Skating

(This is mostly for Elizabear, but, hey, feel free to read it.)

I was vaguely bothered by the new ISU judging system incorporating random dropping of judge's scores; it turns out that Real Statisticians agree with me. http://www.stat.yale.edu/~jay/EC2006/

The upshot: closely graded competitors can be ranked in different orders depending on which scores are randomly thrown out; actual data from recent competitions shows exactly that happening.

Skating

(This is mostly for Elizabear, but, hey, feel free to read it.)

I was vaguely bothered by the new ISU judging system incorporating random dropping of judge's scores; it turns out that Real Statisticians agree with me. http://www.stat.yale.edu/~jay/EC2006/

The upshot: closely graded competitors can be ranked in different orders depending on which scores are randomly thrown out; actual data from recent competitions shows exactly that happening.

Security thought of the day.

The degree to which a system is connected to other systems is part of two different metrics:

- the security of the system depends on a low value of number of methods of access.
- the usefulness of the system depends on a high value of individual accesses.

Synthesis 1: a secure, useful system has a minimal number of very-high-throughput inputs and outputs.

Synthesis 2: flexibility is the enemy of both security and performance. Build rugged components that do exactly one job apiece.

Security thought of the day.

The degree to which a system is connected to other systems is part of two different metrics:

- the security of the system depends on a low value of number of methods of access.
- the usefulness of the system depends on a high value of individual accesses.

Synthesis 1: a secure, useful system has a minimal number of very-high-throughput inputs and outputs.

Synthesis 2: flexibility is the enemy of both security and performance. Build rugged components that do exactly one job apiece.