[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: [tor-relays] Proper bandwidth units [was: Exit nodes on Gandi]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Yes, it can. The program can spend the processor time to run that
> extra instruction set. Do we actually need or want that? Would it
> be worth spending the cpu time in exchange for just a miniscule
> effort to do it ourselves?
Are you really arguing something like 1000 cycles on a modern
processor (so, what, a microsecond, tops) vs 5 minutes of human effort?
Is this maybe an example of why crypto software UX is almost
- -Gordon M.
> On Tuesday, November 26, 2013 3:53:25 PM, Gordon Morehouse wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
>> Travis Northrup:
>>>> This argument (Mbit/s versus GiB/month) reminds me of the
>>>> old saw about the most useless unit of velocity
>>>> (furlongs/fortnight instead of m/sec).
>>> I know exactly what you mean. Personally, I consider any change
>>> to be a convenience modification only. In reality the only
>>> current differences are in defining storage rate and traffic
>>> rate (1024/1000 respectively) and its defined in bits. From
>>> there all conversions are simple math that should be operator
>> Why, when the config file can be liberal in what it accepts in
>> the numerator, and in the denominator (seconds, days, weeks, mean
>> Calculating numbers is a job for a computer.
>> Best, - -Gordon M.
> _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing
> list tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent from my thing that sends email.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
tor-relays mailing list