Example of a garbage HN drive-by comment: this. I've spent a _long time_ working in distributed systems with components which are "close to the metal". There a

Example of a garbage HN drive-by comment: this. I've spent a _long time_ working in distributed systems with components which are "close to the metal". There are use cases for this, many of which are better solved by "hardware timestamping NICs" and "run a stratum 1/2 NTP server with high locality (and if you're geo-distributed, run multiple on systems dedicated to that purpose, because ensuring you're within nanoseconds of _someone else's_ infrastructure is generally an order or magnitude less important than internal coherence). That was the best possible quote from the author/subject trying to explain the use cases. Did you even read TFA? It's completely unclear from their article what the intended uses cases are, what the problem space is, and how much working knowledge they have of existing solutions. Naming people who invested in other companies who are investing in this one and showing what looks like a dashboard for a timekeeping solution is normal TechCrunch garbage, but that quote was a step above. Comments like yours (going all the way back to /.) days really just tell me that you didn't read the article, and it makes it look like your primary goal is sophistry.