Technology
Which posts fit here?
Anything that is at least tangentially connected to the technology, social media platforms, informational technologies and tech policy.
Post guidelines
[Opinion] prefix
Opinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title.
Rules
1. English only
Title and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original link
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communication
All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. Inclusivity
Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacks
Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangents
Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may apply
If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.
Companion communities
!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip
Icon attribution | Banner attribution
If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.
view the rest of the comments
3 is just a small number in this context, you can prevent a conspiracy (of 2), or have a redundancy (of 1), but not at the same time. They choose wrong... It's always a risk when something hinges on a single human individual.
That's actually not true. See the other comment about Shamir Secret Sharing. Very clever stuff where you can split a key in m parts and require n<m of the pieces to get it back.
But with SSS and m=3, n can only be 1, 2 or 3. If n=2 there is a possibility for a conspiracy of 2 and a redundancy of 1, if n=3 then all three have to agree, but there is no redundancy, which was the case here.
Right. Re-reading your comment, I agree. n=3 is too small, even with SSS. BUT without it, 3 was too big in this case. So yey SSS!