darrin

The L1 path can't do any address matching and you can't overlap sources - like Ghostbusters, no crossing the streams. You can source port 1 to ports 2-4 (multicast, but static and unidirectional) and you can change a bidir connection between pairs of ports. The signal gets replicated regardless of what's in the frame. It wouldn't be practical to make it behave quite like an L2 switch.

They're more like digital patch panels. You can connect any pair of ports together in both directions (TX/RX), just like moving a patch cable around. You can also connect an incoming RX lane to multiple TX lanes (think optical splitter but electrical). You cannot merge signals together. Some products have FPGAs that add L2+ or multiplexing functionality with packet buffers, but that's not part of the 2-5ns path.

There are L1 crosspoint "switches" in the 2-5ns range depending on port density and similar modes in some Ethernet silicon. These are not Ethernet switches in any normal sense though. They only replicate the signal 1:1 or 1:n and do not dynamically switch the destination based on anything in the packet. The fastest L3 Ethernet switches on the market are ~90ns.

When I was at a small IT consulting shop ~15 years ago, this is roughly how it worked. We'd get paid 24x7 for a week on-call at minimum wage + 1.5x normal wage for any hours we had to log in.

Hollow core fiber (HCF) is designed to substantially reduce the latency of normal fiber while maintaining equivalent bandwidth. It's been deployed quite a bit for low latency trading applications within a metro area, but might find more uses in reducing long-haul interconnect latency.

Timestamps and other types of in-band network telemetry are sometimes inserted in the frame as a trailer (with a new FCS). If an application isn't looking for the L2 data, it's just ignored by the Linux IP stack.

What's the company? I've wanted to outsource dealing with medical billing games a few times.

What was their reasoning for not paying out?

There's no broader market for beef? Is there a higher break-even point factoring in transport costs?

A bonus based on risk-adjusted outcomes would put pay in alignment with patient care. This would require much better outcome analysis and reporting though (also a good thing).

Adding this sort of friction would increase spreads. Market makers are a net positive for markets (who buys/sells when no one else wants to?), and I don't see any downside to allowing them to manage risk and trade quickly. I think the way to increase fairness is to change the way orders are matched.

The best solution I've seen is to do batch auctions every millisecond or so, and randomize matches within that window (for market orders or limit orders at the same price). You could use a longer window to include slower players in the market.

Even a 1-2 millisecond batch auction would do it. But the big trading firms are the largest "customers" of exchanges, and they've pushed back hard on proposals like this.

It would be interesting if all research and advances based on PHI were automatically public domain. Sort of like the GPL - any derivatives, treatment discoveries, etc. must also be open. There would probably be too many loopholes to cover effectively, but it's a thought.

If all insurance companies published all the code combinations covered for every procedure/diagnosis, I might buy this argument. But they don't. I've asked Blue Cross and they said they don't disclose those details. Many billing codes are open to some interpretation. So if insurance companies aren't transparent about what codes are or are not covered, why are the doctors' offices at fault when something is denied? Why isn't the default response from every insurer "code X isn't covered in combination with code Y. <some clarifying questions, explanation, and related codes>"? Why is it a black box?

The required continuing education is pretty limited. It may cover new treatment strategies, drugs, etc. but not cutting-edge research unless the physician seeks that out. In emergency medicine (where I have some friends), continuing education doesn't include new procedures. Some of my friends have had much more senior docs ask to be taught a new procedure or technique that didn't exist when they were in residency. Many older docs don't seek out new knowledge (no one is forcing them to), and end up just doing what they've always done. The continuing education system does exist, but it's far from perfect.

Did you have a number worked out (or something like a multiple) before diving into due diligence?

Wouldn't the simple solution be to guarantee a minimum hourly rate from the time a driver accepts the ride to the drop-off? Uber would have an incentive to be efficient (find closer drivers, get more drivers on the road) and drivers wouldn't worry about the 45min-$5-ride problem. If the ride is profitable on its own, there's no change. If there are no close drivers for a short ride, the ride would (and should) cost more.

UPS Store or a Fedex equivalent. Looks like their address is a FedEx location.

What program is that? Is that something Epic/Cerner/whatever does, or some add-on?

How do you price a product like that before it has a track record? I'd imagine a high up-front sticker price is a deal killer, and it's probably not practical to tie it to profit (which may have too many other factors in it anyway).

QoS needs to be configured on the ISP's network to really work. Your home router can only impact your outbound traffic, not the bottleneck on your inbound traffic 4 routers up.

Options are sometimes more liquid than the underlying stocks, allowing you to hedge when you wouldn't be able to directly. Consider a case where you want to short a particular stock. Shorting a stock requires borrowing it first, but some stocks may simply not have many people willing to lend. Often you can still get puts on hard-to-borrow instruments to hedge your position. There will be a premium for that insurance, but it may be worth it depending on your position.

Options also allow you to bet on more specific stock movements. Maybe there's a merger rumor and you think the stock will either go up (merger goes through) or down (merger fails). You couldn't make that bet with a static position on the underlying, but you could buy a put and a call (straddle).

Yes, TCP will reorder if necessary, but that will introduce some delay and overhead at the host. The missing sequence number (the out of order frame) will cause queuing as TCP waits for it to arrive or requests retransmit, so keeping streams in order in the network is more efficient.