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…)
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…)
They’re not protecting ‘a’ secret. They’re protecting their copy of the secret.
So while you get X more work, you get X more copies to protect. So you’re actually losing ground.
my favorite answer so far. it is exactly what i meant but i did not realize that it being the same secret (which is technically just half implied by the grammar i think) is what breaks the dynamics.
if it’s 1000 different secrets, then it kind of works but only if the guesser knows/assumes the distribution is uniform. (if it’s the same secret then the guesser knows it’s the same secret then that’s the extreme, maybe a “degenerate” case, like having 1000 doors to one bank.)
You’re getting near a description of Merkle’s Puzzles, one of the earlier versions of public key cryptography. If you like thinking about this stuff I think it’s a fun read.