[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 18 KB, 319x295, hexagon.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6115149 No.6115149 [Reply] [Original]

5.391x10^68th seconds is how long the laws of physics allow for a yottabyte of information to process at the speed of light.

i call hardcore bullshit and hijinx of the highest degree


am I wrong /sci/?

>> No.6115151

Define process

>> No.6115153

define define

>> No.6115156

>>6115151
well, for a yottabyte to move one plank length. i'm assuming the smallest possible storage allowed by physics.


basically what i'm trying to prove is that the nsa claiming to process yottas is a load of horseshit. because it is.

they may as well have said "a kajillion buhjillion googlebytes"

>> No.6115158

>>6115156
planck*

i swear to god that was a typo

>> No.6115167

5.4e68 seconds is about 1.7e61 years.

Assuming processing is linear, you are saying it takes 1.7e37 years to move 1 byte.

I think you just suck at math

>> No.6115172

>>6115156
yottabyte is 8*10^24 bits
multiply that by plack lenght and you get
1.293×10^-10 meters
which takes only
4.313×10^-19 seconds for light to travel.


>basically what i'm trying to prove is that the nsa claiming to process yottas is a load of horseshit. because it is.
it's not though, they are building one right now

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/03/ff_nsadatacenter/all/

It might be debatable on what the actual capacity is since it's secret project.

>> No.6115184

>>6115167
i think you just suck at reading.

your post makes so little sense it hurts

>> No.6115189

>>6115172
well, on a different note, it seems ridiculous to me... i mean, why? spying? i call bulshit. can't be just spying, even on a prism scale. there are 7 billion people... so 142857 gigs per person? that makes little sense to me.

so if the spy program is a ruse, what are they really using this for?

ideas?

>> No.6115192

>>6115189
It doesn't make sense to you because you didn't read the article or are just conspiracy nut, I would suggest that you move to these premises.
>>>/x/

>> No.6115197

>>6115184
mad because you got told three times?
>so if the spy program is a ruse, what are they really using this for?

oh no wonder, you misclicked >>>/pol/

>> No.6115205

>>6115197
you all produced different results though.

and the article raises more questions than it answers. for example: "oh, well lobal Internet traffic will quadruple from 2010 to 2015, reaching 966 exabytes per year." yeah,because that's a perfectly reasonable explanation as to why you need to process yottabytes of data...

i didn't ask for politics. I am wondering what, besides a spy program, one would need such a thing for.

>> No.6115207

>>6115205
>i didn't ask for politics. I am wondering what, besides a spy program, one would need such a thing for.
>>>/pol/ is not for politics, its for crackpot conspiracy theorists like yourself to masturbate together.

>> No.6115210

I guess a better question to ask is this: let's assume for argument's sake that they were using this to map the galaxy.

to what degree could they map everything, assuming they had the means to take in that kind of info at a time?

or just mapping stars... that is a staggerring amount of data.

couldn't there be a better use than spying?

>> No.6115214

>>6115207
i'm not sure where you're getting conspiracy from, but how about you fuck off with your shithole attitude and take your ass to >>>/b/

if you don't want to be in this thread, no one is twisting your arm.

>> No.6115219

>>6115210
>couldn't there be a better use than spying?

Your shitty premise has already been debunked, see >>6115172, >>6115167.
It doesn't matter whatever bullshit you want to attribute to this and this is certainly not /sci/ related, also stop bumping this, just sage+hide thread.

>> No.6115220

>>6115210
the nsa far over-exaggerrating their capabilities isn't exactly a conspiracy. it's actually fairly likely.

a buddy told me their hardware was leaked to sTORage and it's not "lightyears ahead" of civillian shit. certainly not that far ahead.

>> No.6115224

>>6115219
if you think that in any way has convinced me that what they claim is possible, i don't believe you've thought this through.

assuming bit to planck information storage was probably not the way to illustrate the improbability of them having this. atoms perhaps would have been a better metric.

if it doesn't seem ridiculous to you, i guess i don't know what else to say.

>> No.6115226

>>6115219
everything which exists is /sci/ related, depending on how it is discussed.