The Two General's Problem

penny wrote:Apparently like Captain Kirk the MA doesn’t believe in a no win scenario. Reminds me of the Kobayashi Maru test. Kirk is the only cadet who beat the test by reprogramming the simulator to change the variables. Similarly, the MA changed the variables by developing the streak drive.

Dal beat the test too (after failing 100 times), by doing really unexpected and unorthodox actions (barrel rolls, ejecting the warp core, etc.) that the Klingons left - see the Prodigy episode "Kobayashi". In the expanded universe, Nog also beat the test by trying to negotiate with the Klingons and buy passage for the freighter.

Apparently neither of you have correctly digested The Two Generals’ Problem because you keep moving the goalposts. Read the Wiki link that I supplied in the opening post again.

In a nutshell. Two Generals’ (A1) and (A2) need to communicate with each other. But they need to send a courier through enemy territory represented by (B2).

tlb wrote: ...that still leaves the other two points of failure.

The classical two points of failure do not exist!


The classical two points of failure are...

1. The messenger enters enemy territory enroute to the other general.

2. The messenger enters enemy territory upon his return with confirmation of receipt through enemy territory.

Having exclusive access to the iota and kappa bands the messenger will not encounter the enemy because he does not have to travel through enemy territory.

As a result, all of the classical points of failure inherent in the original problem have been eliminated. All of the classical points of failure which are the main concerns of the original problem anyway.

No third point of failure has ever existed – even in the computer simulation, original problem -- because both generals are encamped outside of enemy territory.

This is more true in the iota and kappa bands where each general is camped out outside of enemy territory inside the iota and kappa bands. The entire trip that the messenger has to make is all contained inside the iota and kappa bands where none of the classic problems exist. So no failure points exist! Period!

It is true that unforeseen problems can still crop up. Like the messenger suffering a heart attack, decides to defect, falls asleep at the wheel or is eaten by a giant amoeba. But none of those problems are realistic and are likely.; nor are they spelled out in the original problem. But any solution MUST take those possibilities, however remote, into consideration. Which is why each solution features a redundant messenger. You send two messengers. In case one gets diarrhea or is eaten by a giant amoeba.

Let’s be clear. The MAN’s messenger cannot be captured because he NEVER enters enemy territory!!!

The operation can still fail because both forces can be captured when they attack. That becomes the only two points of failure that exist. As was the case with one of the forces, Filareta, when he came out of hyper and attacked. But that was a failure of the SLN’s OpSec and not a failure of the solution to The Two Generals' Problem; which was the SLN’s dispatch boat.

If the hapless SLN can solve The Two Generals' Problem then surely Alphas can.

Moreover, if the haphazard poorly maintained SLN's ships do not fail then surely the MAN's messenger's mode of transportation will not fail.

Note: Who says that the streak drive has a MTBF that is lower than conventional warships? Text?

penny wrote:Note: Who says that the streak drive has a MTBF that is lower than conventional warships? Text?

Who says it does not? The harder equipment is pushed, the quicker it fails. So military grade spaceship equipment gets rougher usage than commercial grade and fails faster; therefore this brute force hyper-generator will likely fail quicker than regular military grade generators. And since it is so much newer, do they even have a handle on what the expected lifetime is or how quickly failure occurs? Do you really think that it will last forever?

You were bragging about how the Alphas had changed the rules to completely beat the Two Generals' Problem and we pointed out failure points. Now you say those are not part of a computer communication discussion, so do not count. No, but they are part of using physical couriers to communicate in wartime; so people have to deal with it.

penny wrote:Apparently neither of you have correctly digested The Two Generals’ Problem because you keep moving the goalposts. Read the Wiki link that I supplied in the opening post again.

In a nutshell. Two Generals’ (A1) and (A2) need to communicate with each other. But they need to send a courier through enemy territory represented by (B2).

tlb wrote: ...that still leaves the other two points of failure.

The classical two points of failure do not exist!


The classical two points of failure are...

1. The messenger enters enemy territory enroute to the other general.

2. The messenger enters enemy territory upon his return with confirmation of receipt through enemy territory.

Having exclusive access to the iota and kappa bands the messenger will not encounter the enemy because he does not have to travel through enemy territory.

As a result, all of the classical points of failure inherent in the original problem have been eliminated. All of the classical points of failure which are the main concerns of the original problem anyway.

No third point of failure has ever existed – even in the computer simulation, original problem -- because both generals are encamped outside of enemy territory.

This is more true in the iota and kappa bands where each general is camped out outside of enemy territory inside the iota and kappa bands. The entire trip that the messenger has to make is all contained inside the iota and kappa bands where none of the classic problems exist. So no failure points exist! Period!

It is true that unforeseen problems can still crop up. Like the messenger suffering a heart attack, decides to defect, falls asleep at the wheel or is eaten by a giant amoeba. But none of those problems are realistic and are likely.; nor are they spelled out in the original problem. But any solution MUST take those possibilities, however remote, into consideration. Which is why each solution features a redundant messenger. You send two messengers. In case one gets diarrhea or is eaten by a giant amoeba.

Let’s be clear. The MAN’s messenger cannot be captured because he NEVER enters enemy territory!!!

The operation can still fail because both forces can be captured when they attack. That becomes the only two points of failure that exist. As was the case with one of the forces, Filareta, when he came out of hyper and attacked. But that was a failure of the SLN’s OpSec and not a failure of the solution to The Two Generals' Problem; which was the SLN’s dispatch boat.

If the hapless SLN can solve The Two Generals' Problem then surely Alphas can.

Moreover, if the haphazard poorly maintained SLN's ships do not fail then surely the MAN's messenger's mode of transportation will not fail.

Note: Who says that the streak drive has a MTBF that is lower than conventional warships? Text?

Oh, if that's the only bar you wanted to clear (the most literal form of the problem; whether an enemy can stop the courier) you don't need Alphas and the Streak drive. The realities of hyperspace almost give you that automatically.

Outside of some really rare scenarios (like the Selker Rift) you need detailed intelligence on the timing and route of a ship in any hyperspace band to have any hope of intercepting it. So any two dispersed naval forces are already in the situation that any courier sent between them is almost certainly going to get through (and if it doesn't that's far more likely to be from human or mechanical issues with the crew and ship than from enemy action. But the risk that one force will have had to move, so the courier can't find them, is actually far higher than either).

So adding the ability to access a couple more bands of hyperspace barely changes that risk -- because, on a practical level, going from a, say, 1 in a million to a 1 in a trillion chance of interception hardly matters.

----
It's still a non-zero risk because a streak drive still has to pass through all the lower bands on its way up to or down from the Kappa bands; so there's still some tiny residual non-zero chance it might emerge in one of them near a hostile ship.

tlb wrote:

penny wrote:Note: Who says that the streak drive has a MTBF that is lower than conventional warships? Text?

Who says it does not? The harder equipment is pushed, the quicker it fails. So military grade spaceship equipment gets rougher usage than commercial grade and fails faster; therefore this brute force hyper-generator will likely fail quicker than regular military grade generators. And since it is so much newer, do they even have a handle on what the expected lifetime is or how quickly failure occurs? Do you really think that it will last forever?

You were bragging about how the Alphas had changed the rules to completely beat the Two Generals' Problem and we pointed out failure points. Now you say those are not part of a computer communication discussion, so do not count. No, but they are part of using physical couriers to communicate in wartime; so people have to deal with it.

1. Who says it does?

2. Who says the hyper generator is pushed hard?

Who says that a brute force hyper generator is straining the hyper generator? I assumed that brute force simply refers to deploying a larger hyper generator to get the job done. Like using a sledge hammer to drive a nail. Using a sledgehammer to drive a nail sure as hell ain’t straining the sledgehammer.

Why do you always have a need to vilify me. I wish you’d stop. I ain’t bragging. I didn’t develop the tech. I am simply sharing my observations, as everyone else does. I suppose I can brag about seeing what Alphas see because I am an Alpha too. At any rate, bragging rights are all the Malign’s.

Please stop your vendetta against me. You says none exist. If that is true, where does your consistent need to villify me for sharing my observations come from?

Warning to the forum. The incessant hacking continues. Oftentimes after finally connecting to the site after many trials and tribulations, I can search through the threads without problems. Mostly. As soon as I log in everything freezes. I often have to log back out. Oftentimes I have to enter my password several times. That caused me to lose access to my cthia account. After I log out I see several instances of the site. I grow weary. My participation in the forum is going to come to an end. I grow weary of fighting the forum and tlb too.

I hate to do it but participating is no longer the fun it has been for years. When I disappear I have several friends who ring me up and tell me the forum has stagnated. I hate to leave it all up to Theemile to try and get things rolling again. It is a task that I don’t mind having on my shoulders when all wlse is fair in love and chatting. It no longer is.

If you simply don't care then you are selfish because there are those who do.

penny wrote:Why do you always have a need to vilify me. I wish you’d stop. I ain’t bragging. I didn’t develop the tech. I am simply sharing my observations, as everyone else does. I suppose I can brag about seeing what Alphas see because I am an Alpha too. At any rate, bragging rights are all the Malign’s.

Please stop your vendetta against me. You says none exist. If that is true, where does your consistent need to villify me for sharing my observations come from?

What vilification? I disagree with some of the things you post, just as I have disagreed with ThinksMarkedly and others. If I disagree with you more often, it is because you post more often.

People post things on the forum and others either post agreements or disagreements. Either should be expected and neither should be taken personally.

As for bragging rights, you must realize that the author will have Honor's side prevail and the Malign's side totally fail. The Alphas in the stories do brag and the result is foretold:

Pride goeth before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.

tlb wrote:

penny wrote:Why do you always have a need to vilify me. I wish you’d stop. I ain’t bragging. I didn’t develop the tech. I am simply sharing my observations, as everyone else does. I suppose I can brag about seeing what Alphas see because I am an Alpha too. At any rate, bragging rights are all the Malign’s.

Please stop your vendetta against me. You says none exist. If that is true, where does your consistent need to villify me for sharing my observations come from?

What vilification? I disagree with some of the things you post, just as I have disagreed with ThinksMarkedly and others. If I disagree with you more often, it is because you post more often.

People post things on the forum and others either post agreements or disagreements. Either should be expected and neither should be taken personally.

As for bragging rights, you must realize that the author will have Honor's side prevail and the Malign's side totally fail. The Alphas in the stories do brag and the result is foretold:

Pride goeth before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.

Yes the GA will win. Did you really think you needed to say that? I am simply pointing out that it won't be a cakewalk. And I have said it before. Totally destroyed ain't gonna happen.

But whatever.

Yes, you have disagreed with other posters but I have NEVER seen you disrespect, resort to name-calling or use foul language with them.

In this latest example you accuse me of being a braggart when I am only pointing out the advantages of the MAN’s tech that I see.

A braggart, a creator of fanfic, a chastiser, etc., you have accused me of. And used foul language like bullshit toward one of my posts that I simply ignored since you removed it anyway.

I knew this would be your response. Just like many athletes who get called for a foul when the referee calls them out. “Who me? What did I do?”

I knew that post would cause the hacker to react. As soon as I posted it I lost internet access.

I have a couple more posts in progress. Then I will go from there.

If you haven’t noticed I’ve brought forth several threads to leave as entertainment. This week was supposed to be my last.

I won’t waste any more time on this and I apology to those of you who must endure it. I wanted to let all of you know why it is if I no longer choose to participate.

penny wrote:Apparently neither of you have correctly digested The Two Generals’ Problem because you keep moving the goalposts. Read the Wiki link that I supplied in the opening post again.

In a nutshell. Two Generals’ (A1) and (A2) need to communicate with each other. But they need to send a courier through enemy territory represented by (B2).

tlb wrote: ...that still leaves the other two points of failure.

The classical two points of failure do not exist!


The classical two points of failure are...

1. The messenger enters enemy territory enroute to the other general.

2. The messenger enters enemy territory upon his return with confirmation of receipt through enemy territory.

Having exclusive access to the iota and kappa bands the messenger will not encounter the enemy because he does not have to travel through enemy territory.

As a result, all of the classical points of failure inherent in the original problem have been eliminated. All of the classical points of failure which are the main concerns of the original problem anyway.

No third point of failure has ever existed – even in the computer simulation, original problem -- because both generals are encamped outside of enemy territory.

This is more true in the iota and kappa bands where each general is camped out outside of enemy territory inside the iota and kappa bands. The entire trip that the messenger has to make is all contained inside the iota and kappa bands where none of the classic problems exist. So no failure points exist! Period!

It is true that unforeseen problems can still crop up. Like the messenger suffering a heart attack, decides to defect, falls asleep at the wheel or is eaten by a giant amoeba. But none of those problems are realistic and are likely.; nor are they spelled out in the original problem. But any solution MUST take those possibilities, however remote, into consideration. Which is why each solution features a redundant messenger. You send two messengers. In case one gets diarrhea or is eaten by a giant amoeba.

Let’s be clear. The MAN’s messenger cannot be captured because he NEVER enters enemy territory!!!

The operation can still fail because both forces can be captured when they attack. That becomes the only two points of failure that exist. As was the case with one of the forces, Filareta, when he came out of hyper and attacked. But that was a failure of the SLN’s OpSec and not a failure of the solution to The Two Generals' Problem; which was the SLN’s dispatch boat.

If the hapless SLN can solve The Two Generals' Problem then surely Alphas can.

Moreover, if the haphazard poorly maintained SLN's ships do not fail then surely the MAN's messenger's mode of transportation will not fail.

Note: Who says that the streak drive has a MTBF that is lower than conventional warships? Text?

Jonathan_S wrote:Oh, if that's the only bar you wanted to clear (the most literal form of the problem; whether an enemy can stop the courier) you don't need Alphas and the Streak drive. The realities of hyperspace almost give you that automatically.

Outside of some really rare scenarios (like the Selker Rift) you need detailed intelligence on the timing and route of a ship in any hyperspace band to have any hope of intercepting it. So any two dispersed naval forces are already in the situation that any courier sent between them is almost certainly going to get through (and if it doesn't that's far more likely to be from human or mechanical issues with the crew and ship than from enemy action. But the risk that one force will have had to move, so the courier can't find them, is actually far higher than either).

So adding the ability to access a couple more bands of hyperspace barely changes that risk -- because, on a practical level, going from a, say, 1 in a million to a 1 in a trillion chance of interception hardly matters.

My point is that the streak drive reduces the risk to absolutely zero! Unless a giant amoeba gets hungry.

Jonathan_S wrote:----
It's still a non-zero risk because a streak drive still has to pass through all the lower bands on its way up to or down from the Kappa bands; so there's still some tiny residual non-zero chance it might emerge in one of them near a hostile ship.

And why would a GA ship fire on a dispatch boat under any circumstance? Especially in hyper. The DB simply continues on and squirts its message.

penny wrote:I suppose I can brag about seeing what Alphas see because I am an Alpha too. At any rate, bragging rights are all the Malign’s.

penny wrote:Yes, you have disagreed with other posters but I have NEVER seen you disrespect, resort to name-calling or use foul language with them.

In this latest example you accuse me of being a braggart when I am only pointing out the advantages of the MAN’s tech that I see.

A braggart, a creator of fanfic, a chastiser, etc., you have accused me of. And used foul language like bullshit toward one of my posts that I simply ignored since you removed it anyway.

I accused the Alphas in the stories of being braggarts and in your post you said you were an Alpha and could brag about your seeing as they see. So that is a self-own.

Can the registry of a DB be determined in hyper? Especially if it isn't broadcasting its registry in hyper. Which I doubt is galactic law. And not enough justification even if it is law.

Then there is the redundant messenger.