I lived through my wife's PhD in education. I helped with the statistics. It was mind curdling stuff. But her thesis had rigor. S-Plus, Excel and everything else doesn't have MANOVAs. R does. We used R.
Right. So you know first hand how ignorant it is to say math and statistics have nothing to with social science.
It wasn't me who said that.
No but he determined the limits of decidability. Keep up please.
Do you not realize that you are running an Operating System, written in a Turing Complete language, and that it is only possible because the other problems can (and have) been addressed? Also:
" Now solve all the other problems without knowing what they are
."
Just because you don't know what they are doesn't mean that they aren't well known and understood.
An operating system has a API through which you communicate with it. Much like a protocol. Of course the compute environment the programs, both kernel and application are turing complete and operating systems and applications have vulnerabilities.
If on the watch, between application and screen, XML is being generated and parsed into DOM like things to render the user interface of the application, web browser stylee, it's no surprise it runs slow.
I may be wrong, but I fear I may not be.
>Sandboxing solves pretty much all other problems.
Like Java and ActiveX?
Because identifying the 10 million and sampling the 1 million will be expensive. Worse, that many people in the class may not exist. If your class is 'residents of Boring, Oregon', there may simply be too few of them to randomize away the confounders and drive the p-value down.
Top tip. If you want to find something in the data, it helps if it sticks out above the noise floor like a sore thumb. If you're having to push the noise floor down with sample size to make something visible, the odds you got something else wrong go up in proportion.
You solved one problem. Now solve all the other problems without knowing what they are. The problem space is undecidably large.
>Also, being Turning-complete is sufficient but not necessary to have this problem
Yes. No argument there. Once free of Turing you can hedge with the simplest possible design. Formal methods may help.
MC is not even willing to use standard things like TLS.
I'm a cryptographic security architect (their name, not mine) for a large techy corporation and I am not willing to use the steaming pile of poo that is TLS. This was a good call on the part of the Minecraft developers. They might not be able to write a good security protocol, but they sure avoided a bad one.
If I succeed in destroying TLS, X.509 and all that goes along with it, replacing it with something sane, I will have succeeded and I can die content.
Personally, I think that Minecraft needs a lot of work. The gameplay itself is pretty good, but it really needs to be reworked in terms of performance and stability. I was hoping that things would change with MS buying it as they could hire more people to work on it, but I don't think they've actually done anything noteworthy with it yet.
I don't know much about game programming, but I know how big corporations work.
1) Buy a company
2) Leave it there doing what it does.
3) Think hard about how to integrate it, use it's technology etc.
4) Do that.
The gap between 2 and 4 can be years.
From what I've read on the minecraft reddit, it seems like there were 2 approaches to exploit this bug.
They patched one and thought that also covered the other, but it didn't and they weren't aware then fast forward 2 years.
It's not a bug. It's a property of Turing complete languages. You cannot show the server will behave for all inputs. Computer science is a bitch sometimes.
Are you sure that the term "well-controlled study" applies, given how you repeatedly used the term "random" when describing this experiment?
Randomness is not compatible with experimental control. Additionally, randomness itself cannot be controlled, because doing so would prevent it from being true randomness.
Quick! Someone is wrong on the internet.
Friends don't let friends put Turing complete languages in communication protocols.
This cannot be fixed in general. The behavior of a Turing complete language executor is formally undecidable over all inputs.
Minecraft (and X.509 certs and HTML 5.0 and SQL and, and, and...) all need to switch to non Turing complete languages if they are to have the option of secureable implementations.
I lived through my wife's PhD in education. I helped with the statistics. It was mind curdling stuff. But her thesis had rigor. S-Plus, Excel and everything else doesn't have MANOVAs. R does. We used R.
One hour warning is ridiculously short. Also - there was no way for the White House to know he was just delivering letters and not a bomb.
Well it was statistically unlikely. 100% of gyrocopter visits to the white house have no been to deliver a bomb.
There really aren't any good ways to measure those other effects. If you knew how your experiment was biased, you'd try and fix it.
Randomized sampling goes a long way, but only if you have a large enough population. This is one of the problems of social sciences. A randomized 10% subsample from 100 subjects ain't gonna cut it. A randomized subsample from 10,000,000 people isn't going to get funded.
"What man has done, man can aspire to do." -- Jerry Pournelle, about space flight
