3 ms·
> The figures (eg $21M) and names dropped (eg Stanford) are an appeal to authority, which does make me curious. They have the 'names' because they are a reputa
by insaneirish 5y ago
> The figures (eg $21M) and names dropped (eg Stanford) are an appeal to authority, which does make me curious.
They have the 'names' because they are a reputable group of people. They have been at this problem for a while, first with extensive research that required clock sync as a pre-requisite, and then to evolving into clock sync as a formidable problem unto itself.
Clockwork is a rename of the company as far as I can tell. Their original name (Tick Tock Networks) [1] was probably too close to what has become a very popular homophone.
[1]: https://opencorporates.com/companies/us_de/6947372 https://opencorporates.com/companies/us_de/6947372
- galeaspablo 5y agoSure, but ‘names’ don’t explain how they do what they claim to do. Another reply kindly provided references to publications (which I couldn’t find myself) — they made for great reading. You seem to know their work, so if you have further publications, I’d love to get them please.
- insaneirish 5y agoHere's a talk Balaji Prabhakar gave: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQSA99nrFEU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQSA99nrFEU. Looks like the clock sync part starts about 30 minutes in. Haven't watched this one, but might be complementary: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Opf9CBwP5R8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Opf9CBwP5R8.