On 08/08/12 16:45, Bill Richter wrote: >> My claim [on whether miz3 is "intentionally weakened"] is based on my >> believing that miz3 imposes a time limit,
> Thus, I conclude that the purpose of the default timeout isn't to weaken > miz3, but to better instruct beginners who, if I'm a representative example, > make scores of obvious errors and need immediate feedback :) I hesitate to speculate about motivation. However, if you're right, it's clear that the goal of instructing beginners is well-served by deliberately weakening miz3 so that it is less able to prove goals. Here's my last attempt. 1. miz3's "by" is designed (i.e., someone intentionally chose to do this) with a time limit. 2. The time limit means that miz3's "by" proves fewer goals than it might without the time limit. 3. A system A that proves fewer things than system B is a "weaker" system than B. 4. So, miz3 is intentionally weakened. Why are we debating this again? Michael ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ hol-info mailing list hol-info@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hol-info
