I apologize. I should have been clearer.
I mean that if a group of weapons developers, such as, for instance, the Manhattan Project, discovers certain
critical technical data necessary to their weapons, such as, for instance, the critical mass of Pu-239, they will
often prefer that these truths not spread to other groups. For as long as they are able to keep this knowledge
secret, it is indeed a set of truths that makes this set of weapons designers distinct from other groups.
But if other developers are incorrect, then you’d want to be correct; and if other developers are correct, you’d still want to be correct. Put game-theoretically, accuracy strictly dominates inaccuracy. By contrast, isnt’ distinctiveness only good when it doesn’t compromise accuracy?
I apologize. I should have been clearer. I mean that if a group of weapons developers, such as, for instance, the Manhattan Project, discovers certain critical technical data necessary to their weapons, such as, for instance, the critical mass of Pu-239, they will often prefer that these truths not spread to other groups. For as long as they are able to keep this knowledge secret, it is indeed a set of truths that makes this set of weapons designers distinct from other groups.
Oh, I see now. Thanks for clarifying.
But if other developers are incorrect, then you’d want to be correct; and if other developers are correct, you’d still want to be correct. Put game-theoretically, accuracy strictly dominates inaccuracy. By contrast, isnt’ distinctiveness only good when it doesn’t compromise accuracy?