-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Tim wrote:
> Not having read the article, but speculating anyway on the general > point, it may be more than just "cheating." It may be the form of > thinking that encourages probing weaknesses, finding flaws and > loopholes (which is often what "cheating" is), and generally behaving > as a "tiger team" member looking to break in or demolish something. ... > I think there's a connection to this kind of problem-solving and > cheating, and to "getting the juices flowing" and 'thinking outside the > box." Cheating is a kind of "devious" thinking, which is essentially >what thinking outside the box is. I agree; fascinating stuff. Here's a paragraph on deviousness and psychopathy as an adaptive trait you might find interesting: ...we speculate that evolution designed a subspecies of humans who use deception and cheating to get resources from others but do not reciprocate. The key characteristics of such a subspecies ought to be: skill at deception, lack of concern for the suffering of others, ease and flexibility in the exploitation of others, extreme reluctance to be responsible for others (including, in the case of males, their own offspring), and total lack of real concern for the opinion of others. These are psychopathic traits. The point here is that psychopathy is not a disorder because psychopaths (and their mental characteristics) are performing exactly as they were designed by natural selection. According to this view, psychopathy is an adaptation. ... Our theory is that, although nonpsychopaths are capable of some criminal behaviour under the right (wrong) circumstances, psychopaths form a distinct subgroup of humans who use distinct life-long deception reproductive strategies under all circumstances. *** Looks like some people around here are ahead of the curve. "subspecimens of humanity", now theres a thought... > My most productive years of crypto thinking were from 1988 to 1992, > when I figured out a lot of the "undermining" things clued-in readers > know about. > And my best work at Intel was when I was, without any false modesty, > Intel's top "smoke jumper," parachuting in to crisis situations and > bulling my way around looking for weaknesses and points of attack. I >solved a lot of problems by being very sneaky. ... > Must be why some people here are so impressed by my charm. Oh yeah? Did it ever occur to you that they might just have been sneaky and devious enough themselves to figure out what a wily old puff adder like yourself would want to hear? LOL Interesting puzzle--though your handling of the drill-size issue reminds me of a cautionary tale from my modeling and simulation class: Beaming Engineer 1: "You know, I've been working on this all month--I think Ive just invented the worlds most perfect chichen plucking machine!" Doubtful Engineer 2: Really? Engineer One: Surewell, under the assumption that the chickens are perfectly spherical. Though you're right that it's vitally important to find an elegant solution to your problem, gotta watch out for those spherical chickens. I would have thought the thing to do next is choose a range of actual drill bits capable of drilling plutonium, note their properties and create a table of values by working through the equation that way. Oh well. ~Faustine. *** He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself. - --Thomas Paine -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1 (C) 1997-1999 Network Associates, Inc. and its affiliated companies. (Diffie-Helman/DSS-only version) iQA/AwUBPFIQbPg5Tuca7bfvEQLlBwCffg0cenvw+JQipA4OjJ8Oi7rE62oAn285 6dXPvwcsdHxZgls3/j328DKe =vP/Z -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
