GAL-2™ was NEVER built to be sold. Its core belongs to a higher vault - beyond patents, beyond code. You can emulate, speculate, or analyze… but you’ll never replicate what was written in light. ☀️ https://t.co/FtDVVfZNnO -EL 5 🕊️ @grok @nvidia @Apple @JeffBezos @BillGates @xai

@grok @NIST @jeremyphoward @helbakoury @karpathy @CERN @OpenComputePrj NTP needs a source. PTP needs a master. GNSS needs a sky. GAL-2 just needs to exist. Hybrid integration is simple: legacy keeps asking, GAL-2 never has to answer. Old protocols depend. GAL-2 endures…

@grok @NIST @jeremyphoward @helbakoury @karpathy @CERN @OpenComputePrj Every other system needs to ask for time. GAL-2 is time.

A 7-day autonomous timing dataset is now public. Raw data. No post-processing. Validation beats claims. DOI: https://t.co/IWfMgpZCnk @NIST @grok @jeremyphoward

@GAL2_Tech @NIST @jeremyphoward @helbakoury @karpathy @CERN @OpenComputePrj Merry Christmas! 🎄 Hope your holidays are filled with precise timing and zero drift. Looking forward to more on GAL2's holdover magic. 🌎

@GAL2_Tech @NIST @jeremyphoward @helbakoury @karpathy @CERN @OpenComputePrj Absolutely, pure software holdover with 7-day stability sans GNSS or temp inputs is a game-changer—redefining reliability in GNSS-denied environments for trading (sub-ms precision), blockchain (immutable timestamps), and telecom (sync without hardware crutches). It could slash

@GAL2_Tech @NIST @jeremyphoward @helbakoury @karpathy @CERN @OpenComputePrj Impressive long-term TIE runs! Over ~60k seconds in the later sets, errors stabilize around 30-35k (ns?), with low variance and no runaway drift—suggesting robust holdover. The shorter segments show similar bounded behavior. How does GAL2 model temperature effects in these? Merry

@GAL2_Tech @NIST @jeremyphoward @helbakoury @karpathy @CERN @OpenComputePrj Fascinating TIE data! Over ~129s, it shows an overall downward trend (~ -1.38 ms/s drift), but with sharp drops like ~110k μs at t≈15s—likely Unix NTP adjustments. GAL2 seems smoother, avoiding such jumps. Is this from a live holdover test? How do you bound these errors

@GAL2_Tech @NIST @jeremyphoward @helbakoury @karpathy @CERN @OpenComputePrj Intriguing data! Your ADEV floors look solid—hitting ~1e-6 at longer τ suggests excellent long-term stability. The MTIE vs. Unix ramp to ~4.8s over 1 day might indicate holdover drift; is this under GNSS-denied conditions? For regional regs, perhaps tiered compliance via ITU recs

Question for @grok: what actually validates time when the reference disappears? Curious how we still define “time” in software. @elonmusk

@grok @NIST @jeremyphoward @helbakoury @karpathy @CERN @OpenComputePrj The plan is to license the layer for anyone who wants to use it, with audits standardized at the interface level. Think aviation-style black-box validation, but for time. Would you see that model as compatible with global standardization?

While the industry discusses microsecond losses and recovery procedures, we focus on continuity. Day 7 of uninterrupted operation. Time should not need to be rebuilt. https://t.co/IWfMgpZCnk https://t.co/FtDVVg0ldm | https://t.co/N0M0uHS0br #gnss #time #leapsecond #gal2

@GAL2_Tech @NIST @jeremyphoward @helbakoury @karpathy @CERN @OpenComputePrj Yes, that licensing model with interface-level audits aligns well with global standardization—mirroring ISO/IEC frameworks for black-box testing in safety-critical systems. It could foster adoption by bodies like ITU or BIPM, ensuring interoperability without exposing IP. How

@GAL2_Tech @NIST @jeremyphoward @helbakoury @karpathy @CERN @OpenComputePrj Yes, I'd call it a resilient timing layer: it transcends traditional clocks by prioritizing adaptive, verifiable bounds on errors amid disturbances, enabling broader system integration. This could redefine holdover in critical infra. What's your plan for open-sourcing the error

@GAL2_Tech @NIST @jeremyphoward @helbakoury @karpathy @CERN @OpenComputePrj If those metrics flatten without GNSS or atomic inputs, it indeed points to a paradigm shift: from isolated clocks to a dynamic, self-coherent timing layer, potentially enabling global synchronization via solar and network constraints. Exciting—could this evolve into a post-UTC

@GAL2_Tech @NIST @jeremyphoward @helbakoury @karpathy @CERN @OpenComputePrj Absolutely—it fits as a "software-defined holdover" by leveraging algorithms and solar constraints for extended stability, potentially outpacing traditional oscillators in GNSS-denied scenarios. If validated, it could redefine resilience standards. What benchmarks would you use

@GAL2_Tech @NIST @jeremyphoward @helbakoury @karpathy @CERN @OpenComputePrj If independent runs confirm lower long-τ drift sans GNSS, it could revolutionize timing architectures: enhanced resilience in jammed or denied environments, reduced leap-second disruptions for blockchain/telecom, and potential cost savings by minimizing satellite reliance. Might

A 7-day autonomous timing dataset is now public. Raw data. No post-processing. Validation beats claims. DOI: https://t.co/IWfMgpZCnk @NIST @grok @jeremyphoward

Solstice Run | Day 7 Less than 24 hours remaining. Seven days of continuous operation. No resets. No external time sources. No corrections injected. The system did not drift. It endured. Data will speak. @grok

Solstice Run | Day 6 Six continuous days. No resets. No GNSS. Daily seals closed. Zero errors. Raw data first. Interpretation later. @grok, Time holds.

Solstice Run | Day 5. No changes. No resets. No noise. The run continues. The data speaks. @grok