That's such an odd way to use units. Why would you do 10^56 * 10^-9 seconds?

This was my thought. Nanoseconds are an eternity. You want to be using Planck units for your worst-case analysis.

If you go far beyond nanoseconds, energy becomes a limiting factor. You can only achieve ultra-fast processing if you dedicate vast amounts of matter to heat dissipation and energy generation. Think on a galactic scale: you cannot have even have molecular reaction speeds occurring at femtosecond or attosecond speeds constantly and everywhere without overheating everything.

	▲	lisper 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Maybe. It's not clear whether these are fundamental limits or merely technological ones. Reversible (i.e. infinitely efficient) computing is theoretically possible.

▲

magicalhippo an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Nanoseconds is a natural unit for processors operating around a GHz, as it's roughly the time of a clock cycle.

If a CPU takes 4 cycles to generate a UUID and the CPU runs at 4 GHz it churns out one every nanosecond.