asciilifeform: MolokoDeck: probably simplest solution: http://www.loper-os.org/?p=1490 -- but can be trivially improved on.

asciilifeform: but posit that it could, given observables.

asciilifeform: someone, somewhere, may well possess the secret of how to build a thermonuke using the materials of ordinary electronics.

asciilifeform: if either side had tested a working pure fusion device, in the customary 'drilled well' method, the public would not necessarily have learned of the fact.

asciilifeform: official story is that both east and west expended astonishing resources on the problem - and, generally believed, that nothing came of this.

asciilifeform: it is generally known that the 20th c. 'holy grail' of nuke engineering was the so-called 'pure fusion' device.

asciilifeform: i wouldn't imagine the 'sworn monks' can keep the lid on indefinitely - only thus far. as we've seen, they succeed in keeping the lid on 'suite a' & co. is the argument, then, that the pressure under the lid cannot be too high then ?

asciilifeform: say, a factoring algo that runs in polynomial time but with a stupidly large constant factor.

asciilifeform: this is almost convincing re: the impossibility argument. but suppose the goods isn't a generic rsa pill, but something more akin to nuke. that is, oppenheimer & friends didn't run off to an island and form own kingdom, because their 'jewel' required astonishing resources to put into action (industrial empire) and not very useful on their own, on paper

asciilifeform: so, continuing with this lemma, the 'guard' is an impossibility because, were he to exist, he could trivially order his supposed superiors to disappear forever up their own arses, should he wish this?

asciilifeform: why this dichotomy. is it not possible for them to have absolute power to guard 'the goods' but not, say, to control other aspects of the world ? like any ordinary guard

asciilifeform: what's the experiment here

asciilifeform: help me along then

asciilifeform: just trying to argue against 'nothing so valuable can exist, it would've been lifted by now'

asciilifeform: and correctly put it to its intended use

asciilifeform: more traditional question - who, if anyone, can pilfer a working nuke?

asciilifeform wasn't there, didn't personally boot carter - or gorbached - from the goodies vault. but tale is plausible. compartmentalization of 'fun secrets' is generally easy because of the miniscule number of qualified thieves - that is, folks who apprehend the true value of the goods.

asciilifeform: 'mr carter, you aren't cleared for this, and if you ask again there will be problems.' ☟︎☟︎

asciilifeform: and the soviet gdp.

asciilifeform: it went entirely like the tale of gorbachev and andropov ☟︎

asciilifeform: mircea_popescu: familiar with the story of jimmy carter and 'area 51' known to the alien aficionados?

asciilifeform: 'in power' in as much as anyone guarding something of value can be thought of as 'in power.'

asciilifeform: like the proverbial 'bomb codes'.

asciilifeform: some small circle of people would be privy to it.

asciilifeform: sure. 'indiana jones vault' or the like.

asciilifeform: i'd say it has not been used. waiting to the pig to get fatter, before slaughter.

asciilifeform: well then. suppose, bush sr., or whoever, circa '92, whenever, was informed of the discovery, in his fuhrerbunker. then he proclaims: 'let's get the people with valuable secrets to use rsa. how to do this?'

asciilifeform: that's the hypothesis. what if yes ?

asciilifeform: how would this world's observables differ from the known observables?

asciilifeform: let's give them some context, then. picture scenario where the $maxint in u.s. cryptologic work actually resulted in something useful. but, so useful that, like a thermonuke, it isn't fit to trot out on just any everyday occasion.

asciilifeform: but how does this apply? my hypothetical is a historically-humdrum 'skunk works' scenario