3 ms·
They're talking about a horseshoe on a horse which was being used to deliver an important message
by throwaway0123_5 2y ago
They're talking about a horseshoe on a horse which was being used to deliver an important message
- iwontberude 2y agoThere are too many leaps of abstraction, which to me, proves the missing horseshoe nail is irrelevant in the big picture. Too many other things could have transpired positively for the kingdom in a space so expansive. It’s classic scapegoating. “Bro my controller totally didn’t work that time! We would’ve won the match otherwise I promise.”
- throwaway0123_5 2y agoTbh it seems entirely plausible to me that a messenger being unable to deliver an important message could have an outsized effect on that outcome of a battle. What if they're letting their side know about a surprise attack?
- alwa 2y agoSeems also plausible that risks might apply to the messenger that wouldn’t apply to the troops in garrison—that is, the thousands of other horseshoe nails in inventory could have gone unmissed or doomed a less important horse.
- vonneumannstan 2y agoIt's an ancient proverb demonstrating early understanding of complex systems. Not an in depth philosophical argument. However there are plenty of real life examples of a single small detail causing outsize impact. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Airlines_Flight_261 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Airlines_Flight_261 It's kind of absurd to think otherwise.
- shadowgovt 2y agoA more robust treatment of risk factors in both ideas. You want to ask whether the system needs to be tracking nail quality if the kingdom relies on nails that much. You also want to be asking why critical information is being sent by only one messenger.