More people do X makes X more done.

why does it fail so horribly for X = protecting a secret? or does it?

(I’m not 3, by the way…)

  • Paul Skinback@lemmus.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    6 hours ago

    More people protecting the secret means more people know the secret and the more people that know the secret the more likely it is that the secret will be exposed

    • netvor@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      this way of phrasing is reasonable but it feels like those should cancel out. i mean why taking a situation of 1 person protecting a secret and multiplying it by N changes it.

      • netvor@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 hours ago

        oh i got it now.

        if it’s 1000 people protecting 1000 different secrets (each their own) then it does cancel out.

        note that it does get worse if the secret-guesser knows something about the statistical distribution of those secrets, and the value of each secret is kind of interchangeable to them. then things like rainbow tables exist.