|WikiProject Computing||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
The table at the bottom listing decade of error-correction method introduction is misleading re LDPC codes; while invented/discovered in the 1960s it was not until the 1990s and their rediscovery that technology caught up such that an LDPC system could actually be implemented. Also, LDPC codes and Turbo codes aren't used for soft error detection/correction in the sense that this article implies. I think the table could be removed entirely and nothing be lost from the article.
example of a 1 bit error in memory causing a segfault
maybe this would be a good reference. its a very detailed analysis of a segfault, that turned out to be a 1 bit error in the memory caching a binary file. http://blog.ksplice.com/2010/06/attack-of-the-cosmic-rays/ --220.127.116.11 (talk) 14:52, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
hard vs soft
Is there such a thing as a "hard" error? If so, it would be very natural to mention it, and contrast hard- and soft-errors. For example, the article on Software does something similar:
- The term (Software) was coined to contrast to the old term hardware (meaning physical devices). In contrast to hardware, software is intangible,...
This can't be right: "take a typical computer with a large memory capacity at least 10 years before the radioactive elements of the chip's materials begin to decay." Radioactive materials don't "begin" to decay; they undergo Exponential decay. Unfortunately I'm not sure what the correct statement is in the context. Is there an expert in the house? ALloydFlanagan (talk) 20:42, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
- I'm glad I'm not the only one to notice that; it's just plain wrong. Unfortunately I'm not an expert on memory hardware either. I've removed the problematic sentence. Lower down in the article things get more technical, and it's annoying to have something obviously wrong in the introduction. Wyvern (talk) 15:45, 4 April 2013 (UTC)