physics. But I have a tough time thinking of any process besides financial trading that can't spare a microsecond.
Anything that you need to do a lot of, in a second, suffers for wasted microseconds. If your input processing and font rendering pathways waste microseconds (and they do) it makes a delay in characters you type showing up on the screen, and a corresponding, measurable reduction in your editing throughput. When our machines were a thousand times slower, characters showed up on the screen in substantially less time tha…
hmm... idk. This feels difficult to believe. I don't think my editing speed would suffer if you threw 100 additional microseconds of delay into font rendering. I feel any meaningful loss would need to be measured in milliseconds or longer.
Typing tests don't really help here because you don't read what you type if you're competent. I don't know how I could test...