I can't watch the video because the wifi here is sketchy, but I believe there should be a comma between "one benchmark" and "six hundred milliseconds".

I was out with a group after the session and someone asked Chandler what he meant. He said that 600 ms is a reasonable number for when things start to seem slow. If you compile a source file, it should take 600 ms. Compiling any faster doesn't make a difference. If it takes longer than 600 ms it feels slow.

Of course Chandler is wrong. Because the people who believe 60 FPS is the "correct" resolution will insist that any latency over 17 ms is torturous. And the 30 FPS crowd are right, they'll tell you that 34 ms is the limit. The first hard disk had an average seek time of 600 ms: it was damned slow. People who generate vehicle braking distance charts will insist that no matter how quickly you can react you're gonna kill yourself if you drive too close to the car ahead of you. And they're right. Like Chandler. Everybody is right.

I agree with Chandler: 600 ms is a nice benchmark to shoot for when you're talking about something that doesn't have a GUI. I don't believe he was talking about a specific benchmark as in a piece of code. It's just a nice target maximum latency.