3 ms·
Given that the distance between Washington and Chicago is ~950km and the speed of light is ~300,000 km/s I have a huge issue with trusting anything in the artic
by pandaman 6y ago
Given that the distance between Washington and Chicago is ~950km and the speed of light is ~300,000 km/s I have a huge issue with trusting anything in the article which starts with " It takes seven milliseconds for this information to get to Chicago. ". It appears that 3ms for that trip is quite plausible, while 2ms is not. Given the opening misinformation and the whole "2-3ms" phrasing (why not exact timing of the earliest order, could 3.5ms be "2-3ms"? could 3.9ms?) the most plausible assumption that it's one of the early specimen of so-called "fake news".
- coolgeek 6y agoEven if the information got to Chicago in 3ms, you would still need time to process the information and generate a response. So trading on the information, from Chicago, 2-3ms after its release in DC seems implausible, if not impossible
- pandaman 6y agoSure, but how much time is needed to process that information? As far as I understand in this case it was a single bit (change rate yes/no). What is the minimum time you think is plausible for 1bit throughput?