Live data from Hacker News

Janet Jackson had the power to crash laptop computers (2022)

devblogs.microsoft.com

41–50 of 128 posts

Re: Janet Jackson had the power to crash laptop computers (2022)

#41
Related. Others?

Janet Jackson had the power to crash laptop computers (2022) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41534483 - Sept 2024 (79 comments)

Janet Jackson had the power to crash laptop computers - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32483211 - Aug 2022 (12 comments)

Re: Janet Jackson had the power to crash laptop computers (2022)

#42
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The platters used to be coated with iron oxide as the magnetic coating. Modern ones use more exotic materials.

Yes but that was like 40 years ago. I think by now the phraseology should reflect reality after about forty years.

How many horsepower does your car have?

Re: Janet Jackson had the power to crash laptop computers (2022)

#43

> certain models Why the weasel words? Does Raymond Chen not know which models? Or is it actually apocryphal.

He genuinely might not know. I worked on a similar incident when our video encoder caused about 30% of a pretty mainstream mobile handset to hard lock when recieving a stream, requiring the battery to be removed to reboot the device. Neither us nor the OEM ever figured out why. They suspected that it was a weird combination of different bin combinations from different parts, but ultimately we had to change the method…

The Dutch broadcasting service hired me to figure out why their homepage was crashing browsers. I turned out to be an animated GIF of two speakers that had an extra 0 interval frame in it which caused IE to crash... it doesn't take much.

Re: Janet Jackson had the power to crash laptop computers (2022)

#44
post #36

https://everything2.com/title/7+hertz+-+the+resonant+frequen... Example (for both functions): /* Emits a 7-Hz tone for 10 seconds. True story: 7 Hz is the resonant frequency of a chicken's skull cavity. This was determined empirically in Australia, where a new factory generating 7-Hz tones was located too close to a chicken ranch: When the factory started up, all the chickens died. Your PC may not be able to emit a 7…

Not very likely

https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/a/54400

Re: Janet Jackson had the power to crash laptop computers (2022)

#45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HDDs also lose magnetic charge over time, about 1% per year. So you need to periodically spin up and rewrite the data every few years. CD drives however, can store data indefinitely without needing refreshing.

Having had drives which sat for many years and spun right back up without corruption makes me think 1% is too generous maybe 0.05% per year at most

The claim you're responding to is that hard drives lose "magnetic charge" at a rate of 1% per year, not that bits get corrupted at a rate of 1% per year. The error correction in hard drives is far simpler and weaker than what's used in SSDs, but it does exist. So we should expect that there's a significant margin for data degradation before any observable data corruption begins. (This is true for SSDs, too; the first symptom of data degradation is reduced read performance as slower, more complex error correction methods kick in, then much later the host starts to actually get read errors or bad data.)

Re: Janet Jackson had the power to crash laptop computers (2022)

#46
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The platters used to be coated with iron oxide as the magnetic coating. Modern ones use more exotic materials.

Yes but that was like 40 years ago. I think by now the phraseology should reflect reality after about forty years.

We still talk about "bugs" (99+% of computer defects in the past 70+ years have not been caused by insects) and "AJAX" (long after most of these requests use JSON instead of XML).

Re: Janet Jackson had the power to crash laptop computers (2022)

#47
Just a small nitpick: the Tacoma Narrows bridge didn’t collapse because of resonance but because of flutter. It’s a common misconception.

For resonance the external driving force must match the resonance frequency of the system, but wind is rarely/never purely sinusoidal.

Re: Janet Jackson had the power to crash laptop computers (2022)

#48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HDDs also lose magnetic charge over time, about 1% per year. So you need to periodically spin up and rewrite the data every few years. CD drives however, can store data indefinitely without needing refreshing.

Having had drives which sat for many years and spun right back up without corruption makes me think 1% is too generous maybe 0.05% per year at most

The magnetic strength of particles on the disk can decay at 1% per year, but the drive won't have issues reading them until they fall below a threshold where they can no longer be read. It could take decades.

Re: Janet Jackson had the power to crash laptop computers (2022)

#49
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The platters used to be coated with iron oxide as the magnetic coating. Modern ones use more exotic materials.

Yes but that was like 40 years ago. I think by now the phraseology should reflect reality after about forty years.

“Phraseology” is subtly different.

You mean “vocabulary”, “terminology”, possibly “nomenclature”.

Re: Janet Jackson had the power to crash laptop computers (2022)

#50
post #12
post #3

Another reason to step away from spinning rust. Thank dog for SSDs

Technically, that magnetic spinning HDD can work even after decades if maintained safely (no dust, no extreme heat) and without stress, even if it is not switched on for years. In fact, if a magnetic HDD crashes, you may still recover some or all of the data by doing something hardcore, such as letting it sit for some hours in the freezer of your refrigerator, or immersing it in a bowl of rice overnight. However, SSD…

I feel like maybe you didn't understand the meaning of that last bit you quoted from Tom's Hardware. To be clear: the standard for consumer SSDs is 1 year of unpowered data retention after the drive's full write endurance rating has been exhausted.

The experiment Tom's is reporting on found twelve instances of data corruption on a low-end drive that had been subjected to over two thousand full drive writes, four times its rated write endurance, then left on a shelf for two years. This is a demonstration of a bottom of the barrel SSD wildly exceeding expectations.

It's really important in conversations like this to accurately convey not just the existence of the failure mode, but also the realistic chances of running into this problem, and the extent of the problem when it does manifest. If a deliberate torture test can only produce a few kilobytes of data corruption after twice the duration and four times the abuse the drive is supposed to be able to handle, this problem should be described as extremely minor.

Post reply on HN